Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

thinker1691 On October, 7th, 1998, two local men from the town of Laramie Wyoming, Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson, kidnapped a young student named Matthew Shepard with the intend to rob and assault him. Not content to pistol whip, torture and beat him senseless, they tied him to a fence in a remote area and left him to die. Five days later Matthew passed away. This insightful movie called " The Laramie Project " was written and directed by Moises Kaufman for the stage, but has been converted to the silver screen. The film is a compilation of interviews ostensibly expressing the regret and sorrow of the townspeople. To give it a more professional appearance, Kaufman substituted professional actors like Peter Fonda, Clancy Brown, Steve Buscemi and Dylan Baker for the more vocal residents. The movie is shot Documentary style but does contain many of the original statements, quotes and speeches given by the actual townsfolk. The end result is a compelling story of a 21 year old being murdered for his sexual orientation. However, the one aspect I found wanting were the interviews NOT heard. Too often, those bigoted or biased individuals gave their artificially sympathetic opinions ON Camera, but what would they have said Off camera, where they would have been more honest about what they believed. Nevertheless, the legacy of Matthew did not receive closure in Wyoming for years. Indeed his case would have to wait until 2009, when President Obama signed a Federal law making it as a hate crime. Something the spineless citizens of Wyoming have been unable to do. A good film for a conscience seeking audience. ****

samkan It is incredible to me that someone would even THINK about doing a mock documentary on a SERIOUS subject with an intent to arouse our emotions. Drama requires talent in crafting dialogue, scenery and mood to convey a message: Be it clarity or ambiguity. Documentary requires skills in packaging other's points of view: Be it to underscore the maker's message or that of the speakers. What the makers of TLP have done is to avoid the work needed in drama and documentary by canning blunt messages and delivering them without the need of acting, directing, camera work, etc. The result is cheap and insincere. I wouldn't mind learning about this tragic incident from a real documentary where even if the producers' point of view was biased I could hear the actual words and see the expressions of the interviewees. Conversely, I could handle a fictional account where I might adopt and/or appreciate another's perception of the events and emotions involved.But to impose a mandated message by pulling our outrage, pity, anger and tragedy stings like TLP is shameful.

Andy (film-critic) As a viewer, new to this story and type of storytelling, I felt a bit over biased. I realize that instead of focusing on the death and life of Matthew Shepard, Kaufman, focused on the collective voice of the town, which was nothing but a bag of mixed messages. As I sat, thinking about this film over the course of several days, that is the only issue that I had trouble grappling. This was an emotional film, chalk full of actors giving surprising monologues about their personal opinions as we collectively watch the aftermath of such a horrid crime. We even get the chance to see how the death of Matthew Shepard caused an ill fate to another person within the community. Again, these side stories were powerful to watch because it gave a living soul to the town, but where The Laramie Project went a bit too far was the over-dramatic nature of the characters.While I would agree that there was probably some emotion behind those that chose to take part in the interviews, I don't believe you would find such a doctor, with such a dramatic "umph" saying, "We take offense to this murder", like no other than Peter Fonda could say it. Christina Ricci, in my eyes, was the embodiment of my last statement. Perhaps Kaufman, would have benefited more by placing unknowns in the roles instead of these name Hollywood players. While they were not A-grade actors, they each did a phenomenal job in this film – but oddly, this was the problem. Steve Buscemi speaking about his relationship with Shepard made me see Buscemi being Buscemi. I didn't see the character that he was playing. I didn't see Fonda's doctor's character. I didn't see anything of value behind Ricci's character (outside of a definite Ricci being Ricci) – and while I realize that this was not a work of fiction, without the development of a known character, they were just actors speaking powerful lines. The lines stood on their own, and it was those lines that continued my attention through the film. Alas, I could not see Joshua Jackson (from Dawson's Creek) as the actual bartender or Dylan Baker as the head of the hospital because I knew these actors. I wanted better from them. The most emotional speeches came from those that I was not fully familiar with. Those like the man who watched the parade route, or the actor that played Matthew Shepard's father. These smaller, unknown bits, was what made The Laramie Project stand out and break a tear out of even the strongest wall.I want to express again that I thought that this was a very powerful film; there were just certain moments that were using cliché elements to heighten the emotion of the story. This wasn't needed in the least bit. While I know that having the media attention when the residents of Laramie walked out of the courtroom was surprising, the film technique used to demonstrate this seemed cheap, and nearly like a low blow to the story. The glossed effect of when Ricci's character, and her mother, made angels to block the words of protesters, seemed fake on screen – while perhaps actual footage of this event would have strengthened the emotion. Perhaps I am asking too much, but when Ricci walks out with those angel wings flying high, I just expected Will Smith to come out of nowhere, screaming a line that would surely demonstrate to those protesters who was in control here. It came out a bit too Hollywood. As well as the scene where Dylan Baker cries, which I felt was the better of all the cinematic moments. It was powerful, yet subdued. It could have used more realism. Am I complaining too much? Nope, because I thought this was a brilliant film with how unique it was with its portrait of storytelling. I liked hearing the voices, in fact, if this were a story on CD, it would be a personal favorite, but because we were distracted by images of famous actors speaking in their own voice as well as unclimactic cliché scenes, it softened the blow. I was still teary at the end, but this could have been a film to rival that of Angels in America had it just tried a bit harder to avoid the Hollywood influx and paint a more vivid portrait of your average American town.Overall, I must admit, it took me several days for this film to settle, but I think I could view it again. I especially would like to see Amy Madigan's performance, which I thought, her struggle with what happened, nearly overshadowed what happened to Matthew Shepard. I could have watched an entire film based solely on her. It is amazing what the media chooses to cover, and what they choose to ignore. I like what this film demonstrated. I like that it didn't depict this Wyoming town of rednecks and hillbillies never quite understanding what was wrong with the murder of Shepard. I am glad that we were able to see humanity break through the barriers and show emotion, show sadness, and look beyond the lifestyle to see the human being that was wrongly sentenced. I do think, nonetheless, that liberties were taken with certain actors and certain camera shots, but overall that can be overlooked. By throwing in some unknowns to this picture, I think the drama and the intensity of the event could have been heightened. This is a sad thing that happened, and I am glad that Hollywood chose to open the envelope, but they just didn't give it that final seal of approval. Actors were actors and cliché moments were used to build emotion. You already had a sad story; we didn't need the charades to improve it. I strongly suggest watching this film.Grade: **** out of *****

Duncan This film is good, but it contains the same fundamental mistakes as the play: 1. It attempts to beat acceptance in to the head of it's viewers when, in reality, most of those who would view this are already tolerant towards those who are different. It emphasizes over and over the importance of tolerance, spends too much time trying to portray the same emotions in different character, and attempts to make the murder of Matthew Shepard worse than any other murder. All murders are hate crimes. All hate crimes tear communities apart. 2. It doesn't properly explore the murder. It automatically makes the murder a hate crime which, as I do not know all the facts, I cannot properly say whether it was or not. It doesn't allow for the audience to make up their own mind, and takes the views of only a select few. From many accounts that were not included in the play/movie, other factors came into play (money, the attackers's molestation as a child, drugs, etc.) that could greatly change ones opinion if they were included, or if they were mentioned more than just once. Of course, the familiar faces that pop up in the movie so often don't exactly add to it's effect. Overall, the message is a great gift, even if the wrapping is a little shoddy. Worth watching at least once.