TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Gregory Porter Capturing the Friedmans is about the Friedmans; an upper-middle class Jewish family in upstate New York. One day, the police come to the home of the Friedmans and search for child pornography. The police uncover a number of magazines belonging to Arnold Friedman. A retired high school teacher, he, with the help of his son Jesse, hold computer classes and piano lessons for young children. Once the police realize this, they start investigating Arnold for child abuse. Before long, he and his son are charged with around a hundred counts of sexual assault.I have a lot of fun watching documentaries; I can spend roughly two hours watching a movie on the grounds that I am learning something. Over time I've come to realize that it isn't just what the documentary is saying but how. Sometimes documentaries are clearly biased.If you are a fan of documentaries, there is a website called Documentary Heaven which has lots of documentaries you can watch for free. I remember one that was about secret government cloud seeding experiments. Cloud seeding is, more or less, controlling rainfall and weather patterns. For that documentary, there was just the director, one person that was interviewed, and only about a dozen pictures that faded in and out of the frame. Towards the end of the hour and forty-five minute snoozefest, the director comes out from behind the camera and shouts to the camera, "If he has had so much success cloud seeding, why isn't the government spending millions doing further testing!?" It detracts from the feeling that you are learning something. Instead it feels like you are spending time hearing propaganda.The only other documentary I've seen more than once was Werner Herzog's Grizzly Man (2005) and that was because I saw it for a film class. I watched it once at home and once in the class. I don't usually watch documentaries more than once because, well, hearing it once is usually enough. It's like attending a lecture more than once. You don't unless you have to. I saw Capturing the Friedmans twice so far because, again, I saw it for a class. But I will, however, most certainly be seeing it again. Capturing the Friedmans is an example of amazing storytelling.The plot thickens at every turn. With documentaries about crimes, I read them like a detective novel. You decipher the film maker's bias and then anticipate the details of the crime to make up your mind. In this case, whenever I solved the mystery, if you will, the movie would cut to another interview that threw me off.Jarecki juxtaposes interviews to create fascinating dialogs. For example, we hear from the District Attorney about the process for conducting interviews with children. He explains that the children may be frightened so one doesn't want to put words in their mouths. Instead of saying "we know he assaulted you," one should say, "what happened next?" The movie then cuts over to one of the detectives who conducted many of the interviews for the Friedman case: "We went through the whole line of questions...'We know you were in these computer classes and we know that there was a good chance he sexually assaulted you..." the camera then fades out. It's an example of how the movie can steer us toward reaching a particular conclusion. Better still, the movie can make us realize how we could never know the truth of the Friedman case. Towards the end of the movie, Jesse and his attorney provide radically different accounts of the same event. Who can we trust?A major source of information comes from the Friedman's home movies. The family shot a lot of home movies particularly around the time of the investigations. The footage provides a great balance to the interviews. Some shots from their ordinary cameras are eerily good too which add to the experience. At one point, Arnold is playing the piano and his son moves in for a close up. We listen to upbeat music (though it is made darker given the circumstance) and watch his glasses which reflect his hands on the piano keys.I highly recommend you see Capturing the Friedmans. The subject matter is solidly depressing but it is a really well done documentary.

Originsoftruth Truth Nassau County district attorney, Kathleen M. Rice, re-investigated the case of Jesse Friedman in 2013 to determine whether his conviction should be upheld or overturned. Their report, prepared by an independent review panel, demonstrate Capturing the Friedman's is, in the mildest terms 'incomplete, and in some points, even incorrect, either case misleading.Here are some of the key points taken from the report (which can be found online in District Attorney's web site). With respect to the Jesse Friedman case, the report says: " None of the five individuals who Friedman advocates suggest "recanted" have, in fact, recanted to any degree of legal certainty. Three have not recanted at all. Reviews of transcripts concerning these individuals reveal that abuse occurred. Another who spoke to the Review Team stood by his account, in contrast to the statement he gave to filmmakers. The subject of the most recent purported recantation has refused to speak to the Review Team or even confirm he wrote the letter outlining the claim, which was provided to the Review Team by Jesse Friedman's lawyer." "Unedited film transcripts of Judge Abbey Boklan and Detective Anthony Squeglia show that each was the subject of selectively edited and misleading film portrayals in Capturing the Friedmans." "The "Meyers Tape" – one of only two pieces of direct evidence of heavy-handed police interviewing techniques cited by Friedman, his advocates and the Court – is, in fact, no tape at all. All that remains of a tape that hasn't existed for more than two decades are notes taken during its screening by a Jesse Friedman attorney. Those notes, presumably limited to information the attorney found helpful to his client's case, were then reduced and curated by filmmakers, and read dramatically by Friedman's attorney in Capturing the Friedmans." "A sworn affidavit from the therapist who treated former student "Computer Student One," stated that she never performed hypnosis on the child. A portion of an unedited transcript of the film's interview with "Computer Student One" contradicted his claim of pre-outcry hypnosis and had been edited out. "Computer Student One" claimed in a 2004 media report that Capturing the Friedmans "twisted" his account. The filmed allegations of "Computer Student One" remain the only direct evidence offered by Friedman or his advocates suggesting that hypnosis was used to induce victims to make accusations in this case."I also find it difficult to understand how these basic facts are totally omitted in the documentary, such as: "While maintaining his innocence prior to his eventual guilty plea, Friedman commissioned and failed at least two lie-detector tests."Overall I found the film, especially the narcissism still preserved in Friedmans' character interesting enough to google the case. In this sense, I guess that makes it good fiction movie, but still not a documentary.

Jafar Iqbal A controversial documentary about the Friedman family, a seemingly typical, upper-class Jewish family living in Long Island, New York. Their very normal and somewhat happy world was turned upside down when the father and his youngest son were arrested and charged with some very shocking and disturbing crimes.'Capturing The Friedmans' is a film of which 95% was watched with a very bemused expression on my face. It's one of those stories you'd happily accept as a work of bold and slightly twisted fiction; the fact that it's all reality is awful. It won't be a spoiler to reveal that the crimes in question were all related to the sexual abuse of children, and the description of those supposed crimes is horrific.Supposed though, because what the film does so well is point out that the actual truth still really isn't known. It's hard to doubt the evidence against Arnold Friedman, the patriarch and alleged main abuser, but it's the involvement of son Jesse that raises the most doubts. Only seventeen himself when the allegations were made, it is difficult to believe that he could be involved. However, it is very plainly shown that he was one of three sons that had a deep affection for their father, but could it really extend as far as agreeing to assist in his sordid acts? That is one of the conundrums of the movie.What really fascinates me about the documentary is the portrayal of Elaine Friedman, the victimised wife and mother. Not victimised just by the outside world, but by her own family. Unlike the rest of the family, she doesn't blindly trust her husband, which leads to some heated arguments and an eventual alienation from everyone. Her testimony is possibly the most impactful, being the woman who has known Arnold the longest and could cite moments which gave credence to his guilt.Director Andrew Jarecki is fantastic at making sure he stays as neutral as he possibly can, given the circumstances. It would have been very easy to turn it into a biased look at an evil family; but Jarecki makes sure to not go down that route. Through the use of home video footage and interviews, we are made to look at the story from every perspective. The ending of the movie is a very emotional and, somehow, happy one, giving a level of sympathy we probably didn't want.'Capturing The Friedmans' is a very good documentary, but it wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea. However, get past the fact that this is people who potentially committed heinous crimes against innocent children, and what you get is a story about family and loyalty. Excellent.

erniecalderon I'm still not entirely sure whom to believe. This is a testament as to how good this documentary is on denial, family, lies, love, and horror. I would certainly recommend it to whomever wishes to feel real badly about human nature and the evil ways that it manifests itself. Belief in WHATEVER is so powerful and it never ceases to amaze me how we are able to convince ourselves of ANYTHING. I say this only because this family is in absolute denial and they have genuinely convinced themselves that there father is innocent of all charges. With so much damning evidence, it is hard to believe that anyone, with any sense, would not prematurely convict this man of the horrors he committed.