Clemency

A prison warden dealing with depression tries to hold on to life and sanity as she begins to empathize with a young man on death row.

A strong film, despite the slow pace, full of representation and many messages, a strong woman with character and systematics, firm hand and leadership with an iron fist, it is not difficult to choose between a peaceful retirement next to her husband or to continue in the job she loves and performs with mastery (I feel personally affected, as it is a difficult choice to make)... On the other hand, the fated and failed American death penalty, as unfair as it is punitive... Wonderful Alfre and Aldis ...

Outstanding performances, no question about that, but the long dragged out scenes, slow pacing, and 112 mins, made this film feel like it was never going to end. Add to that its depressing nature, you start begging for it to end. Many times I had to fast forward a scene where the character would just be staring into space forever. I get that it's supposed to build suspense, but it was just way to long, too many times, the silence became annoying. Cinematography was excellent, and the score on point. And the conceptual story was well put together, but the long screenplay flawed it. Had this film's pacing been faster, and many of the dragged out scenes edited/cut down, I would have enjoyed this much better. Sadly, it's only a 6/10 from me

What turned out to be a promising start, sadly the ending wasn't that satisfying to me. Nevertheless, exceptional performance by the cast, mainly by Aldis Hodge, Alfre Woodard and Alex Castillo. This film literally brought tears to my eyes.

Judging from the relatively few votes it appears that not many have seen this movie. It is done very well but moves along quite deliberately. It is a fictional story inspired by real people and real events. It is mainly a character study of the warden, a woman, who for some years has been regularly required to preside over the execution of death row inmates after their appeals have run out. She has gotten very clinical about it, in one scene she is questioning the next one scheduled in a couple of days, asking if anyone wants to bury him, or what the prison will do "with the body" almost as if she were talking to someone other than the inmate.

This is an indication of how the psychology of her job has affected her, hardened her, and devolving into a seemingly inability to connect romantically with her husband, a professor. When he suggests they might retire and get different jobs, the change might do them good, she retorts that hers isn't just a job, it is her profession.

The movie also addresses the character of the condemned inmate, 15 years after a crime. What he is going through as his lawyer tries to gain clemency for him, at the same time trying to prepare himself for the execution if it comes to that.

This is a good movie of a difficult story, I am glad that I watched it, at home on DVD from my public library.

"Clemency" is a magnificent film and I would not be surprised to see its star, Alfre Woodard was really, really good in the lead and I would expect to see her nominated for an Oscar for her performance. So why in the heck does the film currently have an overall score of 5.8?! What is the reason for this, as the movie is exceptionally well made. Perhaps people are voting against it for reasons other than the quality of the picture....that's the only thing that makes sense to me.

Woodard plays Warden Williams, a by the book woman who runs a prison where they perform executions. In both cases in the film, the lethal injection is done VERY realistically...so much so that it's a bit difficult to watch. But this is the reason....because the film is not just about the death penalty but how it impacts on the people who perform them. You see the Warden falling apart from the experiences, but you also see how the Chaplin and guards and the Deputy Warden are impacted as well. So, instead of just being an anti-capital punishment film, it's far, far deeper....making the story a difficult but rewarding experience.

Overall, a quality film in nearly every way and the reason I gave it a 9 instead of a 10 was one scene--where the overuse of the handycam (the 'unsteady cam') in one nauseating scene where the roving camera was unwelcome and didn't fit in with the rest of the otherwise well-filmed picture.