Lake of Fire (2006) User Reviews

a documentary that lets you make up your own mind

[Buddy-51 · 9/10 · 27 May 2008]

We've been taught to believe that the purest and best documentaries are those that take a definitive stand on an issue. Such a one-sided approach is supposed to bespeak a righteous passion on the part of a filmmaker - as if dogmatism, in and of itself, were an indisputable virtue. But what if the issue at hand is so morally complex that it simply doesn't lend itself to the strident arguments and easy answers of a black-and-white diatribe? Might it not, then, be best to drop the "know-it-all" posture of the partisan zealot and, instead, attempt to look at both sides of the issue from a position of objectivity and fairness?

Well, that is exactly what filmmaker Tony Kaye has done with "Lake of Fire," a documentary on abortion that attempts to examine both sides of the issue in as unbiased and evenhanded a way as possible. For once, the impassioned spokespersons in both the "pro-life" and "pro-choice" camps are free to have their say and to make their case, without commentary or condemnation from a judgmental third party. In so doing, he has fashioned an unflinching and uncompromising look at one of the issues that most divides Americans today - and will surely do so for a very long time to come..

Watching "Lake of Fire" is a bit like being a ping pong ball in a high-stakes table tennis match. Just as we find ourselves agreeing with a representative from one side of the equation, we are bandied back to the opposing side by what appear to be equally compelling arguments emanating from a spokesperson there. And back and forth we go. For while there are "nutcases" and "screwballs" on both sides of the divide (and they certainly get ample opportunity to voice their views here), many of the people who are interviewed offer sound, reasoned arguments for the positions they take. At a lengthy two hours and thirty-two minutes, Kaye's film has plenty of time to take us into the emotionally-charged world of abortion politics, represented most vividly by the impassioned rallies and protest marches that all too often devolve into name-calling shouting matches that cloud the issue and further alienate those in the political center. Moreover, in what is essentially a new American "civil war," both sides come to the battlefield armed with gruesome images of those who have already perished in the conflict - the pro-lifers of dismembered fetuses, the pro-choicers of murdered doctors and victims of "back alley" abortions.

Kaye is to be particularly commended for not sanitizing or sugarcoating the actual abortion process, clearly assuming that we are grown up enough to face the truth without the need for coyness or comforting filters. Intriguingly, Kaye has opted to film his movie in black-and-white rather than color, a very shrewd and wise decision, since the stark imagery serves to underline the seriousness and gravity of the issue.

If there's a weakness to the film it is that there may be a bit too much emphasis on the movers and shakers in each of the groups and not enough on the ordinary, average citizens whose lives have been directly affected or severely altered by abortion (or the lack thereof). The movie does, however, end on such a note, taking us along with a young woman as she goes through the step-by-step process of an actual abortion. It reminds us that, after all the speeches and marches, all the clinic protests and killing of doctors, the issue finally comes down to an individual woman and the agonizing decision she alone is being called upon to make.

With his film, Kaye clearly wants to make us think, but he doesn't tell us HOW to think - and that's what separates his work from that of so many of his film-making contemporaries. How people will react to this film is anyone's guess. All I know is that, no matter which side of the struggle you may come down on - or even if you have somehow managed to remain scrupulously neutral about it up to this point - "Lake of Fire" will indeed make you think long and hard about the issue.

Everybody is right when it comes to the issue of abortion.

[lastliberal · 9/10 · 16 April 2008]

It seems fitting that I watched this on the very day that I read about the atrocious state of child protection in Oklahoma. It is a reminder of the definition of "Pro-Life" that I believe so strongly: they only care about life before it is born, and are not concerned with life after birth.

It was an outstanding documentary that gave both sides of the issue, even to the point of showing an actual abortion being performed. I could have done without that. This is however, the definitive film on the issue.

Some may consider it slanted as it showed the pro-life advocates as crazy loons, but when they are self-confessed bigots like leader Randall Terry, and Klan members/ministers like John Burk that consider murderers "patriots," what else can you call them. This film will give you a good picture of where this issue started, and why it continues to this day. You will learn just who is keeping this alive and their reasons for doing so. You will also be well informed on the types of people who are using this issue for their personal causes.

Great film to educate you on this sensitive issue.

essential viewing... if you can take it.

[funnylookingmonkey · 8/10 · 7 January 2008]

when i first heard that Tony Kaye – who, let's remember, first made the scene as a self-proclaimed "hype artist" – was releasing a documentary about abortion, i was understandably skeptical. turns out my apprehension wasn't necessary. this is a level-headed, even-handed analysis of a difficult and complex subject. regardless of where you might fall on the spectrum of debate, this film will raise questions that deserve reflection. and, needless to say, this is an issue which warrants attention and discussion – at the heart of the issue are some of the most fundamental questions about life; surrounding the issue, however, are myriad paradoxes, contradictions, and dilemmas... if the details and gray areas seem unresolvable, how does one contend with the big picture? the speakers assembled represent the range and nuances of the debate well; some of the images are graphic but integral; and for the most part the irrationality and unhinged emotion that often cloud this subject are avoided. i wonder about the use of B&W, both from a theoretical standpoint (the obvious point that this is not a B&W issue, for instance – or is that meant ironically? – but also the fact that some footage from primary sources had to be manipulated into B&W which might raise some thoughts about documentary technique) and from an artistic standpoint (B&W often providing a feeling of remove between viewer and image, lacking the immediacy of color... although, with this subject, perhaps making use of this sense of remove is a wise choice). this is a film which deserves to be seen – which also deserves to be widely shown in schools – but will probably never find a large audience. and – i'm only speculating here – my guess is that most of those audience members will be primarily from one side of the spectrum.

the best documentary you probably didn't see in 2007

[Quinoa1984 · 10/10 · 18 March 2008]

In Lake of Fire, a film that Tony Kaye- director behind American History X (which he wanted to be named under the pseudonym 'Humpty Dumpty' following a loss of final cut)- has been shooting footage for over fifteen years, is about all you need to see to know the fundamentalist and existentialist ramifications on the abortion-in-America issue. It covers all of the pro-life advocates, the murders of doctors and bombings of clinics, footage of actual abortions, and even an interview with the real-life 'Roe' from Roe v. Wade. It covers about as much ground, in interviews and footage of those at rallies and on the street and so on and so forth, that can be covered in two and a half hours.

But what builds up Kaye's film to such a potent focus is that Kaye doesn't let out necessarily what *his* stance is on the issue. I think this was the way to go, and not necessarily because it would be insensitive one way or the other- in order to take as objective a stance as possible (which, in this case, is so next to impossible because of the subjective point for a woman when it comes time to decide on the pregnancy), it works best to let the sides speak for themselves. As it turns out, he doesn't let the pro-choice crowd be the only voices of reason either; one actually sees, when there isn't total crazy Bible-thumping rhetoric, some sound arguments against abortion. And why not? It's one of the murkiest of all issues in the annals of history, not just American. And as we learn painfully in Lake of Fire, no matter what the most savage and hypocritical of the maniacs who try and stop abortion practices and doctors (in the old Malcolm X 'by any means necessary' mold), women will always get abortions if it comes down to it.

Kaye's scope is large and all encompassing, with interviews from the likes of pragmatic minded Noam Chomsky and Alan Dershwitz (the latter's parable about the Rabbi hits it the nail on the head, if there could be a nail in this), to intelligent pro-lifer Nat Hentoff, to Roe (real name Norma McCorvey) who got converted to being pro-life after setting the stage for all of this in the 70s, to the clean-cut psycho Paul Hill. Then there's everyone in-between, from radio show hosts to priests and pastors (one of which, an uproarious 'Lamb' protector), and then to doctors and professors. Not one word is wasted, which is staggering unto itself for over two and a half hours.

What one sees is the issue of choice in general, but also the nature of zealousness. To be sure, the pro-choice crowd are far less zealous than those who use the bible (or the Pope or just any thoughts about heaven or hell in general and who they think will go to where or not) as a blanket of protection. And Kaye's style for this is like that of mourning for lack of disagreeing to agree, and vice-versa and in-between. His cinematography shoots things in a stark, gray tone, while Anne Dudley's music- very akin to American History X- is that of the utmost tragedy. There are many beautifully shot scenes, from close-ups to cut-aways, but one that strikes me the most is during the Q&A at a doctor's office with a woman who is about to get an abortion.

As far as the issue itself and how viewers will take to it... It's not cut and dry. It won't reveal to you anything that might change your opinion, if it's already steadfast, about the issue. What Kaye does do, and it's a brave feat, is to not candy-coat a thing, to be provocative but not to a point of no return, to make clear what is at stake in what it means for a human being to take a life, any life, and how we approach that. As a man I will never have to make that choice of 'do I or don't I' in the first trimester. But as Lake of Fire makes perfectly clear, it's a civil rights issue through and through. It also makes for some fantastic cinema through someone as meticulous and exemplary a filmmaker as the (unprolific) Kaye. A+

Remarkable

[vandergraafn2 · 11 September 2006]

Caveat: I have been a pro-choice activist for many years in my home country of Canada, and attended the "March for Women's Lives" in Washington D.C. in 2004. Obviously I have a pretty solid opinion on this issue, but below I have tried to just talk about the film itself.

I saw this a couple of days ago at the Toronto Film Festival. I think it is an unflinching look at the how the battle over abortion rights has played out in the United States over the last 15 years or so. It was intended to be unbiased, an even-handed look at both sides of the issue. By and large, I think Kaye succeeded at this, but I would very much like to attend a screening of this film before an audience of committed pro-lifers to see what they think of it. I couldn't help but think that nearly all the pro-lifers interviewed came across as deeply disturbed, with a couple of exceptions.

The film clocks in at over two and a half hours and could easily loose 30 minutes without taking away from the impact of the film. Similarly it ends dreadfully - overblown music and an utterly inconsequential shot - the director having missed the perfect spot to end it 5 minutes beforehand.

Shot entirely in black and white, there are several moments of stunning beauty, contrasting with the frequently dull and suburban backgrounds in which such a passionate battle is being waged by both sides.

Overall I would definitely recommend this film, but only after it is re-edited from its present version.

A last note: Tony Kaye was present at the screening and gave an utterly bizarre performance during the Q&A at the end of the movie. He stood at the mike, rubbing his face vigorously, making little sense and often at a loss for words. We were planning to ask questions but he was so out of it that we decided not to waste our time!

Brilliant Documentary

[rtbd · 10/10 · 19 September 2006]

I saw this film at a Toronto Int'l Film Festival industry screening and thought it was one of best documentaries I have EVER seen! I've read a couple of reviews that have called it the definitive film of the subject of abortion - I completely agree. I've never seen anything so complex, complete and emotionally wrenching as this epic work. It stayed with me long after the screening. In fact, roughly 10 days have passed since I saw the film and it continues to haunt my thoughts. I weeped at the end. My only criticisms are it's length (far too long) and it's use of music, which often bordered on excessive and manipulative. But, those are relatively small concerns when weighed against the film's many positives.

I LOVE documentaries and have seen nearly every major work produced in the past 20 to 30 years (as well as not so major films). "Lake of Fire" may well be my favorite - I'm still deciding if any of the other films I've loved delivered the same unrelenting, yet profoundly emotional punch to the gut that this one did.

Pro-lifers evidently don't understand bias

[Streetballa · 10/10 · 12 June 2008]

I saw a few people on here proclaiming themselves as pro-life and panning the film for supposedly being biased against their view.

First of all, purely on balance alone I'd say the film is equal to both sides. It's just that most of the stuff which makes you want to be pro-life comes at the beginning of the film while most of the content which makes you want to be pro-choice comes in the second half. It seems to me that they're just upset that their side didn't get the proverbial last word.

Secondly, this film is not about balance anyway. It's about documenting the cultural debate in the film about abortion in America. Whether one or two dissenting reviewers of this film are or not, the fact is that most of the pro-life advocates are Christian religious fringe. Of course there are exceptions, and they document that in the movie. Although I don't think Kaye should have given an hour to the secular atheist pro-lifers, because frankly there aren't that many of them.

The criticism also seem to come from people who don't even understand any points being made in the movie -- one reviewer claimed that Chomsky was comparing abortion to a woman washing her hands. That's not what he was doing at all. His example was made to demonstrate the relativity involved with the process of placing value on life.

In any event, the film definitely is a roller coaster ride, and there are times where you might find yourself at odds with your own opinion. The movie being as balanced as it is, probably wont change a lot of minds, but I would think at the very least it would soften your position one way or another. If it doesn't, you're either just stubborn, or you weren't even trying to pay attention to the message of the film.

Stunning and Unsettling

[Witty_Kibitzer · 10/10 · 11 March 2008]

Lake Of Fire was stunning! This film literally took my breath away and left me feeling physically ill. I can easily see why it took Tony Kaye fifteen years to complete it. Filmed in stark black and white, this documentary about abortion is almost entirely made up of direct shots that do not suggest any bias on the director's part and it is never clear which side of the fence he falls on in this debate. It does, however, illustrate what can be wrong with either being pro-life or pro-choice. This film enraged me, sickened me, scared me, and even made me tear up a little bit. Really all it left me with was this feeling that any choice regarding the abortion issue would be "wrong" in some way instead of everyone being "right", as one of the speakers (Alan Dershowitz, Professor of Criminal Law at Harvard University) so eloquently put it. I have always considered myself to be pro-choice, although I have never believed that abortion was an option for me. This film highlighted many of the reasons why I feel this way, both that I feel that modern women need to have the right to choose and that I feel that abortion is in many cases horrific, and should not be taken lightly. On a purely visual level; the shots were flawless, the color choice (or lack of a use of color) was enthralling, and the editing flowed seamlessly back and forth between two sides of an issue that heeds extreme opinions on both ends. I found this to make for a very taut viewing experience. Just as you were digesting a scene from a Leftist point-of-view, the focus would shift to a speaker or compelling event from the right. It wouldn't surprise me if this were deliberate, as it made it hard for me to connect with the statements being made and forced me to pile every argument on top of another in my mind. I was elated that Kaye chose to close the film with a woman's emotional response after her abortion procedure. It very clearly illustrated that women are not just running out to get abortions on a whim, that they are difficult and painful decisions even for women that know without a doubt that they are making the best choice for themselves.

This is not easy viewing

[sylvesterthekat · 10/10 · 18 June 2008]

Unlike some here, I'd say it's quite obvious which side of the debate Tony Kaye himself lies on; that of pro choice. Although it presents both sides of the argument, the only sane representatives are on the side of choice. Now I don't know enough about the pro-lifers to know if they're all as nutty as the people presented to us in this film. Some aren't quite as crazy, for instance Norma McCorvey, whose reasons for now being pro-life can be understood (she was basically pressured into feelings of guilt for her part in Roe v Wade) if not supported.

What most of this boils down to is religious fanaticism. The vast majority of the pro-lifers use religious 'teachings' as their argument for abolishing abortion rights. I say that it's unwise to base any serious decisions on something as debatable and dubious as anything the bible has to say. After all, the bible at various points would have whole tribes of people wiped from the face of the earth, it would sacrifice daughters to prevent men from making sodomites of themselves, 'god' turns a woman to a pillar of salt for the heinous crime of looking back at her home. Good grief, what a terrible sin! Almost as bad as committing blasphemy for which crime some in this film seemed to think it was acceptable to face the death penalty. We need to be worried about the religious fanatics in this country, not complacent about them. With Bush's encouragement they have grown in strength and the abortion fight is just a part of their whole game.

Tony Kaye did a brilliant job here of showing us all of that. Pro Lifers can't possibly be happy about this film, even though it doesn't candy coat anything - we get to see abortion in all its gory glory. Nevertheless, I feel that if someone is sitting on the fence about the issue and sees this film, they're unlikely to want to associate themselves with the crazies portrayed herein, especially the lunatic priest in Colorado who claims that abortion doctors are Satan worshipers who dangle the expelled fetus by the leg and then barbecue it. Clearly he's one or two marbles short! To summarize, this is an absorbing if somewhat long documentary which presents various arguments for and against abortion and satisfactorily raises most of the issues. Rent the video and devote an evening to watching it but be prepared to run the gamut of your emotions (whichever side of the issue you support), from anger to frustration, fascination to sadness.

missing

[brumps · 10/10 · 7 November 2008]

The only thing important missing from the film is the impact that overturning Roe v Wade might have on the infertility industry. My husband and I had to resort to in vitro in order to conceive our twin boys. Four fertilized eggs were implanted in me. Fortunately, only two remained viable. But what if all four survived? I would have chosen to "reduce" the embryos. As it was my pregnancy was difficult. I went into pre-term labor at 28 weeks. At 32 weeks they had to induce as my babies were starting to kill me. Imagine if I hadn't had the option to "reduce" and all four implanted. What if the law required me to carry the fetuses until my life was in danger instead of "reducing" early in the pregnancy? Or, what if I had 14 embryos, 4 implanted and 10 frozen? Would the frozen ones then be considered "alive" and therefore could not be discarted? What would be the option then? Would I be prosecuted for 10 counts of murder? So I think the film needed to cover this aspect of the debate. Otherwise it was an exceptional documentary.

Lake of Fire - An Intelligent, Objective, Fairly Unbias....mess of a film

[radioanagrama · 7/10 · 16 September 2006]

Like the other reviewer here, saw this today at a screening at the Toronto International Film Festival.

Wow. Definitely an intense film. Intense because it certainly lays out the discussion on abortion in a fairly unbiased objective way. The first hour will leave you think "hold on a second, is this a Pro-Life film/propaganda masquerading as a serious documentary" but then through the rest the argument becomes more open minded as Kaye presents interviews with both ends of the argument.

The problems with the film is more in technical elements of a documentary. It is outright...too long. Certainly lengthy interviews and discussions with subjects about abortions, their roles in the pro life or pro choice movements will feature people speaking grandly and passionately, but at least 10 interviews could have been cut out entirely, or shortened significantly. As such, the pace of the film lags, sometimes you are compelled and moved and disgusted and laughing, and at other times the lull of certain interviews just detract from engaging in the film. Editing is somewhat sub par, pacing isn't great. The other weakness is that a lot of the content show is out of date, lots of coverage of events in the early 90's, etc etc, just seems not really fitting to discuss and analyze the abortion debate with figures and topics from a decade or more ago. Covering Roe vs Wade is key, there seems to be only one event discussed from this century. Kind of odd.

Otherwise, its a great topic to discuss, its an important film simply because he did pick good people to showcase on the topic. The film is startlingly because Kaye does show....abortions, repeat, you will see aborted fetuses in this, you will see the process of abortion and believe me plenty of people in the audience had to avert our eyes for a number of scenes in the film. That being said, it didn't seem like those images were there simply for shock value. Its more a strength that Kaye made a film that absolutely does not hold back, from either standpoint. The most absolutely inane and outright ridiculous evangelic, extremely fundamentalist Christian pro-lifers are given screen time, as well as the more moderate, intelligent, well spoken representatives on the Pro-Life side. At sometimes it might seem as if there is a Pro-Life bias, but when the entire audience is laughing at the ridiculously, narrow minded diatribes found in some of the interviews with the Pro-Lifers, its easy to see Kaye put them there, unfiltered to balance things out a bit.

The film....doesn't seem to have a good sense of direction. There are some shocking revelations (Roe, as in the woman who won an appeal to have an abortion legally in the famous Roe Vs. Wade case, is now working with a Christian group AGAINST abortion).

Anyways...cant think of what else to say. Good film, a few flaws, somewhat shocking at times, but interest topic for sure.

a deep dig into an important subject with very hard images

[nick_gen · 9/10 · 14 March 2013]

Tony Kaye shows that he is prepared to encounter the debate on abortion by covering an incredibly wide range of point of views and doesn't leave out even the most difficult parts. I will start with "harcore" reality details of the abortive presager before I entail my global feelings on how I received this workpiece. I had to stop viewing for a couple of minutes after they showed the fetuses, my heart was pounding, I felt dizzy, sad and mentally assaulted by those images because they just wouldn't get out of my head once I saw them. Nonetheless I still am pro-choice having being hit by that, It forced me to consider the painful reality that go with my own position. This, of course balanced with so many other things that are also thoroughly explored and exposed in the documentary.

Calling Tony Kaye a "biaest" on that matter doesn't do him justice at all. Simply because neutrality in this just has no existence, the relevant material that piles up in the concerned matter as you go further into it, is bound to lead you somewhere. If their is something going on around you and choose not to implicate yourself, you are in fact indirectly making a choice, the choice of leaving it in the hands of those who are ready to carry out decision. I'm not a Christian but I was raised in that manner so I can refer to a story which most of us know and that is the story of Pilate who also took a step back but nonetheless is a part of the picture, that nails down the point that "not to do" is to "let others do" for the best and for worst parts.

This documentary also shows the mind blowing contradictions that inhabits the fundamentalists stirring up on the pro-life side. The fact that they are ready to take on destructive action on the behalf of their posture, stretching a huge focus on that subject while seemingly indifferent to other subjects that involves human choices and it's caused suffering that are by close or by far correlative to abortion. I'll finish by saying that having claims towards even the most wonderful values doesn't suffice at all, being unable to reflect on your own self and the actions you undertake and paying no attention to the conditions of others and more importantly the ones that should justify some of your moral standards is one of the roots of a hypocrisy, denial and egocentric behaviors.

A moving and intimate documentary

[bmacwade · 7/10 · 21 February 2007]

I think this documentary would be far more balanced if it were expanded into a TV miniseries. The theatrical version presents the logical arguments from both sides of this massive issue, but it also shows over an hour of the footage related to the violence committed by the most irrational anti-abortion individuals and organizations. In that way, it seemed to me that the most sensationalist, visceral footage was being left in the theatrical release to make it more entertaining.

And yet, there are incredible moments in the film that are not sensationalist, or unfair to the anti-abortion side. For example, the film begins at the Capitol Mall in 1993, with a peaceful protest aganst abortion, with participants sharing stores and speaking out. A male speaker was microphoned beautifully and we see and feel his genuine emotion, even if it seems irrational to supporters of abortion such as myself. (I should add that the sound in this movie is first-rate - voices in various mediums are captured beautifully, so much so, I was conscious of just how good the audio was). And another example of the film being fair to the anti-abortion side was showing us how a ministry in Dallas was able to befriend Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe) and give her a happier life. It clearly shows how the pro-abortion side failed her. The "Jesus Freaks" didn't snatch her away. The pro-abortion side let her go while we are all into ourselves celebrating the legalization of abortion. She was home alone, receiving death threats, afraid to go out. And who came to her aid? Not my side. Amazing how this film reveals that (there is a shot in this movie that just has to be seen to be believed - you will know it when you see it....it shows Norma McCorvey at her new job....pay attention, it is amazing).

The film ends with a real procedure performed on a woman in Minneapolis who is less than 10 weeks pregnant. We see everything, including the blob of tissue that is taken from her womb. But more important, we see a 5 minute shot of her, telling us how she is relieved and tired, but also saddened and in emotional pain. It brought the theater to tears, and I can see how people on both sides of the issue will find some vindication in that final shot. On one hand, the patient is clearly relieved and has no regrets. On the other hand, she is saddened because she has made a momentous decision to choose her life over the life of an unknown child (a 'what if'). It is incredibly powerful film-making.

I thought if Errol Morris sees this, he might kick himself. He has spent 30 years making documentaries and still has not gotten a shot like that in the can. He's still the best documentary maker out there. But to hear Tony Kaye tell the audience in the Q&A that this labor of love is the result of a happy accident after being drawn into a major issue in US society, that's amazing. Great art is often the result of an accident or taking a risk. This is one such example.

This film gives us John Ford / Sergio Leone-like close-ups of faces. That, and the impressive audio, make this a very intimate work.

Everyone who sees this movie wishes it had more information. For example, the Catholic pro-abortion activist featured in the film was ex-communicated from the Church. Would have helped to be told that? I would think so. I would have wanted some clarification on the age of the fetus' shown. There is a graphic abortion early in the film that shows what looks like a 20-weeker having a procedure done. The fetus is torn apart, and we see eyes, legs, hands, feet. I would want movie goers to know that this is a BIG fetus and doctors don't see this every week in the OR or clinic. The vast majority of abortions are done before 10 weeks, in a short procedure in a clinic. And most states have a 22-week limit on abortion. Bet you didn't know that. The anti-abortion side wants you to believe that abortions are legal until the day before birth. That is not true at all. 22 weeks.

So you can see that I wanted more details. Everyone wanted more details. One audience member wanted to see more women being shown on the anti-abortion side. I know they are out there, but like the clinic patient who agreed to be filmed, they are very difficult to find.

Abortion may seem a complex issue, but I think the answers depend on accuracy of information and the genuineness of our intentions.

[talltrees-964-504184 · 5/10 · 30 January 2011]

Early on in the film, Director Tony Kaye, shows us a live abortion. The physician's matter-of-fact approach to ending a pregnancy contrasts with the close-up of the aborted products---we see the distinct remains of a small white hand, and a head. That image stayed with me throughout the film. In another part of the film, we are shown late term, dead babies crowded into the clinic's freezer compartment.

My first concern is about the accuracy of these visual whammies. The viewer might catch the fact that the woman was twenty weeks along, which makes the abortion being done midway though the second trimester. No recent stats are provided, and I'm wondering what the real statistics are regarding later terminations. We are given a scene where a religious leader with a number of children are planting a field with many small crosses. Later I learn from The New York Times, Oct. 3, 2007, that according to the film's distributor, the images of the late term (intact), dead babies in the "clinic freezer" had been given to Mr. Kaye by members of the anti-abortion group, Operation Rescue. As far as any body knows they could have been dolls---it's not that clear.

I missed hearing more from women who were having to decide about an abortion. What were the causes for their dilemmas---was it lack of affordable, available preventives? Were the preventives they were using not effective? Was it the situation they found themselves in---poverty, an abusive partner, lack of information? Is our society pushing both men and women to participate in risky relationships---is our media irresponsible and seductive? What were the areas that needed our attention? It would have been informative to know what happened afterward. Were there emotional complications as the Fundamentalists have claimed? Or did most women feel that while it had been traumatic, they had done the best they could, and had gotten on with their lives?

I had the distinct feeling that the first part of the long film, and the last part were done by two different people. Perhaps Kaye changed his view as he went along. We aren't given any obvious hint as to where he stands in this difficult debate. He may have well gone personally back and forth as his film seems to do. The back-and-forth doesn't seem orderly as one would expect a debate to be. At first it seems heavy on one side, and then another, and sometimes you wish he'd settle in and do a consistent, equal time, point-for-point thing. But, I have to say, the film's shock treatment keeps you enough off balance that you begin to realize how complex and big this issue is. Still, I also kept thinking that if anyone were truly serious about doing something about the issue, there were a number of savvy, fairly inexpensive, and effective ways to take care of a lot of the pre-abortion problems---so that abortions would then be needed only for special situations, they would be done safely, and the right to make one's own well-informed decision would be in place.

Both sides of the abortion debate presented fairly and disturbingly. It will make you think no matter where you stand. Its one of the best documentaries I've ever seen

[dbborroughs · 10/10 · 19 October 2008]

Tony Kaye's masterpiece documentary on the abortion issue carefully walks both sides of the issue, showing those for and those against the right to choose. Kaye's film is unflinching in its portrayal of the subject where we do see the end result of the procedure in graphic detail (thank god the film is black and white). No matter which side you sit on the film will give you pause to think about whether your "side" is the right one. What I admire most is that the film gives us both the radical and the intellectual of both sides, we get the nut jobs and we get the reasoned. The result is a film that is all the more quietly devastating in its power since you are forced to see the other side. If the film leans toward any side, it is perhaps in the end angled toward humanity in that in the end we watch as a young woman goes in for an abortion and we see the toll it takes on her.She is not a loose woman who is cavalier in her attitude as the right would have us all believe, nor is she a self assured young woman strong in her conviction as many in the left would like to make the women having abortions to be. She is a human being. She is a person and she is conflicted by her choice. It is here that Kaye makes a great film, a great statement by reducing all of the talk down to a person and her choice and real feelings and the real cost and the real experience, and not an intellectual argument or religious belief. It is a long tough film. It is a great film, that has no answers. See the film, just be prepared to be thinking about it for a long time afterward..

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that.

[szech_1 · 10/10 · 28 May 2009]

-- John Stuart Mill, On Liberty.

This is the most informative and sobering documentary on abortion out there.

Have I ever seen an abortion? - No, but now I've seen two, and a lot of fetuses. Have I ever seen a woman dead from coathanger abortion? - Now I have, and I know the statistics. Have I ever seen a man who wanted to keep his baby, but the mother got an abortion? - Now I have, and it's hard to watch. Have I ever seen what it's like for a woman going through an abortion? - Now I have, and it's hard to watch.

What I found particularly fascinating, was that the movie doesn't just show both sides, it shows a lot of the gray area in between. It covers opinions that are simple, philosophically articulate, in poor taste, and from famous figures. It doesn't state an opinion, but provides the information for viewers to formulate theirs, as a good documentary should. I recommend people watch this, and even if their stance stays the same, I hope they have a better understanding of the people they disagree with.

The only thing that bothered me was that I felt the movie showed a bit more fringe pro-lifers than rational ones, and I wondered why that was. In the Q&A with Tony Kaye, I asked if he had encountered any other pro-lifers such as the one author, who was neither religious nor political. His answer was eventually: You saw it. When someone else asked him outright what his personal views on abortion are, his answer was eventually, that it is a complex issue. I feel this is fair, and doesn't change this being an excellent documentary, but I would subtract half a star if I could.

Best way to shoot a documentary....

[lucjameshale · 10/10 · 19 October 2014]

This is by far the best film on the subject and on dealing with hard things in general. Black and White and people from all views being allowed to voice their anger and love. From the start to finish the film has people from all over the place talk about their views on what this subject means to them. The thing i find amazing is the counter points from each point of view. The ability to allow people to show how wrong you are yet still remain strong in your view and at the same time see people change their views based on new evidence of something they may not have know about before. When Roe gets interviewed i found it an amazing thing to learn about. Please give it a view. Great conversations will come from it.

The Practice of Civilized Discourse in America Has Been Usurped by Fixed, Hard-Shell Believers Who Disdain Voices of Equilibrium.

[jzappa · 10/10 · 26 September 2009]

There are contradictory values. Apart from each other, each value is considerably rational. The value of preserving human life, or for that matter any other organism, is a value we should accept. You should not ever go readily kill some animal because it's to one's liking. On the other hand, most of us are in unison on stomping a roach. This is generally the case. The values we hold are not definite. They are ever conditional because life is comprised of problematic scenarios and compromises that collide with our values. If you apply yourself to an individual abstract value, it may sound valid, and maybe it is, but you have to ask what it means under exacting circumstances. So freedom to choose is valid, defending life is valid, and sometimes they come into collision. That is the issue of abortion. Those who regard passionately the issue of abortion in America, no matter which side they are on, may complain that Tony Kaye's graphic powerhouse documentary tells the other side.

This is a bold, unintimidated, occasionally almost unwatchable documentary that makes such a compelling illustration for both pro-choice and pro-life that all you can deduce at the end is that both sides have productive supporters, but the pro-lifers also have some disquieting people on their side. One is a sincere young man named Paul Hill, cleancut, aviator glasses, who says we should kill all abortionists. He doesn't stop there. We should also execute all blasphemers. Anyone who says God dammit should be executed? "Yes," he answers solidly. In awhile, he murders a Florida doctor who performed abortions. It's one of two murders in the film which conclude with the death penalty, which pro-life champions tend to advocate. Other pro-lifers purchase property next to abortion clinics and fashion platforms so they can climb onto them and scream over fences at young women entering the clinics.

They judge abortion to be murder, clear as day, and they are also against birth control and sex education, which have shown to decrease unplanned pregnancies and hence abortions. On behalf of their effort to convince, Hill shows vivid footage of abortions and their aftermath. The scene that struck me most gravely has a doctor sifting through a pan of blood, fluid and body parts to be certain he has withdrawn all of a fetus. Tiny hands and feet can unequivocally be seen. Throughout the film, we see more than enough to persuade us that what is being aborted is not seldom unmistakably human. The most rational words of argument on the pro-life side come from Nat Hentoff, the veteran left-wing writer for the Village Voice, characterized as a civil libertarian and an atheist. He contends from a lucid, not religious, perspective that when a sperm and an egg merged, a human is being conceived, and the development should not be infringed upon. His detached assertions, whether or not you agree with them, are a levelheaded kernel in a riotous whirlwind.

Another key witness in the film is Norma McCorvey, who was the anonymous Jane Roe in the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade. She was a pro-choice activist for years, had her home and car shot at, felt practically a prisoner in her house, and then there was an unforeseen occurrence. But we also meet, anonymously, some of the young women who requisition at abortion clinics, and hear their stories. And we hear very real and very true statistics: If abortion is made illegal again in America, the abortion rate will stay essentially the same as it was before Roe v. Wade, but the fatality rate will begin to increase. Before the Supreme Court decision, the foremost means of death among young women was not cancer, not heart disease, not car crashes, but secondary responses of illegal abortions. These are the vital facts Kaye took the responsibility to include.

This depressingly real expose has been a life's work for Kaye, a British citizen who filmed it on and off for 17 years, and who has said that he still does not know his own personal feelings about abortion. He shoots in 35mm wide-screen, using black and white; take one wild guess as to why that's of integral significance to the way we view the film's content. As in his great narrative feature American History X, he uses Anne Dudley's almost overwhelmingly emotional score only in scenes of an unequivocal nature, never to manipulate our feelings one way or another. He interviews brilliant voices of our time such as Noam Chomsky and Alan Dershowitz. At two and a half hours, his film doesn't feel prolonged, as at every moment something arresting, alarming, dumbfounding or maddening is taking place. Correct, he attacks neither side of the argument. But what he shows by chance is how the practice of diplomatically reciprocated views and civilized discourse in America has been usurped by fixed, hard-shell true believers who ignore and disdain voices of composure and equilibrium.

One of a kind film. Profoundley disturbing.

[the_jesus_2000 · 10/10 · 19 June 2008]

No matter what your stance is on the Abortion debate, this film will make you reconsider your position.

This is where the film is best- when it gets you to merely think about it. Many people either don't or are to stubborn to consider that they are wrong. So who is right? Well, according to "Lake of Fire" everyone is. It never takes a side. However, there are more wackos shown on the Pro-Life side then the Pro-Choice. Many mistake this a bias, but this is more to show understanding rather then to condemn. You may be surprised as I was in some of the information reviled ab out key figures in the Abortion issue such as Roe herself.

So, if you are for or against Abortion this film will trouble you equally.I'm talking about actual abortions being shown twice,and crime scene photos of a woman with a hanger in her crotch dead from a failed abortion attempt. It will probably strengthen the view you already have,but you will leave with a better understanding for why your view is opposed.

Apart from the subject matter, it is a beautiful film. The music is overall good, if perhapses depressing. The presentation overall is as good as anything Ken Burns has ever made. The time and effort spent on this project is just unprecedented. Truly not a film made for money or awards. Any person is interested in documentaries or is interested in making them would be wise to see this film at least once. Its one of the better achievements in documentary film making since "Hearts and Minds".

Fair documentary

[Greatornot · 8/10 · 23 June 2009]

I thought this documentary was very fair. Both sides were shown. Some people say it was biased to the left but I do not believe that. I have personally spoken to people who are antiabortion and most of them really do throw their religious beliefs around, like a 2 yr old throws a ball around the house. Basically , the fanatics against abortion , quote every other passage from the bible. Its not the filmmakers fault if these people that are against abortion , come across inarticulate and judgmental and yes for the most part very uneducated as well. The film showed abortion procedures, scenes of crimes, and multiple monologues from people on both sides. The title of the film itself , is proudly proclaimed by the religious right. If these people view this movie they would probably see this as fair. It was a very chilling film , and reinforced the fact that there are people in our very nation that would circumvent the law to push their religion on others. The film was a bit too long and would like to have seen some color to maybe get the true effect , especially on some of the medical procedures and crime scenes. All in all a good film.

The most divisive issue in America since slavery

[asc85 · 7/10 · 1 March 2009]

OK...I didn't make that up in my Title...that was a quote I heard Senator Arlen Specter make once...I think in one of the Supreme Court confirmation hearings. At first I thought it was an over-the-top comment to make, but the more I thought about it, I think he's right.

I am a Male who is strongly Pro-Choice, and have always been extremely interested in the abortion debate. The fact that this was supposed to be a balanced look at abortion from both sides made me interested in renting the film.

Truth be told, this film is slanted towards the Pro-Choice side. If someone who is Pro-Life felt this was well-balanced, I'd be shocked. As others have noted, most of the Pro-Life people are shown practically frothing at the mouth, while most of the Pro-Choice people are reasoned intellectuals. I'll bet there are some extremely rational, calm people on the Pro-Life side, but we never saw them. I'm sure there are also over-the-top Pro-Choice extremists, but we didn't see many of them either. For example, I would have liked to have seen those who are so Pro-Choice defend sex-selection abortions. We didn't see that.

As a Pro-Choice movie, there is more balance in it than is typically shown, but to say this movie is right down the middle on abortion would be incorrect. Still, I really liked this movie, and the last 20 minutes or so where we watch the woman going through the whole abortion process was extremely powerful, particularly her reaction at the end.

I'm not sure there's a very wide market for a film like this. If you're a big follower of the abortion issue, it's definitely worth seeing. If you don't find this a hot button issue, you'll probably think most of this is much ado about nothing.

hard to watch, hard to forget.

[djmalachi · 7 October 2011]

Black and white. If you are pro-choice, you will skip or wish they omitted the abortion scene. If you are pro-life that will be your most memorable part of the movie. After, the doctor says "Now she can go on with her life, go to school, without taking on the responsibility of becoming a parent..." CUT to a strainer filled with a mashed up pile of pulpy flesh, yet at center in perfect focus, a tiny, open hand. Burned a permanent image into my retina. Wow.

Many pro-lifers ARE crazy, and they should realize that there is nothing they can do to end abortion. They cannot share their point of view without being judgmental. Black and white.

A great piece of film making......if a tad long

[Adam_Mccormick2 · 9/10 · 24 January 2009]

Great documentary that really makes you think about the issue of abortion (even if you don't live in the USA). It also made me thankful that I don't live in the US if I am honest.

The 'Pro Life' issue I though was explored very well. What happens after the birth, do these people care? Are they all anti war, anti capital punishment?

I was also shocked that it was an issue that people went so far as to perform acts of Terror over- killing a man, in front of his children, via sniper rifle- is so far from 'Pro Life' its untrue.

The shooting in black and white really adds to the effect of the movie.

Well worth a watch- in this day and age a film that makes you think is a rare treat indeed.!

Both Sides? Hardly!

[revsolly · 1/10 · 17 February 2009]

I fell upon this "documentary" strictly by accident. I wasn't too surprised that the work, which was supposed to show the abortion debate from "both sides", was decidedly slanted to the pro-abortion end of it.

Except for the wonderful story of how Minister Flip Benham, & his child, were used by God to bring Norma McCorvey out of her misery into hope, this film seemed to be fixated with the murders of 3 abortionists by fringe people who had affiliated themselves with the pro-life movement. As just 1 example, it doesn't even mention that John Salvi not only shot the people in the abortion mill, but also threatened the pro-lifers outside. However, we did get a wonderful reading of a scripted dissertation by the guard who exchanged fire with Salvi.

When going back & forth between the 2 sides, I noticed that the film maker continued to use lettered-people (professors & such) for the pro-abortion side, but failed to reciprocate for the pro-life side. Legitimate source such as Dr. Bernard Nathanson, former abortionist & partner of abortionist Bill Baird, was nowhere to be found to counterpoint Baird's presentation & to address the false assertion of the numbers of women who allegedly died due to using coat hangers to abort. Nathanson was a founding member of the North American Abortion Rights Action League (NAARAL), which is now the National Abortion Rights Action League(NARAL). He could have recounted how those figures were pulled out of thin air by the NAARAL group.

To be balanced, they could have shown at least one of the numerous families who have multiple adopted children, adopted with no regard as to culture (race). Instead many of the "pro-choice" side were allowed to continue with the canard that pro-lifers only cared about white children & didn't care about children at all after their birth. My wife & I would have gladly interviewed for this segment. Or, I could have put them in touch with at least 1/2 dozen other families who have done as we have done. That would have been presenting both sides.

I can only say that, as it was alleged that this would show both sides, I must assume that there will be a part 2, as this part didn't live up to the hype.

re-edit!

[antiknock · 1 August 2007]

It is a really powerful film and I am glad I saw it. It is the type of film that haunts you.....but it could have an hour, at least half an hour cut out of it and it would have been even stronger.

The photography in the film is great and it is worth sticking through as the ending is definitely the best part of the film. I am a fan of Tony Kaye but at over 2.5 hours that was some self indulgent film-making/editing. Tony obviously has problems with editing in long form.

Lake of Fire is a term that represents hell and I was in hell as the same points where made over and over and over again!!!