Very well executed

Very disappointing...

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

For a narcotic which has been proved by scientists to leave its user "happy...intoxicated...and, finally, sleepy", this documentary says that marijuana seems to be the one drug to have gotten an unfair rap since it first appeared on the North America scene in the early 1900s. Initially brought into Texas by Mexican labor workers, and into New Orleans by port sailors in 1914, the U.S. Bureau of Narcotics seized upon pot's early popularity, drumming it into the public consciousness--and into Washington's ear--that puffing on the devilish weed would result in instant insanity. As years passed, the law, led by Narcotics Commissioner Harry J. Anslinger, a self-imposed "Father of the Drug War", made certain pot's reputation went from bad to worse. Each state in the union banned its presence, while Hollywood churned out exploitation scare flicks (and entertainers got busted for using). This colorful, lively film isn't exactly an insightful probe into the history of drugs; it's quick and clever, but too cute to be taken seriously (and ends rather abruptly). Director Ron Mann condescends amusingly towards the politicians who have opposed grass, and his use of archival film and TV footage makes sure that all straight adults look like irrational duds and hypocrites. Still, some of the points scored for marijuana's side are worth considering, even though Mann's film seems just a high-end project. While the results are canny, one is left wanting of more...substance? **1/2 from ****

I watched this right after completing a research paper on marijuana policy, and it was certainly a nice break after working entirely out of dry text. Much easier on the eyes than hundreds of pages of tiny type.There certainly is a lot of stuff this movie left out, including some of the funnier things (such as the marijuana murder trials of 1938, or the 120-second Congressional hearings for the passage of the Marihuana Tax Act), but it definitely gets the point across in a colorful, often rather silly way complete with movie clips, weird songs, goofy video-game graphics, old-ranting-politician footage, and some of the more ludicrous public service announcements. The cultural bent makes it much less dry than most of the strictly historical, legal and political reading I've done, which is saying a bit as the legal history is pretty entertaining.Just in case you somehow miss the point (or forget about it while watching Cab Calloway tap-dance), Grass makes a heavy point of repeatedly pointing out the escalating amounts of money spent on this unobtrusive little weed, and highlights the blatant lies the public has been subjected to over the past century by reiterating "The Truth" for every decade or so.The only real downside to the movie is that it skipped over the disclaimer that every marijuana decriminalization piece really needs to have in it somewhere: There is no such thing as an entirely safe drug.In conclusion, I would recommend this movie quite highly if you're looking to be introduced to the subject in a tolerably entertaining fashion, or if you're sick of reading and want something a little more audially/visually stimulating. For real information on the drug, however, I'd recommend reading "Marihuana: a Signal of Misunderstanding" instead.

The story of the US Government's war on marijuana over 100 years showing key figures, events and periods in the war. This is a genuinely fascinating documentary that looks at the century broken down into periods of several years or several decades. The periods are mainly connected by the `official truth' of the drug that the US put out to try and put off users.The film is fascinating not in the way it looks at the drug but at the look at the war - in fact it has nothing about grass that shows it's safe or anything to convince us that it should be legal. Rather the film looks at the tactics used to fight the war - mostly it's media spin, with the head of the FDN (now DEA) at one time having power over the content of all films shown in the US that mention the drug - anything that didn't put a negative spin on it were banned. The story down the years is captivating, and the money spent is astounding.However the film has a major weakness. As I said it doesn't try to make any points about the drug - there's nothing to convince a fence sitter that the drug is good or that it should be legalised. However it's obvious that the director is pro-grass and he makes his point by having a very light hearted tone to the film. At first this is refreshing as it makes it feel very relaxed and less historical and dusty. However this tone continues as the director basically makes fun of everyone who fought the drug - he does this by using outtakes of detractors rather than just the interviews etc. TV reporters are shown making mistakes, Nixon is shown preparing for a TV statement - basically the film doesn't try to make any points in defence of the drug but rather just tries to make any detractors look stupid.The final line from Mayor La Guardia (actually referring to Prohibition) is a great touch and gets the message across but the lazy bias that runs throughout takes a lot away from the film.

I find reviews interesting in that they tell us what the "reviewer" got out of the movie. I will try to give a true review, and I believe a true "review" tells what point the movie was making. Of course this would be what I got out of the movie, so is it a true review. Maybe the only way for a person to really know what a movie is about is to watch it and not worry about what someone else thought of it. I think this movie was written as a "documentary" and it documents the propaganda about drug from the beginning of the century. It attempts to show those of us who have seen the current propaganda our how it has been presented over the generations. I saw the point as being how serious the subject is taken now, and how we are told that the current law is based on the facts, when their facts came from a propaganda campaign. And if you look deep enough you will see that that propaganda campaign was perpetrated for the interest of Big Business. The purpose of the "war against marijuana" is not to eliminate the use. It is to prevent the growth of hemp which competes with the cotton industry, petroleum industry, paper industry, etc. It is also interesting that we continue to let the propaganda confuse the marijuana plant with the hemp plant.