On a local radio talk show this morning listeners were asked to phone in and name a film that they had walked out from. A lady responded and stated that she and one other person on the other side of the theater, were the only viewers. An hour into the show the other person stood up, walked over to her and said ' I can't take it anymore, it's too gruesome' and walked out.

This brilliant film by Anant Singh tells the story of psychological trauma suffered by a South African prison warden, who lands in court for a most serious crime. In this court drama the facts come to light as the case progresses, until the verdict is given. Based on true facts this movie gives viewers insight into the trial and tribulations of this 17 year old warden.

The movie may be too graphic for some viewers, but it presents actual happenings, without which the movie would be senseless. The end result is an admirable film, leaving scope for thought. This gem has perhaps not had widespread circulation, but is certainly recommended if you come across it.

"The Hangman: Shepherds and Butchers" is a South African film based on true events of the late 1980s. The film is primarily a courtroom drama that touches on capital punishment, moral responsibility, and the mercurial nature of the judicial process.

The narrative introduces us to a troubled young man on trial for the murder of seven athletes, whom he shot in cold blood as they were driving in a minivan. The defendant, Leon Labuschagne, has assigned to him a defense attorney, who slowly pieces together the background of the young man while working as in a prison. Apparently, the defendant was traumatized by having to assist in executions by hanging of over 150 inmates.

The case emotional defense presented by Mr. Webber is countered by an icily cold prosecutor, Miss Murray, who argue for the death penalty. The film takes great pains to point out the differences between the two attorneys. Miss Murray seems remarkably detached from her work, calling to mind the nonchalant manner in which the inmates were subjected to gruesome hangings, sometimes lasting as long as fifteen minutes prior to expiration.

The presiding judge appeared to have made up his mind early in the trial without hearing all of the evidence. It is clear that on the panel of three judges, the presiding judge was a dissenter in the split vote.

This provocative film raises ethical issues on many legal fronts. In the closing credits, we learn that with the presidency of Nelson Mandela, there were much-needed reforms in South African jurisprudence.

This is very moral based and has a purpose. So if you don't like a movie to hammer something into you, this may not be a movie for you to watch. Don't get me wrong, there is still a lot of tension and edge of your seat kind of stuff going on. Not to mention violence and drama about people who try living their lives, but have a lot of baggage.

The psyche of people who have a tough job is really fragile. So when at the end you get the and this happened shortly after in real life, you probably should not be too surprised. And you probably won't be too surprised about the outcome of the movie anyway. The acting is good, the direction is good and if you don't mind court dramas with moral flavour, you could do worse