Author Topic: Making a Murderer  (Read 6728 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3435
  • Respect: +1574
Making a Murderer
« on: December 11, 2015, 05:32:39 PM »
+1


The story focuses on Steven Avery, who was imprisoned for 18 years, only to be exonerated based on DNA evidence. Two years after his release, he became a prime suspect in a murder investigation.

Release Date - Streaming on Netflix starting December 18



wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3435
  • Respect: +1574
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #1 on: December 19, 2015, 05:57:59 PM »
+2

Garam

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Respect: +232
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2015, 06:04:00 PM »
0
The interrogation footage at the end of episode 2 is outrageous.

polkablues

  • Child of Myth
  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 7020
  • Respect: +1737
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #3 on: December 23, 2015, 06:20:20 PM »
0
Oh, don't worry, it gets so much worse.
Now you're in the *spoiler* place.

samsong

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Respect: +208
    • http://www.dvdaficionado.com/dvds.html?cat=1&sub=All&id=samsong
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #4 on: December 24, 2015, 03:19:06 AM »
0
halfway into episode 4 and this one of the most frustrating, infuriating things i've seen this side of dear zachary.  really glad i started this the week of christmas.

trump 2016.


Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10831
  • Respect: +1254
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2015, 05:06:16 PM »
+1
I'm somewhere in Episode 2, and I've read enough about it to basically know what happens, but I'm still intrigued to see how it all plays out. It might take a while, though. The whole thing just makes me feel scummy. Also (this is going to sound bad)... I can only listen to people struggle to put together an English sentence for so long.

Here's a petty complaint: Why in God's name did they not deinterlace their video? It is monumentally distracting. And they must be using the absolute worst DV cams. There are handheld shots, walking through the junkyard or something, that have no image stabilization whatsoever, like they're using the video mode on a DSLR camera. And then, inexplicably, there are gorgeous helicopter shots of the junkyard.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

matt35mm

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3215
  • Bony old behind.
  • Respect: +448
    • My Films on Vimeo
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2015, 06:05:10 PM »
+1
I'm somewhere in Episode 2, and I've read enough about it to basically know what happens, but I'm still intrigued to see how it all plays out. It might take a while, though. The whole thing just makes me feel scummy. Also (this is going to sound bad)... I can only listen to people struggle to put together an English sentence for so long.

Here's a petty complaint: Why in God's name did they not deinterlace their video? It is monumentally distracting. And they must be using the absolute worst DV cams. There are handheld shots, walking through the junkyard or something, that have no image stabilization whatsoever, like they're using the video mode on a DSLR camera. And then, inexplicably, there are gorgeous helicopter shots of the junkyard.

Seems clear to me that they started with no particular budget, or a very low one, and started in or around 2005, so we're still talking miniDV or something like that.

After they put it together, were able to get some money to finish and go back to get some drone shots (which by now is actually cheap to do quality HD helicopter-style shots) to generally beef up the production value, get that professional music and sound design, etc.

Anyway, I've finished watching it. It struck me as very watchable, but ultimately underwhelming, primarily because the bias is clear and gives you only one real way of understanding the story and the vague lesson that the criminal justice system is, um, flawed. It's a good story, though.

diggler

  • The Return Threshold
  • ****
  • Posts: 913
  • Respect: +67
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2015, 08:56:37 PM »
0
It is very one sided but it does provide a pretty compelling argument. I thought the stuff at the end with Ken Kratz's sexting scandal was a bit of a cheap shot, it felt a little sleazy to include it as it had little or no bearing on the case. Other than that it's very well put together and totally heartbreaking.
I'm not racist, I'm just slutty

Garam

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Respect: +232
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #8 on: December 28, 2015, 09:34:24 PM »
0
This exchange from episode 7 made my head explode


Asshole Moustache Attorney: Do you believe it was impossible or improbable for them to plant that key?

Deputy Dipshit Dawg: [...] I would have to say that...it could be possible, as in I was doing other things [...] so if we're just limiting it to 'if it was possible that they could do it without me seeing it', i'd have to say 'yeah, i guess it is possible!'

Asshole Moustache Attorney who Very Possibly Framed Someone for Murder: Is that in the sense that...anything's possible!? *smirks like a piece of shit*

Deputy Dipshit Dawg: That's in the sense that...possibly aliens put it there I guess

Frustrated Defence Attorney: There weren't any aliens in the room, right?

Deputy Dipshit Dawg: Not that I know of.

Frustrated Defence Lawyer: So it being possible in the same way that aliens are possible really isn't a fair characterisation of what you meant, is it??

long pause

Deputy Dipshit Dawg: I don't understand.



WHAT IN THE ACTUAL FUCK

Reelist

  • Shoutbox Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2599
  • Respect: +963
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #9 on: December 29, 2015, 03:42:30 AM »
0
Here's a petty complaint: Why in God's name did they not deinterlace their video? It is monumentally distracting. And they must be using the absolute worst DV cams. There are handheld shots, walking through the junkyard or something, that have no image stabilization whatsoever, like they're using the video mode on a DSLR camera. And then, inexplicably, there are gorgeous helicopter shots of the junkyard.

I noticed this too. On top of Matt's explanation, I think that them keeping the video in the original state it was taken kind of timestamps where we are in the story, because it spans 30 years so for it all to have a kind of cohesive look might jar the viewer as to where we are in time.
You can go to places in the world with pudding. That. Is. Funny.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10831
  • Respect: +1254
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #10 on: December 31, 2015, 12:19:02 AM »
0
Anonymous claims to have evidence that Netflix documentary’s subject, Steven Avery, is innocent

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/making-a-murderer-anonymous-claims-to-have-evidence-that-netflix-documentary-s-subject-steven-avery-a6790546.html

Supporters of the online activism movement say that they have evidence that will help Steven Avery, the subject of Netflix’s ‘Making a Murderer’ documentary. The series follows Avery as he is convicted in a case involving the Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Department. At Avery’s trial, the defence suggested some of the evidence against him might have been planted.

The group has set up a Twitter account to taunt the two police officers who are profiled in the film, claiming that they have found emails and phone records that support the allegations.

Those behind the group posted a threat to the local sheriff’s department that they would release the documents unless they were officially released. The deadline that was given in that tweet has since passed, but no information has yet been made public.

The account has said that another group — Ghost Security, which is close to Anonymous — will be taking charge of releasing the documents. They would be unveiled “shortly”, the account posted.

The Netflix documentary highlights a range of alleged problems with the case, including what critics have said was coercive questioning and a reliance on possibly dubious evidence.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10831
  • Respect: +1254
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #11 on: January 01, 2016, 12:55:44 AM »
0
Can anyone respond to this?


Evidence 'Making a Murderer' Didn't Present in Steven Avery's Murder Case

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

Some highlights:

— The bullet with Halbach’s DNA on it came from Avery’s gun, which always hung above his bed.

— Avery had purchased handcuffs and leg irons like the ones Dassey described holding Halbach only three weeks before (Avery said he’s purchased them for use with his girlfriend, Jodi, with whom he’d had a tumultuous relationship — at one point, he was ordered by police to stay away from her for three days).

— Dassey stated that he helped Avery moved the RAV4 into the junkyard and that Avery had lifted the hood and removed the battery cable. Even if you believe that the blood in Halbach’s car was planted by the cops (as I do), there was also non-blood DNA evidence on the hood latch. I don’t believe the police would plant — or know to plant — that evidence.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Reelist

  • Shoutbox Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2599
  • Respect: +963
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2016, 02:08:42 PM »
+1
You know what's been sticking in my craw about all this? If Steven Avery didn't kill Teresa Halbach, THEN WHO THE FUCK DID?! Are people really under the assumption that the police killed and cremated an innocent woman just to throw a man in jail for SUING THEM? Do any of you here actually believe that? If so, then the documentary has masterfully manipulated you. I will accept that they rushed to indict him and probably planted evidence to make that process go smoother, but he 100% killed her, and Brendan helped. Read the full transcript of His confession with monumentally important tidbits left out of the film. Sorry, but I think we've been duped into caring about these mouth breathing degenerates.
You can go to places in the world with pudding. That. Is. Funny.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10831
  • Respect: +1254
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2016, 02:29:32 PM »
0
Unfortunately I think you're on the right track, and that's why I've been reluctant to finish. There are things left out of the series that are, as you say, monumentally important. Would we have let The Jinx get away with that?

Another example: The doc lets Avery shrug off the cat-in-the-fire incident by saying he was recklessly tossing a cat around, and it was an unfortunate accident resulting from youthful indiscretion. But what actually happened is the cat was soaked in gasoline and oil and put in the fire.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

JG

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1365
  • Respect: +52
Re: Making a Murderer
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2016, 03:57:55 PM »
+2
You know what's been sticking in my craw about all this? If Steven Avery didn't kill Teresa Halbach, THEN WHO THE FUCK DID?! Are people really under the assumption that the police killed and cremated an innocent woman just to throw a man in jail for SUING THEM? Do any of you here actually believe that? If so, then the documentary has masterfully manipulated you. I will accept that they rushed to indict him and probably planted evidence to make that process go smoother, but he 100% killed her, and Brendan helped. Read the full transcript of His confession with monumentally important tidbits left out of the film. Sorry, but I think we've been duped into caring about these mouth breathing degenerates.

to me, this is a bizarre reaction after having watched all ten hours! i trust that you watched the whole thing, right? why do you feel like you've been duped? i watched with the knowledge that, inevitably, the filmmakers may be omitting certain elements from the story to present their side, so after it ended, i did my due diligence and continued my research. i do wish that the filmmakers were a little more comprehensive in presenting the prosecution's side, but i don't think any of their omissions are especially egregious, especially considering that they're not trying to solve a case, but instead trying to reveal flaws in the system. as such, i've continued to read about the case , and have tried to see it from both sides. considering all of the evidence, i think its very possible that steven avery did it, i still think its very possible that he did not. there are lots of possibilities, but i don't think anyone really thinks that the police killed an innocent woman... i think most people who watch the doc are left to infer a whole slew of possibilities. the one i've heard most often is that steven's family members bobby dassey and scott taydch are responsible.

still, the absolutism of your reaction begs elaboration - how can you say he 100 percent killed her? if there's one lesson to glean from these 10 hours, its the uselessness of this kind of verbiage... even today dean strang, the defense laywer for steven avery, says that he isn't sure Steven is innocent, but he is sure that the case itself is extremely troubling...

I don't want to get into the specifics of the case too much - i would just end up copying and pasting a lot of info from reddit - but the transcript Reelist shared demands context, which the show definitely provides. the above transcript is one of many many "confessions" dassey gave over a period of months, and its definitely not the first. i read the transcript from the first dassey confession and and watched the video, because i was curious how his "confession" evolved over a series of interviews, and i have to say, after reviewing the materials, i'm no closer to believing anything brendan "confesses" to in the video.

Many I've talked to have concluded that Steven may be guilty, but that Brendan's confessions are definitely wack - the confession was clearly coerced out of him. how can you be so sure of brendan's guilt, reelist, especially in response to all of the information the doc provides about the transcript you shared?

Jeremy, the "cat-in-the-fire" incident has come up a lot for a lot of people... Its true, the filmmakers would have been better served in presenting a "rougher," truer version of the cat story... but this is still something that happened some 20 years before under drastically different circumstances. knowing the whole story obviously helps in understanding avery as a "mouth breathing degenerate," as reelist describes.. but for me i don't know that this type of behavior is necessarily predictive of rape/murder. i trust there are more people out there who have killed domestic pets than have killed humans... shouldn't i be able to accept that there are varying shades of criminality; even homicidal tendencies? it seems tough to me that the "cat-in-the-fire" would necessarily indict him for any other crime he might be accused of for the rest of his life.

that seems like its been a conundrum for people - to accept that steven avery might be a little "evil," or have disagreeable aspects of his character, but still be able to believe that he he did not commit the crime.. or alternatively, that he might actually be evil enough to commit a crime like this, but did not actually commit this one... these distinctions matter, no?

for me the politics of the filmmaking here are much clearer and less problematic than the jinx, in which the filmmakers make themselves central to the narrative, convince the main subject that they're making a movie different from the one they're making, etc. 

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy