![]() ![]() |
|
Quote: |
and I gave up on season two of MaM, thought it stunk. Should have been 4 episodes, so much filler and fabricated drama. |
Quote: |
They leave out some important details but it was pretty interesting. |
Quote: |
Slanted too...it had an agenda. |
Quote: |
In comment 14207151 5BowlsSoon said: Quote: Slanted too...it had an agenda. I thought that in the beginning, it had less of an agenda. I legit thought to myself how it was different from MaM which CLEARLY has an agenda throughout. But as time went on there was more of an agenda. That said it seems like the evidence pointed the direction of the agenda. Also, all of these usually do. An "on the fence" documentary won't elicit the same emotion. |
Quote: |
In comment 14207152 BestFeature said: Quote: In comment 14207151 5BowlsSoon said: Quote: Slanted too...it had an agenda. I thought that in the beginning, it had less of an agenda. I legit thought to myself how it was different from MaM which CLEARLY has an agenda throughout. But as time went on there was more of an agenda. That said it seems like the evidence pointed the direction of the agenda. Also, all of these usually do. An "on the fence" documentary won't elicit the same emotion. I later found out the defendant was dating/banging someone involved (director or producer I believe) in the filming of this show. |
Quote: |
In comment 14207210 5BowlsSoon said: Quote: In comment 14207152 BestFeature said: Quote: In comment 14207151 5BowlsSoon said: Quote: Slanted too...it had an agenda. I thought that in the beginning, it had less of an agenda. I legit thought to myself how it was different from MaM which CLEARLY has an agenda throughout. But as time went on there was more of an agenda. That said it seems like the evidence pointed the direction of the agenda. Also, all of these usually do. An "on the fence" documentary won't elicit the same emotion. I later found out the defendant was dating/banging someone involved (director or producer I believe) in the filming of this show. Are you referring to the lawyer marrying a reporter? Or literally, Michael Peterson dating someone involved in this show? |
Quote: |
In comment 14207293 BestFeature said: Quote: In comment 14207210 5BowlsSoon said: Quote: In comment 14207152 BestFeature said: Quote: In comment 14207151 5BowlsSoon said: Quote: Slanted too...it had an agenda. I thought that in the beginning, it had less of an agenda. I legit thought to myself how it was different from MaM which CLEARLY has an agenda throughout. But as time went on there was more of an agenda. That said it seems like the evidence pointed the direction of the agenda. Also, all of these usually do. An "on the fence" documentary won't elicit the same emotion. I later found out the defendant was dating/banging someone involved (director or producer I believe) in the filming of this show. Are you referring to the lawyer marrying a reporter? Or literally, Michael Peterson dating someone involved in this show? Peterson getting it on with the director or producer or whatever she was. Big wig. |
Quote: |
In comment 14207293 BestFeature said: Quote: In comment 14207210 5BowlsSoon said: Quote: In comment 14207152 BestFeature said: Quote: In comment 14207151 5BowlsSoon said: Quote: Slanted too...it had an agenda. I thought that in the beginning, it had less of an agenda. I legit thought to myself how it was different from MaM which CLEARLY has an agenda throughout. But as time went on there was more of an agenda. That said it seems like the evidence pointed the direction of the agenda. Also, all of these usually do. An "on the fence" documentary won't elicit the same emotion. I later found out the defendant was dating/banging someone involved (director or producer I believe) in the filming of this show. Are you referring to the lawyer marrying a reporter? Or literally, Michael Peterson dating someone involved in this show? Peterson getting it on with the director or producer or whatever she was. Big wig. |
Quote: |
is that they want to create a victim narrative to attrract an audience. So they leave out crucial details that contradict this narrative. Steven Avery threw his cat into a fire when he was 18 and burned it to death. He is a sick fuck and guilty as hell Amanda Knox is another version of Casey Anthony. Sick, twisted woman but she is American and pretty so she must be a victim of the "terrible" Italian justice system. Leaving aside that the people who make these claims know nothing about the Italian justice system. And Jonbenet Ramsey's family is guilty. Probably the brother. But, no, it was a drifter who did it. These shows pander to people's need to find "conspiracies." |
Quote: |
In comment 14207639 Vanzetti said: Quote: is that they want to create a victim narrative to attrract an audience. So they leave out crucial details that contradict this narrative. Steven Avery threw his cat into a fire when he was 18 and burned it to death. He is a sick fuck and guilty as hell Amanda Knox is another version of Casey Anthony. Sick, twisted woman but she is American and pretty so she must be a victim of the "terrible" Italian justice system. Leaving aside that the people who make these claims know nothing about the Italian justice system. And Jonbenet Ramsey's family is guilty. Probably the brother. But, no, it was a drifter who did it. These shows pander to people's need to find "conspiracies." If you've watched both seasons of making a murderer and STILL think Avery is guilty you are CLUELESS |
Quote: |
In comment 14207653 elisha2014 said: Quote: In comment 14207639 Vanzetti said: Quote: is that they want to create a victim narrative to attrract an audience. So they leave out crucial details that contradict this narrative. Steven Avery threw his cat into a fire when he was 18 and burned it to death. He is a sick fuck and guilty as hell Amanda Knox is another version of Casey Anthony. Sick, twisted woman but she is American and pretty so she must be a victim of the "terrible" Italian justice system. Leaving aside that the people who make these claims know nothing about the Italian justice system. And Jonbenet Ramsey's family is guilty. Probably the brother. But, no, it was a drifter who did it. These shows pander to people's need to find "conspiracies." If you've watched both seasons of making a murderer and STILL think Avery is guilty you are CLUELESS SOMEBODY murdered that poor girl on that property. Who was it? |
Quote: |
100000% ran her down and did all the evil things Steven was accused of. Eye witnesses claim to have seen Theresa leave the property after she met with Steven. Also Steven's account of the events has never wavered and if he were guilty and lying he would have slipped up at some point - he's not the brighest. Bobby looks guilty as hell based on all the evidence that Zellner was able to dig up about his internet history, 10000s of images he downloaded with torture, murder etc. |
Quote: |
...Amanda Knox is another version of Casey Anthony. Sick, twisted woman but she is American and pretty so she must be a victim of the "terrible" Italian justice system. Leaving aside that the people who make these claims know nothing about the Italian justice system. |
Quote: |
is that they want to create a victim narrative to attrract an audience. So they leave out crucial details that contradict this narrative. Steven Avery threw his cat into a fire when he was 18 and burned it to death. He is a sick fuck and guilty as hell Amanda Knox is another version of Casey Anthony. Sick, twisted woman but she is American and pretty so she must be a victim of the "terrible" Italian justice system. Leaving aside that the people who make these claims know nothing about the Italian justice system. And Jonbenet Ramsey's family is guilty. Probably the brother. But, no, it was a drifter who did it. These shows pander to people's need to find "conspiracies." |