Search
Search results
Grave Expectations
6.0
Rate It
Book
Claire and Sophie aren't your typical murder investigators . . . Claire Hendricks is a hapless...
Cozy Up to Trouble
5.0
Rate It
Book
A man in a new city. A murderer on the loose. This is no time for embroidery. Skeeter Dursky is...
The Redemption of Mattie Silks
Book
SEEKING REDEMPTION, SHE FINDS RETRIBUTION In 1892, running one of the West’s fanciest brothels...
Historical Women's Fiction
Murder in the Family
7.0
Rate It
Book
A shocking thriller about a cold case, a fictional true crime series, and the family caught in the...
My Uncle Charlie
Book
If you lived on the notorious Canterbury Estate in the '40s and '50s, then you knew there was one...
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Crime Scene: The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel in TV
Feb 22, 2021
Scarily glamourises internet sleuthing
Crime Scene: The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel is the latest stylised true crime documentary from Netflix, and it’s a pretty scary watch, but not in the way you’d expect from something that has been advertised as a supernatural murder mystery.
The 4 episode documentary series focuses on a notorious hotel in downtown L.A, Hotel Cecil, and the disappearance of a Canadian student, Elisa Lam, who went missing from the hotel in unexplained circumstances and who was later found dead. On paper this has everything a true crime lover wants: CCTV footage of the victim acting strangely, a creepy hotel with a dodgy history and a lot of strange and unusual circumstances, which culminates in Elisa Lam’s decomposing body being found in a water tank on the hotel roof days after her disappearance, the same water that the hotel guests have been drinking all along. It’s a truly fascinating story and if done properly, would have been very interesting. However in the hands of director Joe Berlinger, the disappearance of Elisa Lam has been turned into a dull, drawn out affair that dangerously glamourises baseless conspiracy theories.
One of the two main problems is that this documentary has been drawn out over 4 hour long episodes, when realistically the true story of Elisa Lam’s disappearance could still have been told effectively in an hour, maybe two maximum, without detracting from the facts. And I guess that’s really the problem with The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel, it isn’t necessarily all that concerned about the facts but rather just wants to create a film-like entertaining story, with the facts almost an afterthought crammed into the final parts of the last episode. It features lengthy and pointless interviews from other guests and tourists to try and give us a feel of what life at the Cecil was like, and these are entirely unnecessary, as some short exposition from the hotel manager or officers involved would’ve sufficed. Every part of this case is stretched so thinly that you almost lose track after having to weed out the truth and facts amongst all the irrelevant interviews and chatter. It isn’t helped by the narration of some of Elisa’s Tumblr posts, which comes across as cheesy and irritating rather than emotional and meaningful like it was probably intended.
What is most irrelevant and dangerous about this documentary, and the second main problem, is the focus on internet sleuths. These are mostly YouTubers who have spent hours dissecting every aspect of the case and have put forward many outrageous theories, all of which are completely laughable. But instead of mocking these idiots, this documentary glamourises them and their theories, and has dedicated more of it’s runtime to them than it has to any of the real life detectives and investigators involved. Watching these people wheel out one ridiculous theory after another had me wanting to throw my remote at the screen to make it stop. The theories ranged from the questionably plausible (foul player or murder) to the downright ludicrous - someone copying the film Dark Water, possible links to the Lam-Elisa TB test and a vast cover up jointly orchestrated by the police, hotel management and coroners staff are the ones that made me laugh and cringe the most.
All jokes aside, this focus on internet sleuths is extremely damaging and dangerous and this is illustrated by the awful accusations they made about Pablo Vergara aka Morbid, who’s only crime was to make music that wouldn’t be considered mainstream. If this documentary had focused on slamming these people and highlighting the dangers of them getting involved, then it would’ve redeemed itself. But it doesn’t, it gives them centre stage and debunking their theories is almost an afterthought. They aren’t even condemned for their treatment of Pablo despite the obviously long lasting effects on his mental health. These people are crazy and this only serves to highlight the huge problem with internet, video streaming sites and social media – how Joe public can ever think they know better than qualified pathologists and investigators is beyond me. And how this documentary can indulge and glamourise these people is even worse. From working a day job in the emergency services, I know how damaging this sort of interference and public perception can be.
The story of Elisa Lam’s disappearance at the Hotel Cecil is undoubtedly an interesting one. However in Crime Scene: The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel, the real story has been mauled and disrespected by the focus and respect given to the internet sleuths and their absurd theories. I feel like I’m being generous giving it a 3, it made me so angry.
The 4 episode documentary series focuses on a notorious hotel in downtown L.A, Hotel Cecil, and the disappearance of a Canadian student, Elisa Lam, who went missing from the hotel in unexplained circumstances and who was later found dead. On paper this has everything a true crime lover wants: CCTV footage of the victim acting strangely, a creepy hotel with a dodgy history and a lot of strange and unusual circumstances, which culminates in Elisa Lam’s decomposing body being found in a water tank on the hotel roof days after her disappearance, the same water that the hotel guests have been drinking all along. It’s a truly fascinating story and if done properly, would have been very interesting. However in the hands of director Joe Berlinger, the disappearance of Elisa Lam has been turned into a dull, drawn out affair that dangerously glamourises baseless conspiracy theories.
One of the two main problems is that this documentary has been drawn out over 4 hour long episodes, when realistically the true story of Elisa Lam’s disappearance could still have been told effectively in an hour, maybe two maximum, without detracting from the facts. And I guess that’s really the problem with The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel, it isn’t necessarily all that concerned about the facts but rather just wants to create a film-like entertaining story, with the facts almost an afterthought crammed into the final parts of the last episode. It features lengthy and pointless interviews from other guests and tourists to try and give us a feel of what life at the Cecil was like, and these are entirely unnecessary, as some short exposition from the hotel manager or officers involved would’ve sufficed. Every part of this case is stretched so thinly that you almost lose track after having to weed out the truth and facts amongst all the irrelevant interviews and chatter. It isn’t helped by the narration of some of Elisa’s Tumblr posts, which comes across as cheesy and irritating rather than emotional and meaningful like it was probably intended.
What is most irrelevant and dangerous about this documentary, and the second main problem, is the focus on internet sleuths. These are mostly YouTubers who have spent hours dissecting every aspect of the case and have put forward many outrageous theories, all of which are completely laughable. But instead of mocking these idiots, this documentary glamourises them and their theories, and has dedicated more of it’s runtime to them than it has to any of the real life detectives and investigators involved. Watching these people wheel out one ridiculous theory after another had me wanting to throw my remote at the screen to make it stop. The theories ranged from the questionably plausible (foul player or murder) to the downright ludicrous - someone copying the film Dark Water, possible links to the Lam-Elisa TB test and a vast cover up jointly orchestrated by the police, hotel management and coroners staff are the ones that made me laugh and cringe the most.
All jokes aside, this focus on internet sleuths is extremely damaging and dangerous and this is illustrated by the awful accusations they made about Pablo Vergara aka Morbid, who’s only crime was to make music that wouldn’t be considered mainstream. If this documentary had focused on slamming these people and highlighting the dangers of them getting involved, then it would’ve redeemed itself. But it doesn’t, it gives them centre stage and debunking their theories is almost an afterthought. They aren’t even condemned for their treatment of Pablo despite the obviously long lasting effects on his mental health. These people are crazy and this only serves to highlight the huge problem with internet, video streaming sites and social media – how Joe public can ever think they know better than qualified pathologists and investigators is beyond me. And how this documentary can indulge and glamourise these people is even worse. From working a day job in the emergency services, I know how damaging this sort of interference and public perception can be.
The story of Elisa Lam’s disappearance at the Hotel Cecil is undoubtedly an interesting one. However in Crime Scene: The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel, the real story has been mauled and disrespected by the focus and respect given to the internet sleuths and their absurd theories. I feel like I’m being generous giving it a 3, it made me so angry.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Manhattan Night (Manhattan Nocturne) (2016) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Characters – Porter Wren is a well-respected journalist in New York, he has a comfortable job in his paper because of his reputation for telling people’s stories. His latest case however will get him looking into the murder mystery that will push himself to the limits when he gets involved with the victim’s wife. He narrates a lot of this which is the films way of trying to have a dig a modern society. Caroline is the wife whose husband has been killed, she seduces Porter, which plays her out to be a siren, only she soon feels like a victim with this character get caught in the middle we never know which side she is meant to be, one that gets what she wants or just a victims. Simon is the husband that has been murdered meaning we only see him in flashback of how the two were married. Lisa is the wife of Porter, she is doctor and from how Porter tells the story they don’t get along as they once did.
Performances – Adrien Brody does well in the leading role in the film even if he doesn’t make his character feel much different than any others from the similar genre. Yvonne Strahovski fits the seductive side to her character, though without being the strongest in the serious side of the story. Campbell Scott and Jennifer Beals just don’t get enough time to show their skills off in this film.
Story – The story here follows an investigation into an unsolved murder which brings the investigative reporter into a series of cover ups and conspiracy in true noir style. Using the noir style is clear here, the execution of the noir style doesn’t quite come off though because the siren doesn’t feel like a siren and by the end you will be left wondering just why the investigation wasn’t solved by the police in the first place, let alone why the reporter is even asked to investigate it. Nothing really comes out of solving the case which is the biggest disappointment from everything we are getting invested in.
Crime/Mystery – The crime side of this mystery does involve a murder that hasn’t been solved, it does have other crime elements involved too which just confuse the simply plot.
Settings – The film is set in New York and uses a secret house to show a place of peace in this busy city and how people can meet and connect through life.
Scene of the Movie – The truth.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The case felt pointless to solve.
Final Thoughts – This is a noir styled crime mystery that gives us a case that almost doesn’t need to be solved in the end.
Overall: Mystery that didn’t need solving.
Performances – Adrien Brody does well in the leading role in the film even if he doesn’t make his character feel much different than any others from the similar genre. Yvonne Strahovski fits the seductive side to her character, though without being the strongest in the serious side of the story. Campbell Scott and Jennifer Beals just don’t get enough time to show their skills off in this film.
Story – The story here follows an investigation into an unsolved murder which brings the investigative reporter into a series of cover ups and conspiracy in true noir style. Using the noir style is clear here, the execution of the noir style doesn’t quite come off though because the siren doesn’t feel like a siren and by the end you will be left wondering just why the investigation wasn’t solved by the police in the first place, let alone why the reporter is even asked to investigate it. Nothing really comes out of solving the case which is the biggest disappointment from everything we are getting invested in.
Crime/Mystery – The crime side of this mystery does involve a murder that hasn’t been solved, it does have other crime elements involved too which just confuse the simply plot.
Settings – The film is set in New York and uses a secret house to show a place of peace in this busy city and how people can meet and connect through life.
Scene of the Movie – The truth.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The case felt pointless to solve.
Final Thoughts – This is a noir styled crime mystery that gives us a case that almost doesn’t need to be solved in the end.
Overall: Mystery that didn’t need solving.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Anti-Social (2015) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Story: Anti-Social starts as we meet street artist Dee (Sulkin), his model girlfriend Kirsten (Markle) and his armed robber brother Marcus (Myers) who has been making the headlines for all the wrong reasons now. Dee is about to be given motivation from Philip (Berkel) who sees his potential as an artist, while Marcus is getting deeper into the world of crime.
Dee is given the chance to escape the rough streets of crime, only to find himself being caught in the middle of the drug war his brother has started in the streets of London.
Thoughts on Anti-Social
Characters – Dee is a street artist in London, think of him like the Banksy of the local era. His art work has grabbed the attention of many with his big opportunity coming his way, when his brother gets into trouble, he is forced to balance his own future for his brother’s. Marcus is part of an armed robbery gang that are terrorising London, he has rivals from both sides of the law which has put him in the middle of a drug war, he never asks his brother to help him. Kirsten is the model girlfriend of Dee’s, she is an American that isn’t used to the world Dee is from, she doesn’t do much else other than support Dee. Philip is the man from the art world that could easily make Dee’s life better and is willing to make this happen.
Performances – Gregg Sulkin in the leading role is solid enough, we see his difficult life decision being made well enough, though he does lack that true charisma for a leading role. Meghan Markle is the biggest draw for this film now because of her royal status, only she is completely wasted here, given next to nothing to do. Josh Myers gives us a character which only leaves us hating his character, this is something you will see from nearly all of the criminal side of this film.
Story – The story here follows two brothers whose lives are going in very different directions only for the one that is about to escape, needing to return to criminal world where he must make up for his brother’s error. The way this story is told feels very messy, the idea that the street artist getting a bring break is simple and effective along with the idea that he could be made to make a decision about his future. It is the time spent with the criminal brother, we gain no sympathy for him or his crew, we learn nothing about why they are committing these crimes doesn’t help. The number of gangs also isn’t shown in anyway to make us truly understand the world we are living in and while the final act does have tension, it seems to come from the wrong reasoning.
Crime – The crime world we enter in this film is gangs and robbers, we focus on one young man about to leave this world, who gets dragged back into it after his brother’s action, it shows how in London people are willing to just commit crimes for the fun of it.
Settings – The film is set in London and shows us just where the criminals will act to try and make a living from hurting other people.
Scene of the Movie – The airport.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – No sympathy for the criminals.
Final Thoughts – This is a messy crime movie which only ends up making you not care about the characters like it should.
Overall: Messy and drags along.
Dee is given the chance to escape the rough streets of crime, only to find himself being caught in the middle of the drug war his brother has started in the streets of London.
Thoughts on Anti-Social
Characters – Dee is a street artist in London, think of him like the Banksy of the local era. His art work has grabbed the attention of many with his big opportunity coming his way, when his brother gets into trouble, he is forced to balance his own future for his brother’s. Marcus is part of an armed robbery gang that are terrorising London, he has rivals from both sides of the law which has put him in the middle of a drug war, he never asks his brother to help him. Kirsten is the model girlfriend of Dee’s, she is an American that isn’t used to the world Dee is from, she doesn’t do much else other than support Dee. Philip is the man from the art world that could easily make Dee’s life better and is willing to make this happen.
Performances – Gregg Sulkin in the leading role is solid enough, we see his difficult life decision being made well enough, though he does lack that true charisma for a leading role. Meghan Markle is the biggest draw for this film now because of her royal status, only she is completely wasted here, given next to nothing to do. Josh Myers gives us a character which only leaves us hating his character, this is something you will see from nearly all of the criminal side of this film.
Story – The story here follows two brothers whose lives are going in very different directions only for the one that is about to escape, needing to return to criminal world where he must make up for his brother’s error. The way this story is told feels very messy, the idea that the street artist getting a bring break is simple and effective along with the idea that he could be made to make a decision about his future. It is the time spent with the criminal brother, we gain no sympathy for him or his crew, we learn nothing about why they are committing these crimes doesn’t help. The number of gangs also isn’t shown in anyway to make us truly understand the world we are living in and while the final act does have tension, it seems to come from the wrong reasoning.
Crime – The crime world we enter in this film is gangs and robbers, we focus on one young man about to leave this world, who gets dragged back into it after his brother’s action, it shows how in London people are willing to just commit crimes for the fun of it.
Settings – The film is set in London and shows us just where the criminals will act to try and make a living from hurting other people.
Scene of the Movie – The airport.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – No sympathy for the criminals.
Final Thoughts – This is a messy crime movie which only ends up making you not care about the characters like it should.
Overall: Messy and drags along.
Louise (64 KP) rated Surviving Execution in Books
Jun 28, 2018
First off thank you to readers first for a copy of this book.
Surviving execution is the true story of Richard Glossip, a man who is on death row for a crime he never committed. Richard Glossip’s story is told by Ian Woods a UK Sky news reporter, Ian wanted to bring this to the UK’s attention of the miscarriage of justice and how capital punishment is not always as straight forward as it’s made out to be.
Richard Glossip was arrested for the murder of his boss and motel owner Barry Von Treese, however Richard was not the person that killed him but was implicated by Justin Sneed and the police who interviewed him. For this the man who actually murdered Barry Von Treese got life without parole whilst Richard gets the death penalty for being the supposed mastermind.
Richards Glossip didn’t start off well with a bad lawyer that was under qualified for this type of case and failure to bringing certain evidence to light was going to cost Richard his life. With multiple trials, appeals and stays you would hope this man would get some sort of break, however that’s not the case and shows how corrupt the police and the law can be.
Also this book tells us a bit about the history of Capital Punishment, the methods, the countries and also the abolitionists. Although this is non fiction it is really easy to digest and very much the page turner. It makes you question so many things and whether this should really still be carried out.
We also get an insight in to what Ian Woods is thinking as he is helping this mans case and whether he would or could witness the death of a man that he has come to know and call a friend. Ian tries to remain unbiased especially when asked if he thinks Richard is guilty which infuriates others helping with the case. This case got some high coverage as Richard Branson, Susan Sarandon, Sister Helen Prejean and even the Pope got involved.
I would really recommend reading this book if you are interested in true crime and capital punishment. Maybe just read this book so you can decide if the state of Oklahoma was correct in giving this man the death penalty.
Surviving execution is the true story of Richard Glossip, a man who is on death row for a crime he never committed. Richard Glossip’s story is told by Ian Woods a UK Sky news reporter, Ian wanted to bring this to the UK’s attention of the miscarriage of justice and how capital punishment is not always as straight forward as it’s made out to be.
Richard Glossip was arrested for the murder of his boss and motel owner Barry Von Treese, however Richard was not the person that killed him but was implicated by Justin Sneed and the police who interviewed him. For this the man who actually murdered Barry Von Treese got life without parole whilst Richard gets the death penalty for being the supposed mastermind.
Richards Glossip didn’t start off well with a bad lawyer that was under qualified for this type of case and failure to bringing certain evidence to light was going to cost Richard his life. With multiple trials, appeals and stays you would hope this man would get some sort of break, however that’s not the case and shows how corrupt the police and the law can be.
Also this book tells us a bit about the history of Capital Punishment, the methods, the countries and also the abolitionists. Although this is non fiction it is really easy to digest and very much the page turner. It makes you question so many things and whether this should really still be carried out.
We also get an insight in to what Ian Woods is thinking as he is helping this mans case and whether he would or could witness the death of a man that he has come to know and call a friend. Ian tries to remain unbiased especially when asked if he thinks Richard is guilty which infuriates others helping with the case. This case got some high coverage as Richard Branson, Susan Sarandon, Sister Helen Prejean and even the Pope got involved.
I would really recommend reading this book if you are interested in true crime and capital punishment. Maybe just read this book so you can decide if the state of Oklahoma was correct in giving this man the death penalty.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Staircase in TV
Feb 25, 2021
The massive red writing on the promotional image says it all: Did he do it? In 2001, Michael Peterson was accused of murdering his wife, who was found dead at the bottom of their staircase covered in blood the prosecution said was too much for an accidental fall. But Peterson, supported by most (but not all) of his family maintains his innocence throughout, and the show follows his attempt to prove it. The first 8 episodes of this incredible story were first shown in 2004, before True Crime docs were really a thing, followed by two updates of several episodes in 2013 and then 2018 as the case updated and new evidence came to light.
Of all the docs on this list, this is the one that had me most gripped by the back and forth of the case. I changed my mind so much, almost several times an episode at points, because Peterson himself is both very likeable and very suspicious. There is an opportunity to weigh the evidence for yourself here that a lot of crime series ignore. The balance feels fair, and the case itself is so very fascinating, both from a personal and legal point of view. It plays like a real life soap opera at times, complete with cliff-hangers and teases, as Making a Murderer proved was so effective. To this day, I am not certain of Peterson’s guilt. The only thing I can say is that it was he himself who commissioned the series and allowed the filming of the case. Is that something a guilty man would do to manipulate what we see, or what an innocent man would do when unafraid of the truth? You decide! This would be the one I would recommend to anyone new to the genre, uncertain if this kind of thing is for them.
Of all the docs on this list, this is the one that had me most gripped by the back and forth of the case. I changed my mind so much, almost several times an episode at points, because Peterson himself is both very likeable and very suspicious. There is an opportunity to weigh the evidence for yourself here that a lot of crime series ignore. The balance feels fair, and the case itself is so very fascinating, both from a personal and legal point of view. It plays like a real life soap opera at times, complete with cliff-hangers and teases, as Making a Murderer proved was so effective. To this day, I am not certain of Peterson’s guilt. The only thing I can say is that it was he himself who commissioned the series and allowed the filming of the case. Is that something a guilty man would do to manipulate what we see, or what an innocent man would do when unafraid of the truth? You decide! This would be the one I would recommend to anyone new to the genre, uncertain if this kind of thing is for them.
Erika (17789 KP) Mar 1, 2021
Sarah (7800 KP) Mar 2, 2021