There is a big impression that the case is bizarre, and the key evidence will never be found, and Bob's one-sided words will always confuse the public, but even if it is so absurd, the documentary itself still needs to be real, objective, and multi-faceted. reduction. In order to achieve this, the wide scope of the documentary, the large number of interviewees, and the meticulous layout make people feel surprises everywhere, which is really powerful. The narrative also adopts the typical documentary narrative form of Europe and the United States. It adopts the first point of view, draws the cocoons layer by layer, and investigates the tracking. The hooks are also just right, leading the audience to look down step by step.
For example, in the first episode, we just saw Robert paid $1.8 million to hire two high-profile barristers to defend himself for killing and dismembering his neighbor, and it transitioned to 10 years after a few seconds after appearing at the door of a Texas courtroom. At the premiere of the movie "So Beautiful Things", you may think this arrangement is very strange. In fact, I want to explain what was the opportunity to make this documentary, why this documentary is unique, because he invited the protagonist of this case, Robert himself. , saying that he was invited was actually uninvited, because Robert watched this movie based on himself, and despite the lawyer's dissuasion, he took the initiative to contact the film's distributor, hoping to express his views on the film and your truest self. Hehe, I can only hehe here. Because Robert never thought of it, this is a big pit. From the first call between Robert and Andrew (documentary producer), Andrew began to record. You can say that this kind of foresight makes people feel cold, but for Andrew, it has accumulated precious material for making a documentary .
After the hook of the first episode was placed, it began to narrate in chronological order. From the disappearance of the rich man's wife in 1982 to the murder of his friend in 2000, there were a large number of participants in the case at that time, the family and friends of the two victims, There are also media reporters who reported on it. Another amazing thing is that the pictures we see are all restored according to what the interviewees said. There is no narration. You will never understand such an arrangement. will feel closer to reality.
Of course, one of the things I'm most concerned about is how such a seemingly tame, but actually cold-blooded, wealthy businessman can whitewash himself in court. Yes, his lawyer seized the loophole in the law and took advantage of the fact that only two people were present to say that Robert was in self-defense and put the blame entirely on the deceased. Maybe you and I have the same question. The dismemberment of the corpse is unreasonable, but the lawyer defended that Robert did dismember the corpse, but does the dismemberment represent killing people? The main discussion of the case is whether he committed murder. Just like that, Robert was acquitted, what the hell! His lawyer later explained that this is what the capitalist system has created, some people may suffer injustice because of their innocence, and some people can escape the responsibility that should have been borne by him.
After watching this documentary, I really have to take a deep breath. A multi-millionaire who has three lives on his back is at large, and he is bold enough to ask Ying for an interview. What kind of psychology is this person? Maybe criminal psychologists will study it carefully. . As a viewer, I think "wife, friend, neighbor" is not a simple title. Some people will kill because of money, and of course some people will be happy because of love. They are too important people in life, if you don't love them anymore, don't be extreme, don't hurt them.
View more about The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst reviews
