Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueMixing present-day interviews with previously unheard recordings, this true-crime series examines serial killer David Berkowitz's mark on 1970s New York.Mixing present-day interviews with previously unheard recordings, this true-crime series examines serial killer David Berkowitz's mark on 1970s New York.Mixing present-day interviews with previously unheard recordings, this true-crime series examines serial killer David Berkowitz's mark on 1970s New York.
Parcourir les épisodes
Avis en vedette
Who directed this garbage?? The Son of Sam Decent Into Darkness, just to name one, does the job well of telling the story. I got through the first episode of this one, barely, and shut it off. Not sure what the directors were thinking here, other than, let's put out the same info, change things up a bit and present it to Netflix. What a joke. I don't understand how crap like this even gets picked up. There are so many cases out there left untold, but let's continue to beat the dead horse. I guess it's easier, not much thinking or effort needed. And after reading another viewers comment about the directors trying to pin another case on Berkowitz, left out more than half of the story, is not a surprise. No effort went into this whatever u want to call it, why bother presenting all the evidence, right. Bait and switch at its finest.
In the summer of 1976, a killer brought terror to New York, randomly killing people and shooting them as they sat in their cars.
I didn't know a huge deal about Berkowitz. In episodes one and two, we're given real insight into the mind of the Son of Sam. We learn what happened to him in his youth and adult life. Berkowitz is an unusual character; he doesn't seem to follow the same pattern or have the same traits.
Episodes one and two were very good and insightful. The third episode was a little slow and somewhat padded out; had it been two episodes long, it would have worked better, although I was fascinated by Wendy Savino's story.
I'm always fascinated by what life must have been like in New York in the 1970s; it must have been quite something. Berkowitz was clearly able to exploit the lawlessness of the district.
As is always the case with these documentaries, there is some incredible footage from that time and some remarkable interviews. The linking and cutaway scenes work very well; they help to drive the story forward.
Definitely an interesting watch.
7/10.
I didn't know a huge deal about Berkowitz. In episodes one and two, we're given real insight into the mind of the Son of Sam. We learn what happened to him in his youth and adult life. Berkowitz is an unusual character; he doesn't seem to follow the same pattern or have the same traits.
Episodes one and two were very good and insightful. The third episode was a little slow and somewhat padded out; had it been two episodes long, it would have worked better, although I was fascinated by Wendy Savino's story.
I'm always fascinated by what life must have been like in New York in the 1970s; it must have been quite something. Berkowitz was clearly able to exploit the lawlessness of the district.
As is always the case with these documentaries, there is some incredible footage from that time and some remarkable interviews. The linking and cutaway scenes work very well; they help to drive the story forward.
Definitely an interesting watch.
7/10.
This is the result of sheer desperation on NYPD's part. It's impossible for them to honestly address the evidence that David Berkowitz was not the lone Son of Sam shooter, but they're taking advantage of growing public interest in the case by dredging up an attack with no credible link to Son of Sam (wrong caliber of weapon, wrong victim profile, shooter flees the scene with two other individuals when Berkowitz is alleged to have acted alone) and hoping that it will serve as an effective distraction.
This documentary is strictly for non-researchers, and that includes resident "Son of Sam expert" Manny Grossman, who never undertook a moment's research when I worked with him. Other people present him with material; he acts as a mouthpiece. Despite his preening as an authority on Son of Sam, he betrays a lack of confidence in his own position by launching nasty personal attacks against researchers, other podcasters and even his own listeners. Who would conduct himself in such a reprehensible manner if he actually believed that he had solved the case?
What we have here is not an examination of the evidence, but a curated presentation which OMITS abundant evidence that Son of Sam was a group effort. (The majority of that evidence was gathered by late investigative reporter Maury Terry, though other researchers - myself included - have followed in his wake.) "The Son of Sam Tapes" is nothing more than the same hole-ridden story that NYPD has been peddling for almost fifty years.
This documentary is strictly for non-researchers, and that includes resident "Son of Sam expert" Manny Grossman, who never undertook a moment's research when I worked with him. Other people present him with material; he acts as a mouthpiece. Despite his preening as an authority on Son of Sam, he betrays a lack of confidence in his own position by launching nasty personal attacks against researchers, other podcasters and even his own listeners. Who would conduct himself in such a reprehensible manner if he actually believed that he had solved the case?
What we have here is not an examination of the evidence, but a curated presentation which OMITS abundant evidence that Son of Sam was a group effort. (The majority of that evidence was gathered by late investigative reporter Maury Terry, though other researchers - myself included - have followed in his wake.) "The Son of Sam Tapes" is nothing more than the same hole-ridden story that NYPD has been peddling for almost fifty years.
I was a kid when all of this was going on. I also lived a few blocks from where the third shooting took place. (I still live a few blocks from that location but I'm east of it now instead of west of it.) Because of those reasons I'll watch pretty much anything that comes out about the killings. "Conversations with a Killer: The Son of Sam Tapes" does a pretty job telling the story. I found the actual recordings of David Berkowitz' voice uninteresting. I have no interest in listening to what a murderer has to say, especially one who keeps changing his story. I also didn't like how the show poo-poos the idea of there being more than one shooter. If it was only Berkowitz, why, all of these years later, is the case still considered open in the borough of Queens?
The docuseries delves deeply into every event in David Berkowitz's life, helping us understand how he forged the personality that would later become a prolific serial killer. While his attacks are described as a common thread, his experiences in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood are narrated in parallel, with a back-and-forth that provides context for Berkowitz's actions. The jumps in time do not confuse the chronology of events; on the contrary, they enrich the story. Added to all this is the juicy testimony of the killer himself, now in prison, in which he clarifies his experiences.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Conversaciones con asesinos: Las cintas del Hijo de Sam
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée
- 1h(60 min)
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant