User reviews

I've been binge watching this and I'm halfway thru season 2 and all I can say is I'm thoroughly disgusted with the cops, prosecutors, judges, jurors all of them. All one needs to do is watch the very 1st time Brendan's so-called confession tape was aired in the series! That CHILD had NO CLUE what the interrogators were talking about nor what they wanted him to say. This boy was, no IS so innocent, that when they started their LEADING questions regarding "what happened around her head area"...after a long bout of silence he responds quote: "I CUT HER HAIR?". That is how innocent and non-violent Brendan is. That the first thing he could think of ON HIS OWN was a freaking HAIRCUT!!! Those interrogators were SO frustrated by his obvious lack of knowledge of what happened to the poor woman that they announced for all of us to see THAT THEY TOLD HIM she was shot in the head. Haircut to a Bullet in the Brain. Despicable. Wisconsin is full of corrupt cops, prosecutors, state attorneys, forensic analysts, and judges...in at least TWO COUNTIES. SHAME ON YOU!

This documentary is insane! The best true crime documentary out there. It purely sheds light on the TRUTH of this nightmare of a case. Its infuriating to say the least. The American criminal justice system is SO corrupt, twisted, and flat out wrong for convicting Steven and Brenden to life for a crime they did not commit. EVERYONE needs to watch this documentary and be angry at how they were 100% framed.

unbelievable.

After watching this I will never set foot in the State of Wisconsin. What was done to this man was a fate worse than death. I am normally a supporter of the police but not in WI.

You need to watch this to see what are the autorities capable to do to protect them self

This is one of the best documentaries ever created and a must-watch for everybody. The story is so insane and unbelievable that you would think this is a piece of fictional work, but it is not.

The only thing that could have been made a bit better is the episode running-time, sometimes the episodes feel a bit too long.

--9 out of 10 stars--

This documentary is incredible. It may seem a bit one sided but if you look at the list of people at the end who declined to be interviewed you will see why. You can't begrudge the producers for the other side not cooperating. That being said, the outcome is not very surprising. If you've paid any attention to America's justice system ..... ever ....you would understand that cops and judges are above the law and they can do whatever they want and they have zero accountability. This series just solidified that. Everyone is going to act angry and appalled but then never actually do anything about it. And it will continue and the "good ol' boys" will continue trampling on our basic "freedoms and liberties." Yay USA!! *insert exaggerated eye roll here*

It's hard to put into words how moving this documentary series was. The view of this work from 30,000 feet is perhaps that it is a beautiful but tragic depiction of the powerful versus the powerless in the context of the American criminal justice system, and a haunting reminder of what human beings are capable of when we believe the ends justify the means. The view on the ground - from a very intimate front row seat in Steven Avery's hometown of Manitowoc, WI - is that one man likely endured not one, but two of the most egregious injustices imaginable.

One thing that sets this series apart from previous shows in this genre (like NPR's Serial) is that the producers never once make an appearance on camera, nor does the viewer ever hear their voices, at least not in a literal sense. Instead, they rely on interviews, court proceedings, news clips, and telephone and video recordings to tell the story, often against the backdrop of the Avery's family compound. In a simple and clean way, the series is beautifully shot. And the story itself... unbelievable. But even the most reasonable, even skeptical viewer will have to grapple with the theories put forward. Theories that would seem a reach at best if it weren't for the overwhelming hard evidence unfolding, on film, right before your eyes.

I started out by saying that it was hard to describe how moving this documentary was, and I actually found myself transitioning through the same emotional states (albeit to a much lesser degree) that the key figures seemed to experience: from shock and disbelief to anger and ultimately to a sense of despair.

To me, what separates television and film that constitutes true "art" from that which is merely entertaining, is that it reveals something perhaps not so obvious but nonetheless true about human nature or the human experience. This easily surpasses that standard, but what makes it particularly chilling is that this is not a carefully constructed fictional plot designed to pull our heart strings. This actually happened. And it happened to real a person. To a real family.

I should have been in bed 5 hours ago but I can't stop watching the new chapter of the Avery Saga. The miscarriage of justice is frighteningly insurmountable. Being a screenwriter, if this were a movie I was going to write, I would never have been able to use this plot. I wouldn't have believed an audience would accept such a series of ludacris events like the mishandling and planting of evidence, unethical prosecutorial actions and the total and complete lack of ability to self examine their actions, due to fear. Fear because they've fully committed to their guilty story and if found innocent, how bad they'll look.

Making a Murderer documents the true story of Steven Avery, sent to prison under questionable circumstances, exonerated on DNA evidence 18 years later, and accused of murder shortly thereafter under equally questionable circumstances.

MaM, ten hours long, is gripping throughout. The story is revealed chronologically, paced so perfectly to leave the viewer gasping at regular intervals, yet never feeling manipulated. But make no mistake: the filmmakers do have an opinion. And by the end of MaM, it is an opinion you will share.

The comparisons to gems like Paradise Lost and The Jinx are inevitable. Up until now, Paradise Lost represented the pinnacle of the genre; MaM tells its story similarly, yet surpasses PL. Where The Jinx, an otherwise excellent documentary, left me with a bad taste, feeling that the truth played second fiddle to its filmmakers' ambitions, MaM never focuses on its creators. The drama is narrated only by the players, the argument made convincingly by historical footage, media and police manipulation made plain not by rhetoric, but by the simple evidence provided by context.

Avery's story, as presented in MaM, is a horrifying story that leaves one infuriated at law enforcement, politicians, and news media. Not generally one for righteous indignation, this was the first series I've ever watched from which I had to take regular breaks out of sheer rage. Avery's story is not a pleasant or uplifting one. But it is as well-told as any I've seen.

As far as I was personally able to ascertain, the series pilot seemed so densely packed with a plethora of baseless assumptions, and heavily riddled with flawed reasoning skills, to the point to which I felt intellectually compelled to abandon all plans of ever watching the rest of the first season, after viewing just one episode, being completely and utterly overwhelmed by the sheer amount of questionable conclusions. Since I do not particularly enjoy posting spoilers, I hereby spare the reader their rather lengthy list; suffice is it to say, however, that they should be straightforwardly apparent to anyone viewing the pilot with a critical eye, through an objective lens.

Given its sky-high mark on this very site, along with a whole host of awards, won at various film festivals, I can only assume that the production eventually rewarded those that were psychologically able to muster or soldier through it, despite the constant onslaught of logical fallacies and unsound arguments permeating its first episode, for their enormous amount of patience and martyr-like resilience, as a cool morning breeze delighting heated young lovers after an exhaustingly arduous night of passion; personally, I found its powers of inference and intellectual prowess significantly less impressive.

Regardless of its ultimate truth value or popularity, a bad start or flawed pilot constitutes an unpardonable sin in matters of film making, for precisely this very reason: deterring potential viewers from ever engaging the movie or series; this is particularly relevant in a capitalist world of sales and marketing, where books are de facto judged by their proverbial cover; or, in this case, by their prologue.

Not being especially fond of posting low marks on productions I personally deem or perceive as somewhat subpar, I am thereby content with offering this hopefully constructive criticism, in good faith, with the intent of being received as such.

After watching this film I felt Avery was guilty as charged. This was before I did reading on all the damaging evidence mentioned in passing if at all by the filmmakers. It felt more like an extremely long episode of DatelineNBC instead of the first Paradise Lost film on the West Memphis Three. Unlike the Thin Blue Line, Making A Murderer doesn't show us there was very little evidence in Avery's case that would have exonerated him. DNA of his inside both her car and on the hood. The *69 calls to the victim to hide his number on the day of the murder. A key found several days after the initial searches of his residence. Evidence missed is not unusual, several key pieces that tied Manson's family to the Tate murders were found on subsequent searches. Lack of fingerprints? Profiler John Douglas wrote it's Mike rarer than one thinks to find identifying fingerprints at crime scenes; this while he was still with the FBI. After finishing this series I did some investigation and found even more evidence than covered in the film. On the other hand, I do believe there is a good chance his mentally slow cousin was fed his false confession.

If you like true crime I think you will really enjoy this for the entertainment value. It's not as depressing as My Brother's Keeper.

For entertainment value- 9 stars For being so biased on the "railroading" of Avery I give it 4 stars.

I rated my average down as by the eighth show I was beginning to lose interest.

Steven Avery has a past history of severe domestic violence toward his first wife, Lori, and his former girlfriend, Jodi. Also, years ago, there were allegations of sexual abuse towards more than one minor relative of Steven. Unfortunately, I didn't research this until after I watched the series. The show's producer/writer couple are deluding themselves if they think he is simply a kind gentleman who was wrongly convicted. The show is compelling, but not real. Just do some homework if you watch this series so you're not in the dark. Of course, there are real problems with our judicial system, the producers were not honest about this case.

....don't mess with Avery's new lawyer. Her relentless and intelligent approach leaves no stone unturned and has brought much astounding new evidence to light.

I was impressed by the 2 original lawyers in Part 1, but they come across feeble and impenetrable compared to her.

Exploding to see the corruption finally get unfolded- this show has clearly taken the world by storm, and I pray justice and the truth will be brought to light.

This was one of the most heartbreaking, inhumane and irrational criminal cases I came across in my entire life.

You will find two major types of reviews in here:

1. The skeptic type, based on rational and logical analysis of all the evidence and framings towards Steven Avery and Brenden Dassen making them not guilty (attributing around 10/10 rating).

2. The emotional type, based on irrational and illogical analysis of all the speeches and horror stories the prosecution, the police and the media told the public making them guilty (attributing around 01/10 rating).

This documentary series is constructed to favour the skeptic type (1). However, reality favoured the emotional type (2).

Living the American nightmare, shall them say.

Enjoy this highly unbiased masterpiece.

This is one important documentary. This shows just how wrong the justice system is in America. Im from Sweden and did not know anything prior to this series. But If you have - like me, been reading and seeing other documentaries of this kind. You know this have happened several times. It makes me sick. When it comes to Brendan and his statement I immediately started to think about Jessie Misskelley. A boy with below average IQ and was one of three teenagers that got falsely accused of murdering three young boys in Memphis. He also made a "confession" after the cops had lured and guiding him towards what they wanted to hear. Anyway, I hope that one day, the truth will come out and the ones, that still walks free, get the judgement they deserve and that Brendan and Steven Avry will get their freedom back. This is something everyone should see. If I were a parent I would show it to my kids, if I was a teacher I would show it to my students. I will recommend it to everyone I know.

This is an incredible documentary. There is no doubt that Steven Avery was framed by the police in order to prevent the $36M law suit. I wonder how long this will go on until the State of Wisconsin admits to the unbelievable injustice of Avery and the corruption of its officers. This also proves how much power lies in the State and how they really can do whatever they want, and how they control all authorities across it's jurisdiction.

This is a very disturbing case, i am a local in the area, and there was no insurance coverage for the county on steve's lawsuit, thus, pay it out of the general fund, or get him arrested and sent to prison....one of the biggest problems is how deputy colburn called in the rav4 plate 2 days before it was discovered, then when they played the recording of his call to dispatch, he said he did not recall doing that.

What a women ! She makes me feel powerful and strong ! Women to stand up for what they believe in ! It's so hard sometimes to be a women in this world ! she is in incredible! And so so strong !

A documentary is supposed to document the facts of something, not pick and choose which facts to use and then cleverly edit the video and audio recordings in order to cause a social media uproar and promote your own careers.

I wish there was law to protect victim's families from people like Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos. These filmmakers are masters at taking things out of context and using those things to promote the story they are trying to spin.

I'll admit that I was absolutely captivated by the first few episodes which lay out how Steven Avery was convicted of a crime he didn't commit and how the Manitowoc police department failed him in many facets of the investigation and subsequent incarceration.

Having said that, when I was watching the episodes related to Steven Avery's trial for raping and killing Teresa Hallbach, I found myself saying, "No,,,No,, NO WAY can he be found guilty... NOOOO WAYYY!!!" I couldn't understand how a jury might convict him if they were seeing the evidence we as viewers we seeing.

So, I researched the case on my own. I read the transcripts from the multiple confessions Branden Dassey gave and looked over ALL of the evidence which wasn't covered in this film. I quickly realized why Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos left out so much of the evidence. The reason is, the evidence they left out is completely irrefutable. They couldn't take it out of context and make it look like something else, or cast doubt on it. If they hadn't left out all of the extremely damaging facts about this case, no one would have ever heard about their "documentary" because it is a clear cut rape and murder committed by a child- molesting animal-torturer and previously accused rapist who had been stalking the victim:

If you care at all about this case and the rights of the victim and her family, please do a quick search for what the filmmakers omitted.

The story is fascinating and my heart goes out to Steven Avery. But these shows cannot be fully trusted. They may be selling us a lie . He may have been not innocent. Cannot really say. I did not enjoy it as it only showed one side of the story

Planted evidence, multiple LE departments colluding to frame a target, coerced false confessions, unconscionable behaviors, ruined lives.

Justice is an illusion, held hostage by those with twisted motives and the means to subvert it. Shocking, infuriating. But then again, this is one case which has come to light. Very possible this is a systemic ill within the US justice system, something we subconsciously tend to overlook since the repercussions, were it true, could be so shattering.

Firstly, whether you fall on the side of being for or against Steven Avery, I've put that aside for this review and am looking at it as a documentary and what it's trying to do.

Part One is a conspiracy documentary, and it's meant to invoke intrigue and doubt. You can't take everything in a series like this as truth only with a pinch of salt. It is for entertainment at the end of the day. I really enjoyed the direction and flow of the narrative in the first series solid 8 or 8.5 out of 10. I thought what we saw was well balanced and sparked interested. It's clear why it won awards.

Part Two was awful. Slow, dull, lack of narrative. I felt right from the start that this part was created due to the controversial reaction of audiences, not because they wanted to tell something compelling. In Part One the times spent with the family members were tasteful and worked with the tone. Here they were placed in as filler and served no purpose except to cheaply try and win your emotion. This part takes a complete 180 from part one and focuses on facts and fact finding. It's an interesting premise following the lawyers, but it's executed poorly and I found myself bored and wanted to turn it off. (Depaite usually enjoying legal dramas and documentaries.) Part Two I'm giving 4/10, so that's how I land on my 6/10.

Go and watch Convicting a Murderer!

I have to confess, I was one of the many who fell hook, line, and sinker for what has been called a "documentary". This is anything but a documentary; a carefully constructed narrative with severely misleading edits and a complete lack of sympathy for the victim of a murder.

The fact one can watch this documentary and feel so strongly about an issue they didn't even know existed until the film's release, you have to give credit to the filmmakers. But as with every story, there are two sides. I always felt that documentaries were meant to show both side of the story and remain objective. It's clear that these filmmakers were anything but objective. They exploited a movement designed to hold law enforcement accountable, perhaps even gave false hope to people who were more than deserving of prison. But most importantly they treated the victim of a murder as nothing more than an object not quite in focus; something that, if it didn't work out, you can just through away on to the editing floor.

The most egregious offence is surely that of the filmmakers' defence of their objectivity. They had no interest in the truth, they were only concerned with a story and the potential success that comes with convincing millions of people that your story is true.

Trust, but verify!