alfonso-desas

I don't agree with some of the critics saying that it is slow and there are too many characters. The pace is Australian, not made in Hollywood, and every character is perfectly defined and memorable. It is moving, very well acted and directed, the landscapes are beautiful and whoever has lived in a community of less than 2000 inhabitants knows that every person is intertwined with everybody else one way or other,and the simplest of dramas get magnified precisely because of that closeness. The plot is tight, the twists and turns are plausible because there are no "plot intruders" planted in the story just for the sake of it. When the show is over, beautifully closed, by the way, you realize that, when all is said and done, there weren't so many characters after all. One of the best series I've seen on Netflix.

As a long time fan of Tom Brady I have disliked A. R. for the last 10 years or so. I couldn't comprehend the admiration for a guy who just won 1 Super bowl, and the perception by pundits that he was better than Brady, who won 7. Today that discussion holds no more, but I recognize I couldn't fathom the guy, his decisions and stands on several hot topics. He came across as arrogant, aloof, I-know-all kind of person, and after watching the mini series he agrees to that perception, calling it "the observer", and comparing it to his "ego". The interesting consequence of my watching the documentary is that I realize than I am closer to him as a man than I am to Brady, so there must have been a Jungian bias in my judgment. Now I see AR as a complete man, someone that has much more value than meets the eye, someone that has made a conscient effort to go through a lot of pain and criticism to achieve a better understanding of himself, and therefore improve as a human being. The documentary finds the right balance between the player and the man, and does it in a very accurate way. Highly recommendable (except if you don't like the NFL)

This is the question I have been asking myself for nearly 20 years, and it seems that if you want to know the killer's name you'll have to Google it, because the series prefers to tiptoe over its most critical element. I happened to live in Argentina in 2006, and to work a lot in Cordoba province when the crime happened. Those were happy times, the country was slowly recovering from its 2001 "corralito" crisis, inflation was low and Kirchner was still an obscure but reliable president. The crime was "the" news of the day, together with a clean, slim, rejuvenated Maradona and some paper mill conflict with Uruguay to spice things up. Those were happy times indeed in the political and economic fronts, and all we wanted to know is who killed Norita. 3 chapters and 150' later we still don't know, no matter that the identity is already known. Was it consensual sex, as the medical examiners suggest, and if so, how could it end with her dead? The crime can't be prosecuted again due to statute of limitations, so if you want to know more, Google it and ask Netflix what legal reasons prevent them from disclosing it in the series. Pretty disappointing although solidly filmed, so these are not spoilers. A few local journalists should be prosecuted for cruel harassment of the family, but that's another story.