|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jan 20, 2016 9:25:54 GMT -5
Has anyone here watched "Making a Murderer" yet? I'm only on episode 3, and I'm quite disturbed by it. I'm not following the case, and my husband I decided to start watching it the other night, and wow. As of right now, I don't think he did it. I realize that a lot of people are watching this show, but being in Wisconsin during the trial, I lived through the news coverage and trial. What everyone should bear in mind while watching this, is that though it claims to be a documentary it's only showing one side. Also, according to the local officials (and confirmed by the film makers), there is evidence being left out from what's being shown on Netflix. If you Google "Teresa Halbach" you can find plenty of articles regarding it.
You and everyone else are, of course, welcome to come to your own conclusions, but I suggest you also read the news articles that are coming out now about the case as well. A number of things that the film makers claim are evidence that he was framed have been debunked.
My opinion is that there was indeed a victim here. She was raped, murdered, and burned in a fire pit. Her name was Teresa Halbach.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 9:50:20 GMT -5
Yeah, I have only seen 3 episodes. And I certainly don't mean to shrug off any victims. Lordy.
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Jan 20, 2016 10:00:22 GMT -5
Yeah, I have only seen 3 episodes. And I certainly don't mean to shrug off any victims. Lordy. I just finished it last night. I found it absolutely fascinating and troubling. Prosecutor Katz's assertion that "reasonable doubt is for innocent people" chilled my blood. The filmmakers have stated that they did not intend to prove/contest the guilt or innocence of any of the parties in this specific case, but rather to shine a light on what they consider our broken system of justice, spur a dialog, and spark interest in addressing and fixing the problems that the documentary highlights. The filmmakers have also expressed disappointment that so many are fixating on the specific circumstances of this single case instead of the larger picture. I was riveted the entire time. It's an extraordinary piece of work.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 10:16:36 GMT -5
Yeah, I have only seen 3 episodes. And I certainly don't mean to shrug off any victims. Lordy. I just finished it last night. I found it absolutely fascinating and troubling. Prosecutor Katz's assertion that "reasonable doubt is for innocent people" chilled my blood. The filmmakers have stated that they did not intend to prove/contest the guilt or innocence of any of the parties in this specific case, but rather to shine a light on what they consider our broken system of justice, spur a dialog, and spark interest in addressing and fixing the problems that the documentary highlights. The filmmakers have also expressed disappointment that so many are fixating on the specific circumstances of this single case instead of the larger picture. I was riveted the entire time. It's an extraordinary piece of work. I was not attached to this at ALL for the first two episodes. In fact, I fell asleep the last 5-10 minutes of the first episode (it was late, and I'm up entirely too early). But, when Brendan entered the picture? I'm sucked in now. When I watched them interrogate him, I wanted to junk-punch people. He was wearing those jeans that can be unzipped at the knee, all the way around, so they can be worn as shorts, if necessary. I haven't seen jeans like that since, what, the late 90s? Yeah. I cannot believe such a small detail like that sucked me in and crushed me. But a detail like that would suck me in and crush me even if this wasn't based on an actual case.
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jan 20, 2016 10:47:55 GMT -5
Yeah, I have only seen 3 episodes. And I certainly don't mean to shrug off any victims. Lordy. To be clear, at no time did I think you were shrugging her off or anything of the sort. I do believe that a lot of people are losing sight of her in all this media frenzy, but I respect you far too much to ever think you were capable of that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 10:57:16 GMT -5
Yeah, I have only seen 3 episodes. And I certainly don't mean to shrug off any victims. Lordy. To be clear, at no time did I think you were shrugging her off or anything of the sort. I do believe that a lot of people are losing sight of her in all this media frenzy, but I respect you far too much to ever think you were capable of that. Thank you. I am only watching the show, and not following the case, that is why I said that in my original post. I am not unaware that details can be missing, things can be manipulated, and all of that. I am also aware that heart strings can be tugged at, and I also know that I get sucked into shows. As I said, I didn't get into the show, really, until Brendan showed up. Those d@mn pants. It makes my heart hurt.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 11:03:00 GMT -5
Disagree on two parts. One, if you are contracted by the license owner to author the story, you're not a "fan." You're an employee. Two, those who are contracted to write these stories may or may not even like the characters they've been hired to write stories about. Their expertise is what lead them there, and their assignment is surely constrained to editorial approval to keep the characters true to whatever spirit the license owners think it should be held to. If you are contracted to write someone else's creation, it is still pastiche. Hence, either fan fiction OR pastiche. -M Fan fiction as I understand it is both voluntary and amateur. If the intellectual property owners recognize the work as canon it's not fan fiction.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 15:19:42 GMT -5
If you are contracted to write someone else's creation, it is still pastiche. Hence, either fan fiction OR pastiche. -M Fan fiction as I understand it is both voluntary and amateur. If the intellectual property owners recognize the work as canon it's not fan fiction. Amazon pays authors for fan fiction, so it is not amateur. Things change-Olympic athletes were once considered amateur, now professional athletes play in the Olympics. Amateur was not part and parcel of the definition of Olympic athlete. It was a circumstance that changed. Same is true of fan fiction. So your understanding is at best outdated. And no one is forcing professionals to create, that too is voluntary. Remuneration does not take away choice and make something not voluntary. Unpaid volunteer is not a redundancy, it is a description of one type of volunteer, not the only kind. And pastiche is not the same as fan fiction. There may be some overlap, but when a statement says pastiche or fan fiction, it doesn't mean both it means either, so I am not sure why you try to discount an either/or statement to corroborate your disagreement and say the statement is untrue by objecting to only one of the parameters. -M
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Jan 20, 2016 19:12:07 GMT -5
Fan fiction as I understand it is both voluntary and amateur. If the intellectual property owners recognize the work as canon it's not fan fiction. Amazon pays authors for fan fiction, so it is not amateur. -M Is Amazon paying for fiction involving characters whose copy writes are owned by others? If someone writes a superhero story using established characters not in the public domain, it is indeed fan fiction and amateur. Obtaining money from it can invoke legal sanctions. Or am I under the wrong impression?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 0:37:58 GMT -5
Amazon pays authors for fan fiction, so it is not amateur. -M Is Amazon paying for fiction involving characters whose copy writes are owned by others? If someone writes a superhero story using established characters not in the public domain, it is indeed fan fiction and amateur. Obtaining money from it can invoke legal sanctions. Or am I under the wrong impression? Well Valiant is one of the fan fic universes Amazon is paying for. There are about 20-30 different fan fic licenses they have and pay for. None of the stuff is canon, but Amazon pays for it and sells it via kindle and the IP holders get a percentage of the sales. They don't pay for any old thing, jsut the fan fics they have licensed from the IP holders. -M Edit to add-the official title is called Kindle Worlds with link to info page
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 0:43:32 GMT -5
Is Amazon paying for fiction involving characters whose copy writes are owned by others? If someone writes a superhero story using established characters not in the public domain, it is indeed fan fiction and amateur. Obtaining money from it can invoke legal sanctions. Or am I under the wrong impression? Well Valiant is one of the fan fic universes Amazon is paying for. There are about 20-30 different fan fic licenses they have and pay for. None of the stuff is canon, but Amazon pays for it and sells it via kindle and the IP holders get a percentage of the sales. They don't pay for any old thing, jsut the fan fics they have licensed from the IP holders. -M Edit to add-the official title is called Kindle Worlds with link to info page My qualification is not that the author somehow get paid for their writing, but that the owner of the intellectual property pays them. When Marvel hires you to write X-Men, you're not writing fan fiction. You're doing your job. I don't do my job because I'm a fan of showing up to work every day.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 0:45:31 GMT -5
If Marvel hires you to write X-Men you are still writing pastiche though. L. Sprage de Camp and Lin Carter were hired to create new official Conan stories, it's still Conan pastiche.
-M
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 1:26:23 GMT -5
Hey everyone, it's been a while! How are all of you doing?
|
|
|
Post by Mormel on Jan 21, 2016 12:13:09 GMT -5
Hey Watchdog. I'm loving your avatar!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 18:15:10 GMT -5
Hey everyone, it's been a while! How are all of you doing? where have you been?
|
|