Mystery, murder, conspiracy; Cold Case Hammarskjöld has it all. It will draw you to the edge of the seat, make your jaw drop and most likely leave you in awe at the end of the film. If we accept that the goal of this documentary is to call attention to the matters discussed and portrayed in this documentary, then indeed it fulfills its purpose outstandingly. If however it is to be taken as a 'mystery solved documentary', like in the case of The Thin Blue Line (Morris, 1988) , then it fails miserably. Luckily the latter, in my opinion, does not seem to be the case. Therefore I can highly recommend watching this thriller of a documentary. Hopefully the story will receive a part two, because it needs one.
Reviews
3 Reviews
The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst
(2015–2024)
Hopefully not too late.
19 March 2018
Murder mysteries as a genre, so it seems, has gained significant momentum over the past few years. Netflix acts as an active supporter of the genre seeing it has recently produced series like The Keepers which proved extremely succesful. The Jinx is yet another mystery crime documentary series which explores multiple murder cases and the people possibly involved in it. This tendency therefore quickly brings to mind a documentary like A Thin Blue Line which, in my opinion, could be seen as the blueprint for these new Netflix series.
What the abovementioned documentaries all have in common is its use of reenactments resulting in an overt dramatization of the displayed themes and storylines. Yet whereas normally the use of reenactments in documentaries might seem questionable, it is within these documentaries that I believe it serves as to illustrate more clearly the inconsistencies surrounding the given suspects and stories. So instead of using it as a way to show what (theoretically) has happened according to the filmmakers, it rather serves as a tool to communicate the flaws surrounding the existing theories about the given events. Its used as a means to pose questions, not answers.
It is for this reason that, in my opinion, the documentaries' credibility is by no means undermined. Moreover, further research concerning any of these documentaries does not result in contradictory findings as is the case with another murder mystery documentary series produced by Netflix; Making a Murderer. Surrounded by inconsistencies, irregularities and questionable evidence this documentary proofed to have taken a few liberties with their findings.
The Jinx, as noted, does however build a surprisingly strong case against Robert Durst without its evidence being disputed by other sources. And its not like these other sources don't get the oppurtunity to present the case in favor of Robert Durst. Even Durst himself has the oppurtunity to explain what has happened and how he was (or wans't) involved. However during the six-episode series a pattern slowly emerges which undeniably lead to one single conclusion.
The documentary surely offers an interesting portrayal of a man caught up in allegations and trials. Furthermore it offers psychological insight into a man who has been subject of many investigations in the past 30 years. And last but not least I find the images produced to be of absolute importance for the world to see. That being said I must conclude that its the story which makes it a great documentary. Not by way of its storytelling for it mostly shows talking-heads, offers little archive material of evidence, and fails to capture the gruesomeness to some extent. Nonetheless the story itself intriques and just screams to be told. Hopefully it is not too late.
What the abovementioned documentaries all have in common is its use of reenactments resulting in an overt dramatization of the displayed themes and storylines. Yet whereas normally the use of reenactments in documentaries might seem questionable, it is within these documentaries that I believe it serves as to illustrate more clearly the inconsistencies surrounding the given suspects and stories. So instead of using it as a way to show what (theoretically) has happened according to the filmmakers, it rather serves as a tool to communicate the flaws surrounding the existing theories about the given events. Its used as a means to pose questions, not answers.
It is for this reason that, in my opinion, the documentaries' credibility is by no means undermined. Moreover, further research concerning any of these documentaries does not result in contradictory findings as is the case with another murder mystery documentary series produced by Netflix; Making a Murderer. Surrounded by inconsistencies, irregularities and questionable evidence this documentary proofed to have taken a few liberties with their findings.
The Jinx, as noted, does however build a surprisingly strong case against Robert Durst without its evidence being disputed by other sources. And its not like these other sources don't get the oppurtunity to present the case in favor of Robert Durst. Even Durst himself has the oppurtunity to explain what has happened and how he was (or wans't) involved. However during the six-episode series a pattern slowly emerges which undeniably lead to one single conclusion.
The documentary surely offers an interesting portrayal of a man caught up in allegations and trials. Furthermore it offers psychological insight into a man who has been subject of many investigations in the past 30 years. And last but not least I find the images produced to be of absolute importance for the world to see. That being said I must conclude that its the story which makes it a great documentary. Not by way of its storytelling for it mostly shows talking-heads, offers little archive material of evidence, and fails to capture the gruesomeness to some extent. Nonetheless the story itself intriques and just screams to be told. Hopefully it is not too late.
Wild Wild Country
(2018)
Rare insight into 'cult-life'
18 March 2018
Although some of the former members dismiss the term cult when referring to the Rajneesh movement, it undoubtedly shows a range of similarities to what might be referred to as a cult. Nonetheless the documentary series Wild Wild Country proofed surprisingly succesful in offering insights that go beyond the taboos and stigmas normally surrounding the subject. Clearly the Rajneesh movement was something that the world had not seen before and the world, perhaps, hasn't seen since.
Focussing around the Indian guru Rajneesh, later known as Osho, the documentary starts off by exploring the very beginning of the movement. Its unorthodox teachings, controversial beliefs as well as its international reach slowly unfold during the first episode of the documentary series. Gradually the focus of the documentary however shifts towards the individuals who circulated within the inner circles of the movement. This inevitably transforms the documentary into an exposition of 'the individual as part of a cult' rather than an exploration of the deeper beliefs of the movement (which at times seem contradictory).
Nonetheless the documentary continues to captivate the viewer as opposition against the movement arises during the cults relocation in Oregon. It is here where the movement encounters more and more opposition which in return fuels the hostility from members towards outsiders. It is not unlike patterns we've seen with cults like the church of Scientology and the Peoples Temple where, once a stark contrast between in- and outsiders has been established, a cult turns violent. The documentary manages to explore the depths of the criminal activities in which the Rajneesh movement was involved without overtly (or excessively) steering its viewers towards a certain point of view. The result is a story that shocks without excessive dramatization.
What makes this documentary worthwhile is the way the story unfolds. Although spread over six different episodes the documentary could be seen as one climactic film in which tension continues to build until it has reached its inevitable climax. Surprisingly the documentary does not necessarily leave one to wonder how people could ever be part of the group, for it also displays the movements admirable qualities. Rather it leaves you to ask how knowledge about the Rajneesh movement could have been absent for you prior to watching the documentary series. If this is the case indeed, then this is a must-watch.
To me personally the appeal of the movements leader remains unclear. This ofcourse could be explained by the lack of insights the documentary offers regarding his background and the very origine of the movement. So yes, the documentary will leave you with many questions. But rather than leaving you with the illusion of presenting the full story, the documentary ignites within you a thirst for knowledge. I guess that is exactly what one might demand from documentaries: the desire to know more.
Focussing around the Indian guru Rajneesh, later known as Osho, the documentary starts off by exploring the very beginning of the movement. Its unorthodox teachings, controversial beliefs as well as its international reach slowly unfold during the first episode of the documentary series. Gradually the focus of the documentary however shifts towards the individuals who circulated within the inner circles of the movement. This inevitably transforms the documentary into an exposition of 'the individual as part of a cult' rather than an exploration of the deeper beliefs of the movement (which at times seem contradictory).
Nonetheless the documentary continues to captivate the viewer as opposition against the movement arises during the cults relocation in Oregon. It is here where the movement encounters more and more opposition which in return fuels the hostility from members towards outsiders. It is not unlike patterns we've seen with cults like the church of Scientology and the Peoples Temple where, once a stark contrast between in- and outsiders has been established, a cult turns violent. The documentary manages to explore the depths of the criminal activities in which the Rajneesh movement was involved without overtly (or excessively) steering its viewers towards a certain point of view. The result is a story that shocks without excessive dramatization.
What makes this documentary worthwhile is the way the story unfolds. Although spread over six different episodes the documentary could be seen as one climactic film in which tension continues to build until it has reached its inevitable climax. Surprisingly the documentary does not necessarily leave one to wonder how people could ever be part of the group, for it also displays the movements admirable qualities. Rather it leaves you to ask how knowledge about the Rajneesh movement could have been absent for you prior to watching the documentary series. If this is the case indeed, then this is a must-watch.
To me personally the appeal of the movements leader remains unclear. This ofcourse could be explained by the lack of insights the documentary offers regarding his background and the very origine of the movement. So yes, the documentary will leave you with many questions. But rather than leaving you with the illusion of presenting the full story, the documentary ignites within you a thirst for knowledge. I guess that is exactly what one might demand from documentaries: the desire to know more.
Tell Your Friends