Benutzerrezensionen

As others have noted, this series is as much about Michelle McNamara as it is about the California rapes and murders. McNamara's story --- a sad but unremarkable descent into obsession and addiction --- is simply not interesting enough to justify the extended treatment it gets. The series is on surer footing when its focus shifts to the crimes and, in particular, to the victims of those crimes.

Interesting, thrilling documentary which glues one to the screen. Having said, details and ideas keep being repeated with lengthy and sometimes irrelevant interviews. Could have easily cut down into four-five episodes.

The first episode just aired yesterday, so obviously my review isn't my final, overall opinion. I just wanted to address the reviews that gave the first episode low marks. It seems as though the reviewers don't realize that this is a documentary series in 6 parts. There's more to it than just the first episode, therefore, the entire story is not going to be told in the first 60 minutes.

I don't think it was disjointed, as others have said; I think it does a good job of laying the groundwork for the rest of the series to build on. And yes, there is a focus on Michelle McNamara, the author of the book. The full title of the book is "I'll Be Gone in the Dark: One Woman's Obsessive Search for the Golden State Killer," that indicates that some of the documentary is going to be about her search, along with the EAR/ONS's crimes.

I read the book recently and I'm excited to see how this series unfolds, partly because there will be interviews with people who were involved with the original investigation, along with interviews of victims as well. Ms. McNamara interviewed people for the book, but to be able to hear it directly from them should be interesting. I just hate that I can't binge-watch it all at once!

This is a story about Michelle's chase of the EAR/ONS but it's truly a master class in documentary filmmaking. The chase gets under your skin. It unveils itself in a breathtaking manner. I am amazed that I hadn't heard more about the crime and the chase before this film.

This series is advertised as being a true cime story about the Golden State Killer. Very quickly in the first episode, you feel like it's rather an advert for Michelle McNamarra's blog, podcast and book. The blog's URL is repeated multiple times like these bad adverts for car insurance and we're told by various people how great Michelle is and how great her book is going to be. A lot of time is spent explaining how Michelle got interested in the case, how she investigated it, how she got access to evidence and sources, her thoughts and theories and how she wrote about it all. Is this just a badly disguised tribute to Michelle from her family and friends? If you stick with it, you do end up hearing from the victims and their story, and how the GSK operated but it does take a while. The episodes though are often a jumble of bits which don't seem to have a particular order or flow to them. You don't feel like you are progressing through time or through an investigation. It's more like listening to someone remembering parts of Michelle's life story in random order until you reach the point when the crimes themselves are discussed. This makes it difficult to get into and at times quite boring. Had they stuck to talking about the crimes, victims and investigations/evidence, it would have been a 2 (perhaps 3) episodes series but interesting throughout.

I read Michelle's book and listened to Paul Holes book on Audible, and this documentary is the visual version of both books. The people that are complaining, are the ones that wanted a gritty true crime documentary.

What I love about this documentary is that it shows how much of a toll it takes on Michelle and her family. She was so dedicated to her work and she was so invested to finishing her book. Please just look into what the documentary is truly about!

While I don't share the frustration of those who expected a documentary focused primarily on the Golden State Killer, I do think "I'll Be Gone in the Dark" has problems, despite the many strengths of the series. Liz Garbus is an exceptionally talented filmmaker who has directed several superior documentaries. This is not her best work.

Michelle McNamara is the lead story. As the episodes accumulate it becomes increasingly clear that while smart, passionate and dedicated, she is not especially interesting. We learn about her family, upbringing, blogging, fact gathering, obsession, and drug abuse. Great care is taken not to judge her or question the decisions that led to her death.

Her husband comes across as a well-intentioned enabler, woefully out of touch with changes in McNamara's health. Viewers are left to wonder how much child rearing was left to a nanny we never meet. When McNamara's sister shares that she ordered a full toxicology, which revealed fentanyl from black market drugs, the implications are left hanging.

We never learn what shape the incomplete draft of the book was in, or the extent of the revisions and additions. Much more interesting are the interviews with survivors of the GSK. The honest reflections and painful revelations say more about the vast harm done by the murderer/rapist than anything we learn about McNamara. They were brave to share. Their stories are chilling. They live with pain that never really goes away.

McNamara did not solve the case. In some ways, she became another victim of the GSK. The film casts her in as favorable a light as is possible, yet the real heroes are the dedicated law enforcement officers (some retired), and the courageous survivors. The advancement of DNA testing, along with a growing database, was essential to bringing long delayed justice to become a reality. There were many victims of the GSK. The brave survivors are the true heart of the series. Tragically, McNamara was a victim of her own making.

This is a documentary style series on the journey of the writer who became possessed with investigating the series of rapes and murders in California. Very interesting first person account of the writer and her path of investigating these cases.

Would recommend - enjoyed the series but saddened by the true events.

Honestly, Ive never been more disappointed in a show in quite a while. Completely misleading title in that it has little to do with the GSK. Even though I dont like Patton Oswald personally, I cant be more sympathetic to his situation. But unfortunately, I think his sorrow has just turned his wifes work into a vanity project. Not a good documentary at all.

...about the contents of this superb series is because the viewer isn't open to all the film is about. This is the story of a woman who is fascinated with the criminal mind. The fact that she's not a sworn law enforcement officer, shouldn't take away from how talented, creative and, ultimately obsessed she is with one serial killer known by various names but ultimately linked as one due to the advancement in DNA forensics. McNamara names him the Golden State Killer.

I was reminded of Truman Capote's confession that he had a nervous breakdown researching the Clutter murders for "In Cold Blood." And his research overlapped the killers' arrest and results in fostering a deeply personal relationship with the killers with very complicated motives, and their execution. Here, Michelle McNamara is goaded on by NOT knowing who the killer is and her interest turned to obsession in trying to find out who the killer/rapist was. This is that story. It's not solely about the case. She died not knowing that he would be found, arrested and sentenced for life.

To promote that her work isn't worthy of this HBO documentary is baffling. The series includes minute detail about the victims, the investigations (which were often sabotaged by law enforcement itself), the victims and impact on family, friends, and communities, only reinforces why she was so driven.

Patton Oswald who is also the motivating force of the completion of McNamara's work as well as the push for the documentary comes across as a loving (very understanding) husband of another creative soul. It's unrealistic to exclude the material about his wife since the effect of it had such a profound impact on his marriage and ultimately the course of his life.

The direction of the documentary by Liz Garbus is artful and flows with the urgency McNamara brought to the case. Minutely detailed, excellent recreation of the period, and despite complaints by the victims, their complaints seem more of an expression of the tragedy they've lived through rather than how they come across in any portrayal in the film. No one is demeaned in a very difficult situation talking about the consequences of being a victim, a survivor, or involved in law enforcement. In the case of the latter, there was plenty of room to mock or criticize. The film steers wide and clear of that.

While I've yet to see the last two episodes where relatives of the killer are interviewed, I'll assume they are treated as respectfully. If not, I'll amend this review.

Disappointing. The last person I want to see in a serial killer crime documentary is Patton Oswald. Lol.

Sorry for the passing of McNamara but should've focused more on the crimes, the victims and the perpetrator. Stopped in the first episode.

The "how we did it" of capturing the Golden State Killer. It shows what a committed researcher can do when working with others with similar interests. "Citizen Detectives" all - the cooperation and sharing is an example of what we can do when sufficiently motivated. It's one of life's major injustices that Michelle didn't live to see the resolution of the case to which she brought such energy and devotion. Bravo Michelle - you made the difference!

If I read one more review of "it's about Michelle!", I'm going to scream! The title of the docuseries is THE SAME TITLE AS HER BOOK! I could not roll my eyes anymore without them falling out. Good God, people. Refrain from writing a stupid review because you didn't know this was about the book.

This is simply excellent documentary filmmaking. I'm very familiar with the EAR/ONS (Golden Stare Killer) case having studied it on my own for many years. Of course, I'm ecstatic with the arrest of a suspect (leaving name out since he's not convicted) as I'm sure Michelle would be too. The first episode really hit home because I know what it's like to spend hour after hour day after day obsessed with amateur detective work. You sometimes wonder if you're having any impact at all and are often mocked for trying to shed light into places where it's never landed before. Michelle's work proved that amateur slueuthing can make a difference in subtle and important ways. Would the case have been solved without her contributions? Maybe, even probably, but that's not really the point. Her work demonstrates that the victims in these terrible crimes do matter, no matter how long the cases remain unsolved. The victims matter to her and to all of those who strive to solve these mysteries, and it's that fact that keeps amateur detectives motivated to the point of obsession and NOT some morbid fascination with human tragedy. I said all of the above because I feel the filmmakers have done an excellent job capturing the real motivations for people like Michelle McNamara and all other armchair detectives. Since the subject matter is both the Golden State Killer case and Michelle McNamara's obsession with it, it's much more nuanced than a more traditional true-crime documentary where the subjects are generally comprised of police officers, the subject of their investigation, and, on occasion, surviving victims and family members. 'I'll Be Gone in the Dark' functions on all of those levels too but also goes deeper by using a non-traditional protagonist. The filmmakers deserve kudos for utilizing this unique angle, and in the first episode they've done an excellent job of setting up the the characters and the conflict of the documentary. If the remaining episodes are on par with the first, this documentary series will easily score an 8/10. (Note: I am not affiliated with the filmmakers, Michelle McNamara, or her estate in any way. The above review reflects my unbiased opinion of this documentary. Rest in peace Michelle.)

Honestly I felt bad about thinking the stuff about the author that didn't interest me, but then I saw the reviews and saw people were even more annoyed by it. Since I have this interest for serial killers I felt held up when the story about this author went bigger and bigger.

Anyway, I wouldn't say it is a bad documentary, I just wasn't too interested in the story about the author. The parts of the serial killer are done greatly, there were parts where I felt a lot of tension. The crimescenes were built greatly and mixed up with the voicememos and stories it made a good documentary.

They shoud've made a version with all the other stuff cut out and leave it a 2 or 3 part documentary. I still would recommend it, depending on what you like to see.

All the reviews that say "iT's mAiNlY aBoUt ThE aUtHoR" are so stupid. that's how it was advertised. it never said it was strictly about the GSK. you can't watch the Leaving Neverland documentary and get upset that they don't talk about MJ's music. seriously people.

as for the documentary, its good! Michelle's story is intriguing and relatable as a fellow crime enthusiast. at times it does jump around a bit but I don't feel lost watching it. give it a try!

I really don't understand the negative reviews. If you want a generic true crime show, then watch the ID channel or whatever. This is a documentary about how the writer researched and threw her life into the book and trying to find the killer. So far it's very well done and kept very interested in both her story and the killers story. I highly recommend this show!

The series doesn't even focus on the east area killer, a more accurate name for the show would be "people praising Michelle McNamara".