Atentado en Londres: La cacería tras las bombas del 7/7
Título original: Attack on London: Hunting the 7/7 Bombers
Los relatos de testigos presenciales y las imágenes inéditas revelan los atentados con bombas en el transporte de Londres de 2005 y los acontecimientos posteriores.Los relatos de testigos presenciales y las imágenes inéditas revelan los atentados con bombas en el transporte de Londres de 2005 y los acontecimientos posteriores.Los relatos de testigos presenciales y las imágenes inéditas revelan los atentados con bombas en el transporte de Londres de 2005 y los acontecimientos posteriores.
Explorar episodios
Opiniones destacadas
Let me start by saying I watch a lot of crime documentaries, and I mean a lot.
This documentary series begins really well, it's a time line constructed by interviews, news reports and expert testimony that lays it all out really well. It explains it really well for people who are unfamiliar with it or weren't born at the time.
It starts falling apart in the 2nd episode. The narration is still there, but it's clearly trying to be as culturally sensitive as possible. I remember that day, and I remember those years. It did feel at times like they were attempting to minimise the extremism that permeated the world at that point. I appreciate the voices from Muslims who were there at the time, who spoke about how it didn't represent them. But despite the victims testimonies, it failed to capture the absolute fear and paranoia that gripped everyday people. Indicating people were unnecessarily 'bigotted' or people being profiled because people are just 'mean' was not needed. And the pointed repetition of 'homegrown' was so on the nose, by the end it was a little silly.
I understand the need to be a little careful when something still is a real world threat. And this is coming from someone with a Muslim partner. But this series really diluted what is a really big problem still.
This documentary series begins really well, it's a time line constructed by interviews, news reports and expert testimony that lays it all out really well. It explains it really well for people who are unfamiliar with it or weren't born at the time.
It starts falling apart in the 2nd episode. The narration is still there, but it's clearly trying to be as culturally sensitive as possible. I remember that day, and I remember those years. It did feel at times like they were attempting to minimise the extremism that permeated the world at that point. I appreciate the voices from Muslims who were there at the time, who spoke about how it didn't represent them. But despite the victims testimonies, it failed to capture the absolute fear and paranoia that gripped everyday people. Indicating people were unnecessarily 'bigotted' or people being profiled because people are just 'mean' was not needed. And the pointed repetition of 'homegrown' was so on the nose, by the end it was a little silly.
I understand the need to be a little careful when something still is a real world threat. And this is coming from someone with a Muslim partner. But this series really diluted what is a really big problem still.
It seems today's storytellers really have a difficult time conveying time frame and accepting that time changes. What is acceptable today will not be acceptable sometime in the very near future. Whilst it does use a lot of real footage and photos, and talks with a few survivors, it does not go far enough. It is disjointed at times and doesn't speak to enough survivors. When a very specific demographic succeeds in blowing up a lot of places in the biggest International city on the planet, you do not go around looking for people that are opposite of said demographic; and we don't want to be preached to about it since we lived through it. If a 5'11 140 lb male 20 - 30 yr old is the perp/suspect, you don't target a 4' 200 lb 70 year old female. To find fault with investigators 20 years after the fact is Asinine. To even bring it up just goes to show that in 2025 people care more about optics than actually saving people's lives; and to preach about how awful it was that police targeted a specific demographic now is a slap in the face to the survivors and victim's family members; and severely minimises the true fear of a population of over 8 million AT THE TIME. I would love to see how these hypocrites would react if they actually lived through an attack on their family member, or themselves. Is it absolutely tragic that Jean Charles de Menezes was killed - yes- AND it's really easy to armchair quarterback that in 2025. The jacka$$e$ that did this were a very specific demographic. That is a fact. You cannot go searching for the opposite and expect to get the criminals. Plus the makers of this series completely forget that Londoners live with bomb attacks - for decades and generations. There was WWI, the Troubles started in 1920, WWII, the Troubles continuing until 2008, and terror attacks in recent years. This series was somehow uploaded out of sequence, so episode three is actually episode four, and episode 4 is actually episode three, so I had to watch it twice. It is appalling and quite astounding that these four idiots only received a minimum 40. What's even more disturbing is that you cannot find any information at all about them. Just like the idiots that attacked NYC. It tells me that England, like the US, has used these idiots to catch bigger fish. Abu Hamza, which radicalised these idiots at least got a life sentence in NY. These four should have been displayed at Traitor's Gate in 2005.
This was a very interesting documentary about the 7/7 London bombings. The interviews with survivors and people who were there that day were definitely the strongest part.
The interview with the civil rights activist felt out of place and didn't really add anything. Suggesting that the police or investigators were being racist just because they were trying to find suspects based on the info they had isn't fair. Profiling, in the context of a manhunt, is a logical and necessary part of narrowing down suspects, based on the information available at the time, not on prejudice.
It's unfortunate that Netflix appears to include these elements to attract certain viewers or to appeal to activist narratives, rather than to enhance the factual quality of the documentary. Investigators have a duty to act on the best leads available, regardless of race, age, or gender, and suggesting otherwise distracts from the real story and the real victims. Doing otherwise would just mean they'd waste time.
Still, even though it got quite frustrating in the end, the documentary remains a worthwhile watch.
The interview with the civil rights activist felt out of place and didn't really add anything. Suggesting that the police or investigators were being racist just because they were trying to find suspects based on the info they had isn't fair. Profiling, in the context of a manhunt, is a logical and necessary part of narrowing down suspects, based on the information available at the time, not on prejudice.
It's unfortunate that Netflix appears to include these elements to attract certain viewers or to appeal to activist narratives, rather than to enhance the factual quality of the documentary. Investigators have a duty to act on the best leads available, regardless of race, age, or gender, and suggesting otherwise distracts from the real story and the real victims. Doing otherwise would just mean they'd waste time.
Still, even though it got quite frustrating in the end, the documentary remains a worthwhile watch.
Im an American. I was 10 when 9/11 happened so ive seen plenty of documentaries about it over the decades. So I was excited to see someone had made a proper 7/7 documentary. A terrorist attack that seems to have been largely forgotten as a result of more recent ISIS attacks in Europe with significantly higher casualties. But as you will see in the documentary, it goes deeper than just 4 Jihadists on 7/7 who blew themselves up, and id say, for the most part. They did a great job portraying it.
With footage most of us likely have never seen before, interviews with high ranking police, intelligence operatives, and the warmonger Tony Blair himself, we get an interesting comprehensive look at what happened. Though I personally would not have structured it the way it was, possibly due to the lack of footage (unlike 9/11), this is how the had to do it, and thats ok because it was compelling to watch the scenes unfold. However, while I watched on with interest into the subsequent forensics investigation and later-on failed attack and manhunt, I was displeased with something thats been creeping in to these documentaries as of late. The "poor me, Muslim pity party".
Right in the middle of sections discussing forensics, police investigations, internal discussions at MI-5. We get stopped, jarringly by "human rights activists" and other of that ilk. And they go on and on and on about how THEY were persecuted, not the 50+ people heinously murdered by true Muslims, BUT THEM, apparently 50+ dead isn't enough right? We have to be victims too. I was old enough to clearly remember 9/11, I remember the justifiable backlash against Muslims. When we have a plethora of dead people, I and very few other people want to hear about how its not real Islam, because it is, ive studied it, ive fought it. People complaining about being searched by police. Of course you are, when a white Catholic does the same, go ahead and search me. Get out of here with that nonsense and get back to the true crime investigation I came here for. Not a slew of people pretending that what happened isnt actually true textbook Islam justified by their "Holy" texts.
So while one can just skip through those stupid interviews, the rest is fantastic and another example of how Netflix still can produce good documentaries despite a lull in quality as of late, this one stands above most of the recent Netflix documentaries.
With footage most of us likely have never seen before, interviews with high ranking police, intelligence operatives, and the warmonger Tony Blair himself, we get an interesting comprehensive look at what happened. Though I personally would not have structured it the way it was, possibly due to the lack of footage (unlike 9/11), this is how the had to do it, and thats ok because it was compelling to watch the scenes unfold. However, while I watched on with interest into the subsequent forensics investigation and later-on failed attack and manhunt, I was displeased with something thats been creeping in to these documentaries as of late. The "poor me, Muslim pity party".
Right in the middle of sections discussing forensics, police investigations, internal discussions at MI-5. We get stopped, jarringly by "human rights activists" and other of that ilk. And they go on and on and on about how THEY were persecuted, not the 50+ people heinously murdered by true Muslims, BUT THEM, apparently 50+ dead isn't enough right? We have to be victims too. I was old enough to clearly remember 9/11, I remember the justifiable backlash against Muslims. When we have a plethora of dead people, I and very few other people want to hear about how its not real Islam, because it is, ive studied it, ive fought it. People complaining about being searched by police. Of course you are, when a white Catholic does the same, go ahead and search me. Get out of here with that nonsense and get back to the true crime investigation I came here for. Not a slew of people pretending that what happened isnt actually true textbook Islam justified by their "Holy" texts.
So while one can just skip through those stupid interviews, the rest is fantastic and another example of how Netflix still can produce good documentaries despite a lull in quality as of late, this one stands above most of the recent Netflix documentaries.
I didn't know much about 7/7 as I was relatively young when it happened and I didn't care much about the world beyond my neighborhood. Also 9/11 takes most of the attention when it comes to stories about terrorism for obvious reasons, so other terrible events like the London, Boston and Madrid attacks get a distant second spot. So it's good to hear the story of the 7/7 victims and survivors as well as the first responders. I wish the documentary didn't resort to so many production cliches that are so predictable and distracting like interviewing amputees with a closed up shot to later give you a wide shot of his missing legs, the digital clocks counting down and the Minority Report style geo locators with their silly "computer sound". With so much access to material and stories the director could have done something much more interesting and powerful, instead of just copy and paste all the same tricks and artifacts we have seen hundreds of times.
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Everything New on Netflix in July
Everything New on Netflix in July
No need to waste time endlessly scrolling — here's the entire lineup of new movies and TV shows streaming on Netflix this month.
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Attack on London: Hunting the 7/7 Bombers
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
- Tiempo de ejecución45 minutos
- Color
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the French language plot outline for Atentado en Londres: La cacería tras las bombas del 7/7 (2025)?
Responda