Os Bastidores do Pop: O Esquema das Boy Bands

This doc is absolutely terrible. It's suppose to cover 'the boy band scam' however up until half way through the series the topic is merely brushed over.

Half way through the series and they have basically only covered completely random points. The first episode spends a lot of time covering back stories, of Lou mixed with random stories about him with little evidence, no real point to these stories. Many make him out to be this great guy.. His childhood friend that was fawning over him making fake ID was particularly bad. They talk about previous scams but with no proof and no real judgement on what ended up happening. Did he maybe rip those people off? Wink and a nod.. In a documentary? So realistically they don't cover a single backstory well, they all feel 'touched upon', and the information they do focus on is incomplete and without a point really.

They cover the backstory of the two most famous bands he is affiliated with but in a very poor way. They cover certain artists backstories but not others. The impression I got was that they are really trying to make these boy bands out to be the biggest losers ever. Obviously boy bands did not age well.. but it's like they selected the most cringe worthy clips surrounding boy bands to really hammer the point home. You get the feeling of 'why were these dorks even popular', whereas there is surely some more flattering clips of them out there. They never really cover their rise to super stardom or really show what that super stardom even looked like. They're talking about sums of $200M but haven't or have barely even showed them performing sold out arenas. Like where did that money come from? You never showed the 'rise' part.

Then you have the adult boy band members who are basically on par in cringe with their earlier selves. They either dress like they think they are still a popstar or have extremely inflated opinions of themselves. Leather jackets and spiked hair on 40+ year old dudes is not a good look. Can only imagine the smells that would come off them if you grouped them all together in a room.

Then they talk about how Lou was screwing them in the most traditional way every manager screws their artists.. Their really is not a single 'scam' that was talked about, unless they're waiting right until the end to disclose it. An episode an a half in and their isn't a single point of how Lou is doing anything 'different'. What Ponzi scheme?

After Lou and the bands settles in court, it shows Lou in an interview saying these boy bands needed him, that he built them - That they couldn't do it on their own. Scene jumps to several members scoffing at the idea until one jokingly says 'except for justin timberlake' who literally was the only one of the dozens of members that ever had a successful solo career. It's probably the highlight of irony in this show. I don't even know the names of the guys that are responding to the comment, that is how right Lou was.

The documentary style is overall just creepy - with many clips that either feel misleading or specifically places to be creepy. Like the scene with the kids and Lou on the boat, or outside the courthouse a bunch of younger and singular older woman leading a creepy prayer circle. Or when those two girls come up to Lou and are basically crying saying 'Keep doing what you're doing' -presumably because they are obsessed with the boy band members they perceive he created. Even many comments directly relate Lou and his antics to the Beatles but then never make any mention of it. Examples being: Starting their careers in Germany, referring to himself as the 6th member and others.

The only thing that seemed to be news was Lou Pearlmans previous business venture and more specifically his desire to work with a former Nazi. That story was basically the problem with this documentary in a nutshell. "We heard he got insurance money" "He moved to florida after". Like zero completion to the story, zero confirmation any scam took place, and just conjecture about why he would have done what they haven't proven he did..

I watched this so-called "documentary" until halfway through the third episode, and I'm baffled. If you asked me what it's about, I'd struggle to answer. The basic premise seems to be "Lou Pearlman is bad," but beyond that, there's no real story to follow. Nothing happens, the narrative doesn't progress, and no significant revelations are made. The documentary just circles around, fixating on trivial details that either have nothing to do with the main point or everything to do with it-honestly, it's impossible to tell.

Who is Lou Pearlman? Where did his money come from? How did he connect with so many important people? What are they actually uncovering, and where's the proof? It feels like they had a thin story that could have been told in under 30 minutes but decided to stretch it into a series with no substance. There's simply not enough material for whatever it is they're trying to convey. What a waste of my time-I won't be finishing the series.

I love Netflix docu mini-series. I saw many of them, maybe even most of them. But this one.. it bothered me all the time I was watching. As usual, I did not know anything before I started to watch and after the first episode, I was asking myself, why are they still going in circles and never telling things normally? What happened?? They were dancing about it all the time. It was so annoying. So, they are making documents, because they thought the audience is smart enough to be interesting, but suddenly is not smart enough to tell things honestly and intellectually interestingly. So they chose to take all of the audience's dignity. Since when is quantity better than quality? It is obvious they do not have enough material to make top quality 3 episodes so they took the cheap way. Really disappointed.

I knew nothing about this situation in spite of knowing these bands by name.

It's amazing that such a scam was ever allowed to happen.

Good documentary footage and coverage of the situation overall. Coherent story and explanations.

I could have used a little more variety of the people in the clips, but felt satisfied enough. (You can't get everyone to film, after all.)

My criticism is mainly that they took a good source--the book written by the criminal--and used AI to present it. First, why use AI? Second, why use it here and make the source have an "uncanny valley" vibe?

I'd recommend it as an easy watch.

I had no idea that any of this happened and the documentary was very interestingm It even explains a few song lyrics that I've had questions about for years. However, the AI of Lou Pearlman is just so very creepy and unnecessary. If it were removed and just a voiceover of those parts was put in it would get a much higher rating from me. I actually hesitate to rate it this high because it really was a super distraction from the actual content I wanted to see. The only other complaint is the reoccurring dramatically colored face lighting shots were not clear in their meaning, so just distracting as well.