Cold Case: les meurtres au Tylenol

Chicago medics are shocked when several healthy people die unexpectedly. The only link is that they'd all taken Tylenol. Investigations uncover a shocking truth: the Tylenol capsules had been laced with cyanide. Early indications are that James Lewis is the man, especially since he sent an extortion letter to Johnson & Johnson.

It's a very well-made documentary that isn't afraid to throw in a few controversial talking points, including the potential involvement of pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson.

It's chilling to think that nobody was ever caught for it, someone or some organisation quite literally got away with murder, unfortunately I don't think we'll ever learn what happened.

There are some fascinating interviews, especially the words of potential killer James Lewis. I thought Michelle Rosen was absolutely fantastic: courageous, honest, and not afraid to call out corruption where it exists.

As for James Lewis, while listening to him speak, I just don't think he has the mental clout to carry it out, especially given the deaths that occurred once Johnson & Johnson had added all of those safety precautions to their Tylenol products.

7/10.

Michelle Rosen, daughter of one of the victims, suspects Johnson & Johnson of accidentally lacing Tylenol with cyanide. J&J lying about possessing cyanide, keeping it within close proximity of production of Tylenol suggests that this is possible. J&J itself seems to aware of this by testing a portion of and subsequently destroying the product.

But if this were an issue why didn't pop up before then? The argument that accidental cyanide poisoning was somehow missed isn't real convincing. People would have noticed other people dropping dead after taking Tylenol. More than just old people take Tylenol.

There is no evidence that Tylenol was tainted in that factories where it was produced.

Meanwhile we have James Lewis, a man accused of murder and rape and who served time for extortion. For reasons not explained the murder case against him is dropped. All we know is that he fled Chicago just after Raymond West's death.

There is no evidence that Lewis laced Tylenol bottles with cyanide. There is no evidence that he even possessed cyanide.

The testing of medication and subsequent destruction of 22 million pills, while responsible behavior, does also hint at concerns about possible contamination. The last death occurring 4 years later further strengthens this suspicion.

On one hand we have a corporation, institutions well known for covering up blunders. But on the other we have what appears to be a psychopathic criminal. Both parties seem adept at covering their tracks based on their respective histories.

If you're into conspiracy theories and prefer mystery over truth, this one's for you.

But if you're more grounded in reality, you'll likely find this series built around sensationalism rather than substance. Despite revisiting one of America's most infamous unsolved cases, the show offers no real conclusion.

Honestly, I wish production companies like Netflix would include a clear disclosure when a documentary lacks a widely accepted conclusion. Otherwise, you might spend three hours watching just to realize you've learned nothing definitive. It's frustrating when a show builds so much tension without providing any real payoff or meaningful insight.

The strength of this true crime documentary is the random evil of the underlying crime and the bizarre machinations of its prime suspect. When the documentary hews close to the facts it's harrowing and fascinating. Unfortunately it too often falls into the trap of peddling a conspiracy. The conspiracy is presented in a way that makes it sound convincing; but pretty quickly it becomes apparent that not only does the conspiracy have no substance, there's no attempt to explain the mechanics of what's being alleged or counter the evidence that contradicts it. It's ultimately pretty tedious and it doesn't lead anywhere convincing.

I never cease to be amazed that there isn't a set of obvious guidelines and ground rules that documentary makers follow. One of those would be to keep the audience apprised of the timeline.

This documentary flips back and forth, mostly seemingly between 1982 and 1986, when two events occurred. Of course there was coverage after that and some from the present day. At times it was unclear what the timing was for a particular scene. This makes the story harder to follow for viewers. You can do better.

Apart from that, it was an interesting subject that I recall from my youth. I did not recall the resolution of it, such as it is, so it was interesting to get a more complete story although we still don't have the full story do we?

ABOUT MY REVIEWS:

I do not include a synopsis of the film/show -- you can get that anywhere and that does not constitute a meaningful review -- but rather my thoughts and feelings on the film that hopefully will be informative to you in deciding whether to invest 90-180 minutes of your life on it.

My scale: 1-5 decreasing degrees of "terrible", with 5 being "mediocre" 6- OK. Generally held my interest OR had reasonable cast and/or cinematography, might watch it again 7 - Good. My default rating for a movie I liked enough to watch again, but didn't rise to the upper echelons 8- Very good. Would watch again and recommend to others 9- Outstanding. Would watch over and over; top 10% of my ratings 10 - A classic. (Less than 2% receive this rating). For Lifetime Movies for Chicks (LMFC), drop the above scale by 3 notches. A 6 is excellent and 7 almost unattainable.