Anyone else do the same, and the n watch the film?
I enjoyed it as a stand alone take on Kuklinski.
But it left huge portions (important portions at that) out of the story.
Glaringly obvious that he beat his wife and was a feared father to his children if you read the book.
I have not seen it yet but I knew they wouldn't go all in he was a monster to make it a great movie they needed to show the abuse of not only his father but his mother and how it effected him as a husband. The Iceman Tapes are still some of the most chilling and intriguing documentaries I've ever seen. The first book is more believable the one by Phillip Carlo was made to sell he contradicts so many known facts and even has to put corrections in his books because of it. Carlo made an entertaining book but I take it as more of a movie actually it's a mix of fact and fiction and sometimes it's hard to say what's true and what's not. He places The Iceman at almost ever famous whacking from Hoffa to Gallante to Roy DeMeo which that one I can actually believe.
share[deleted]