MovieChat Forums > The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst (2015) Discussion > Did this seem sleazy to you

Did this seem sleazy to you

posted 10 years ago by Esl21599
44 replies | jump to latest

I didn't fine ending to be compelling but actually sleazy. I think the film makers at the end came off as tabloidish or sleazy from a content standpoint. Leaving the mic on and him running his mouth in the bath room might have sealed his fate. A street guy once said "law enforcement only knows what you tell em"

Law enforcement should still be ashamed of themselves. They dropped the ball on all three cases and now need a HBO documentary to find evidence. these people are in charge of protecting the public. The lack of physical evidence and how they can't even place him in LA at the time.

[–] AdvanceIstheMan 10 years ago

I think the question is, if you were friends or family of any of the victims, how would you feel about the documentary? I think I would be glad that one way or another they found a way to get this guy to admit what he did. He may manage to beat another case and he may keep denying it until the day he dies, but we all know the truth now. Any defense for what he said in the bathroom will just be the new version of "he only dismembered the body because he was scared."

[–] glo-co 10 years ago

I feel the same way. Durst doesn't have much longer to live and most, maybe all of that time, will be spent in jail awaiting trial. Even if he gets off, what is he really getting out of? The fact that everyone knows that he killed those people and that their friends and family got to hear him say the words could go a long way in bringing some closure to all those involved.

[–] Mehki_Girl 10 years ago

No, law enforcement can know way more than you tell them, unless he meant the telling in leaving phone records (one idiot of the would have been perfect crime called from a payphone to tell wife and sister in law he had killed her husband. Time was running out so he gave them the number. They called him back. The cops pulled phone records. Why is a call coming from the next state at the time the murder happened. Idiots. Couldn't wait to get back home to tell them. They knew you snuck out of the house during party, drove to the next state to kill him - wait until you get home), leaving DNA, not what you actually say or do that tells them. Did he mean that kinda of "telling", like being stupid and leaving a trail?

http://www.auplod.com/u/dalpuo430da.png

[–] lynxx55 10 years ago

After this salacious documentary, good luck in finding 12 unbiased jurors with no previous exposure to the facts of the case.

[–] neerood 10 years ago

Well sorry to say that only a fraction of the population watches TV, and of that, only a much smaller subset watches HBO. There's people here who don't even know who Hillary Clinton's husband is, so finding dumb jurors will be easy.

[–] NancyDPA 10 years ago

We still have two more episodes to watch, but I don't think the filmmakers are sleazy at all. First of all, Durst contacted them for the interview, and he chose to do it against his attorneys' warnings. He had been told in a prior interview that his mic was on and that they could hear everything he was saying ("nobody tells the WHOLE truth"). They even said to him that if he wasn't careful, he was going to be looking at murder charges in New York or California.

What I find sleazy is that no matter what you do, if you have enough money, you can get away with murder!

[–] nightech 10 years ago

Your assertion was proved correct by the O.J. Simpson trial. However, like Durst, the guilt finally weighed on him so much that he arranged to get arrested for something else. The later crime brought him punishment more commensurate with his previous offense. Kidnapping carries sentences similar to murder, an outcome of the Lindbergh baby's kidnapping and murder in 1932.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] madcapradio 10 years ago

agree entirely OP.. jarecki is sleaze. agreed this was compelling but every move the filmmakers made other than setting up an interview camera was pretty much the lowest form of entertainment...

this is compelling like any friggin serial killer at large would be compelling. i hated everything "film" about this. content wise, its hard not to recommend. unlike "all good things"

[–] Acid_Reflex 10 years ago

Ending was all about the director. Usually they network for their next gig like that on the lot or during the wrap party LOL.

--Ju know what a "Hasa" is Frank!?! Dat's a PIG, that don't "FLY STRAIGHT"

[–] m0oo0m 10 years ago

Durst will probably walk and then take care of the unfinished business with Jarecki.

[–] bobbyh-568-148826 10 years ago

So you find blame in law enforcement for not obtaining a conviction but contradict yourself by finding fault in the methods of the film makers for cornering a practiced pathological liar with infinite wealth in a corner that nails him for all his terrible inhumane deeds?

[–] fidgette 10 years ago

The NYPD and LAPD dropped the ball on this one because Durst is wealthy, no other reason.

But as I've read the FBI have been investigating him for the past 3 years, it wasn't the HBO series that caused them to arrest him recently, so I'm guessing they have other actual evidence. I mean, his letter alone is probably enough.

[–] jd_movie_luver 10 years ago

Sleazy? Anyone who has ever been on a set knows to turn your effing mic off when you go to the restroom. Jarecki didn't intentionally leave bobs mic on....bob left it on. he could have taken it off before or at least turned it off. And no way in hell would jarecki not air this material after it was discovered.

-------

[–] dawnrzr 9 years ago

Must be an extremely easy thing to forget to remove, especially after he's upset about getting caught, lots of things on his mind here + don't forget that he's getting really old and what that does to a persons memory. So no, he obviously didn't "leave it on", he forgot to remove it. Also don't forget he did this in an earlier episode too, spoke (alone) to the camera, while it was on.. this is not a technical person who even understands that he can be recorded without him knowing it.

In most cases i think the team handles the mic, removing it / turning it on/off, especially for old people who are not technical. A mic can also be remote controlled, as in no physical on/off button.. i have one for my camera, they're pretty common.