Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 318

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    29,233

    Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #6

    Please continue here. Please be mindful of TOS and don't let emotion get the better part of the discussion.

    Thread 1

    Thread 2

    Thread 3

    Thread 4 - On hold.

    Thread 5

    Appeal is to be decided in March 2011.

    Last few posts from previous thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova View Post
    Lifetime basically only shows two movies: in the more popular one, the plucky heroine has to fight off and eventually kill the man who betrayed her. The other movie shows a good girl who falls prey to drugs and a bad boyfriend and becomes a killer (and/or hooker).

    Guess which one the Amanda Knox movie will be?
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    I think I fall into the same category as the people objecting to the film. It's been known for some time that the film was being made, but objections to it being shown have only recently come to light. Now that we've had a glimpse of what the film is like (through the trailer), it looks to be in poor taste.
    Last edited by KateB; 05-16-2015 at 04:04 PM. Reason: repair url tag.


  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Salem For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    24,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    There is no way to do a film such as this in good taste, imo. Unless maybe it is a documentary? Even then I would wonder.

    I think the best movie would be one from the minds of the posters here, who have dedicated so much time to the actual court documents, etc. and picked apart every little piece of evidence until it screamed.

    And still we have a difference of opinion. Amazing, isn't it? I find the whole thing very interesting, from the event itself, to how every one looks at it. And I really feel for Meredith's family here. No matter what happened, to have your daughter's last hour on earth portrayed in such a manner, for the world to see, had got to be a very sharp, painful stab in the heart.

    I don't think they should have been allowed to advertise the movie (unrealistic, I know, but still).

    Salem
    I had to bring this quote over ... because reading this made me start thinking about how a movie about a murder could be done more respectfully.

    Rather than show a violent attack, the scene could follow Meredith going home and show her settling in to study, cut to 1-3 figures entering the cottage and then silence ... with a photo tribute to Meredith and maybe some shots of her memorial.

    I'm not convinced that sex and violence were needed to draw an audience for this film ... too bad the producer didn't realize that.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg9eSyhgzBw
    Last edited by KateB; 05-16-2015 at 04:04 PM. Reason: repair url tag.


  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to otto For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,018
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    I had to bring this quote over ... because reading this made me start thinking about how a movie about a murder could be done more respectfully.

    Rather than show a violent attack, the scene could follow Meredith going home and show her settling in to study, cut to 1-3 figures entering the cottage and then silence ... with a photo tribute to Meredith and maybe some shots of her memorial.

    I'm not convinced that sex and violence were needed to draw an audience for this film ... too bad the producer didn't realize that.
    I want to be clear that while I am skeptical about this film, I by no means think we should discard the first amendment to ban it.

    otto, there is no evidence whatsoever that 3 figures entered the cottage together. Even if you believe the evidence shows 3 people (in addition to the victim) ended up there eventually, there's no evidence they arrived together.

    So even in one brief and tasteful example, we've already left the available evidence and departed for the land of fiction.


  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Nova For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    24,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova View Post
    I want to be clear that while I am skeptical about this film, I by no means think we should discard the first amendment to ban it.

    otto, there is no evidence whatsoever that 3 figures entered the cottage together. Even if you believe the evidence shows 3 people (in addition to the victim) ended up there eventually, there's no evidence they arrived together.

    So even in one brief and tasteful example, we've already left the available evidence and departed for the land of fiction.
    I wrote 1-3, not 3.


  8. The Following User Says Thank You to otto For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,018
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    I wrote 1-3, not 3.
    The principle is still the same. Sorry, I should have made it clear I wasn't objecting to your example, per se, just pointing out that any film made will require choices that tilt the narrative toward one conclusion or another.

    It is possible in theory to construct a film that is ultimately neutral, but very difficult to do in practice. And probably impossible with the budget and shooting schedule of a made-for-TV movie.


  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nova For This Useful Post:


  11. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,679
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    I wrote 1-3, not 3.
    The start of 1 - 3 still represents an issue

    On the record I will not partake in any movie discussion. I have no idea what the content is but I do know the aim of most movies

    I am actually saddened that MK's family has to go through this and I will simply not be a part of it


  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Allusonz For This Useful Post:


  13. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,679
    I did though come across this interview with Dr. Greg Hampikian

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vEFPZgW9HA
    Last edited by KateB; 05-16-2015 at 04:04 PM. Reason: repair url tag.


  14. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Allusonz For This Useful Post:


  15. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Allusonz View Post
    I did though come across this interview with Dr. Greg Hampikian....
    What were you saying about how sometimes one thank-you just isn't enough?


  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Nova For This Useful Post:


  17. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova View Post
    What were you saying about how sometimes one thank-you just isn't enough?
    Sorry by the time it was at the end i was laughing so hard at what they had done i had tears rolling down my face

    The interesting part is that it was the defense that requested it be taken apart not the experts as has been reported thus I am thinking the objections ....

    Nope those objections make no sense to me whatsoever


  18. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Allusonz View Post
    Sorry by the time it was at the end i was laughing so hard at what they had done i had tears rolling down my face

    The interesting part is that it was the defense that requested it be taken apart not the experts as has been reported thus I am thinking the objections ....

    Nope those objections make no sense to me whatsoever
    As I'm sure you know, a basic rule of direct and cross-examination is "never ask a question unless you already know the answer." The same principle applies here, I feel certain: the prosecution doesn't want any surprises and has no way of knowing what is inside that handle.

    That, of course, is no FAIR reason not to take the handle apart and retest, but I'm sure that is the prosecutor's motivation for objecting.

    (And given the way the evidence was handled in this case, that knife handle may well hold traces of MY DNA!)

    What is telling is the defense request. Obviously, AK and RS are telling their lawyers there is no way that knife was involved in the murder, because their lawyers aren't worried that pulling the handle apart will unearth a huge sample of MK's blood.


  19. The Following User Says Thank You to Nova For This Useful Post:


  20. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova View Post
    As I'm sure you know, a basic rule of direct and cross-examination is "never ask a question unless you already know the answer." The same principle applies here, I feel certain: the prosecution doesn't want any surprises and has no way of knowing what is inside that handle.
    That, of course, is no FAIR reason not to take the handle apart and retest, but I'm sure that is the prosecutor's motivation for objecting.

    (And given the way the evidence was handled in this case, that knife handle may well hold traces of MY DNA!)

    What is telling is the defense request. Obviously, AK and RS are telling their lawyers there is no way that knife was involved in the murder, because their lawyers aren't worried that pulling the handle apart will unearth a huge sample of MK's blood.
    BBM

    I have 2 schools of thought on this

    No one wants to be surprised during any trial that includes the defense/prosecution

    If there is indeed DNA in that handle they would be very hard pressed to not be able to say contamination


  21. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova View Post
    I want to be clear that while I am skeptical about this film, I by no means think we should discard the first amendment to ban it./
    I guess they could start creating bad press, full page ads or however it's done.. basically start lobbying hard against the movie in hopes of stirring up enough negative publicity that the sponsors back out of advertising.


  22. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,266
    I don't plan on watching the movie. TV movies are generally trashy and not well made to begin with. That being said, I'm sure at some point a "tasteful" version of the story could be made, but probably not until long after all the appeals are done and the maximum amount of information has been made available and some time has passed. IIRC, the Michael Winterbottom version is supposed to stay away from any depiction of the murder, barely focus on the Amanda character, but centralize more on a reporter covering the case.


  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Malkmus For This Useful Post:


  24. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,018
    Having a photo with the knife next to a ruler merely confirms my earlier conclusion: there's no way somebody chose to carry that knife out for the evening "just for fun."


  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nova For This Useful Post:


  26. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    24,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova View Post
    Having a photo with the knife next to a ruler merely confirms my earlier conclusion: there's no way somebody chose to carry that knife out for the evening "just for fun."
    The knife is still 12 inches in length, even when placed next to a centimeter ruler that is too short.


  27. The Following User Says Thank You to otto For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 826
    Last Post: 02-07-2011, 01:46 PM
  2. Replies: 681
    Last Post: 12-25-2010, 02:11 PM
  3. Anyone following Meredith Kercher/Amanda Knox
    By voynich in forum Amanda Knox
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-13-2009, 04:55 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •