Jump to content

American Crime Story


xBrownstonex

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

 

On 29/02/2016 at 5:10 PM, -W.A.R- said:

the show is watchable but i do wonder allot how much of this is accurate

Marcia says it's pretty accurate and they're getting the big things right.

 

This week's episode was brutal. I have no idea how she managed to go through 12 months of trial without losing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, xBrownstonex said:

Yes it was a great one

i love checking youtube vids of the actual trial after seeing the episodes.

Me too! Gotta say I'm a little obsessed. I'm 26 and I'm from Brazil so I didn't get to watch it back then. 
It's crazy to see the actual trial on youtube after seeing the episodes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad episode seven featured a dramatized dismissal of the "grand conspiracy."

For too long, popular culture has hung on to this theory that the LAPD "framed a guilty man." I'm no apologist for the words that came out of Mark Fuhrman's mouth, but the notion that he planted the glove and the blood is so preposterous that it's mind-boggling people still give credence to it. 

I remember me and my father having really heated discussions about it. My father was ever the cynic and his experiences with cops were less than great, so he had no problem believing a cop like Fuhrman would plant evidence in what would ostensibly be a capital murder case - without really knowing squat about the case! Would put his own freedom and indeed life on the line (In capital murder cases, if you manufacture evidence, you are liable to face the death penalty) without knowing whether OJ Simpson had an alibi that would completely exonerate him

Not to mention, there were fourteen officers that arrived at the Bundy crime scene before Fuhrman who all concur there was only one glove. They all literally would have had to turn their backs as Fuhrman took the second glove, for it to be true.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, wasted said:

I forgot that Shapiro was Travolta. That must be good acting. 

Why don't the gloves fit?

and why dod OJ's wife buy two pairs?

OJ had latex gloves on his hands when he tried on the gloves not to contaminate them. Also, the gloves were soaked in blood, that may have altered their shape.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, emybdc said:

OJ had latex gloves on his hands when he tried on the gloves not to contaminate them. Also, the gloves were soaked in blood, that may have altered their shape.
 

And I've read that someone on the dream-team told OJ to stop taking his med's for arthritis.  Which would make his fingers/hands swell up a bit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JONEZY said:

And I've read that someone on the dream-team told OJ to stop taking his med's for arthritis.  Which would make his fingers/hands swell up a bit.

 

Yes, I've read that before, you're right. I forgot about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, wasted said:

How did OJ kill them? With a Gun? 

Both victims were stabbed to death. Since this mini-series I have wanted to check out the theories and specifics of the case but in all honesty the appeal of this show is not the murder mystery, but the going ons surrounding the case, the different motivations of the parties involved, the media coverage (I wish they had spend more story on that even more).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bumblefeet said:

Both victims were stabbed to death. Since this mini-series I have wanted to check out the theories and specifics of the case but in all honesty the appeal of this show is not the murder mystery, but the going ons surrounding the case, the different motivations of the parties involved, the media coverage (I wish they had spend more story on that even more).

Both? Damn run away!

It's interesting to get some background on the main players. Strangely they don't go into OJ much. But by all accounts he was a massive cokehead. Just non stop between his NFL games. He just went pyschotic and killed them. It wasn't really him. If you do some thing like that you should admit it and seek help. 

Wonder where The Fridge is now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

watching/reading some actual stuff about the case and its became clear why he was voted not guilty...the jury had the IQ of a rock

to their credit DNA evidence was new at the time but saying "I didn't understand the DNA stuff at all. To me, it was just a waste of time. It was way out there and carried no weight with me" and downplaying the domestic abuse as if it had no context in a murder case of the abused spouse speaks volumes

heres more on just how little they understood DNA evidence:

"One juror said that she didn’t even take the DNA evidence into consideration because "many people have the same blood type." Another juror felt that the DNA evidence presented by the prosecution wasn’t relevant because "it’s not against the law to bleed at your own home"

but it also seems that the prosecution weren't all that bright either by withholding more simpler evidence that anyone with a functioning brain could understand such as the interview OJ had with police after the murders that was littered with inconsistencies and saying how he don't know how he got a deep ass cut on his finger

Edited by -W.A.R-
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Slash787 said:

The episode was good, Ross is getting better.

The jury consists a bunch of morons. 

i don't like Robert Kardashian's poytral in the show but watching interviews i like him and i think he knows deep down OJ is guilty...the expression on his face when they say not guilty is the look of bewilderment like he can't believe it...thats not the look of a guy that truly knew his client was innocent

i think how Cuba played OJ when they did the mock cross examination when debating about putting him on the stand is how he should have been played. maybe not to that extent but that arrogance should bleed through more...because thats how i picture OJ was

Edited by -W.A.R-
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, -W.A.R- said:

i don't like Robert Kardashian's poytral in the show but watching interviews i like him and i think he knows deep down OJ is guilty...the expression on his face when they say not guilty is the look of bewilderment like he can't believe it...thats not the look of a guy that truly knew his client was innocent

i think how Cuba played OJ when they did the mock cross examination when debating about putting him on the stand is how he should have been played. maybe not to that extent but that arrogance should bleed through more...because thats how i picture OJ was

From the videos I've seen, that IS how he was. I agree, Cuba should've been more arrogant from the start

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, appetite4illusions said:

I wonder what the next season will focus on?

 

Jon Benet Ramsey, Ted Bundy, the Unibomber?

There's no shortage of true-crime material to draw from.

The next season will be on the aftermaths of Hurricane Katrina. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see.

Sounds kind of lame. I don't know of any major crimes that would warrant the mini-series to focus on the hurricane.

The Nic Cage "Bad Lieutenant" used the aftermath of Katrina as a good setting for civil unrest, but I feel ACS would be wasted telling a season about that particular subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On February 19, 2016 at 10:16 AM, RussTCB said:

A couple of things about it are quite bothersome to me, mostly Kardashian related. David Schwimmer is WILDLY overacting the Robert Kardashian character in general so that's my first problem. The need to stop having him say "Juice" every 2 damn seconds and he needs to learn a different "I'm distraught" face, because he just keeps looking like Rachel hurt Ross again whenever he's upset lol. On top of that, the seem to really want to remind you exactly who he is. There's continued and completely unnecessary mentions of his daughters names...... we get it....he's Kim, etc dad. Then the speech he gave them at lunch about fame was so bad I was laughing out loud. None of that has anything to do with the actual story they should be trying to tell and it's incredibly distracting. Whenever they're done with any Robert related scenes, I almost have to force myself to get back into what else is going on, which is a bummer.

Other than that, I like it very much. It's very early in the case and you can already see exactly how outsmarted the prosecution is and how they ended up fumbling a touchdown that was already on the scoreboard.

I personally loved the dig they took at the Kardashians.  I agree that Schwimmer is miscast for the role, but I commend the show's attempt to comment on todays celebrity/fame culture as it relates to the OJ case.  You've got to admit it's quite ironic that the Kardashians, a family famous for reasons few can explain, have ties to a case where bit players became famous.  

I do love the show, but like you, my biggest problems are the casting.  Cuba should not be playing OJ.  I don't see OJ when he's on screen, I see Cuba Gooding Jr.  OJ is/was a large presence with a deep voice and had largely personified a "white" persona by the mid 80s to his arrest.  I don't see any of that in Cuba's performance.  Almost every other actor/actress (with exception of Schwimmer) does a great job.  Travolta is fun to watch, but there again I perhaps would have found a less identifiable actor to play Shapiro.  

What I like about the show is that no one is the devil, but no one is a saint either.  Just as emotional biases are about to be formed on a character the show switches gear and you see each character in a different light (with exception of OJ).  Can't wait for the remaining couple episodes as the wife and I binged watched the first eight episodes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On February 28, 2016 at 3:10 PM, -W.A.R- said:

the show is watchable but i do wonder allot how much of this is accurate

There's a few websites out there that fact check the show.  The one I refer to is Rolling Stone: http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/recaps/the-people-v-o-j-simpson-episode-8-our-fact-checking-recap-20160322

So far it's fairly accurate.  A few details were moved around or exaggerated (or under-represented; can't believe in real life that most of the defence team tried on the glove before OJ "attempted" to put it on during the trial).  Keep in mind the show is based on Jeffrey Toobin's book "The Run of His Life."  The case was so absurd in real life that there really isn't much need to fabricate or make things up.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On March 16, 2016 at 6:59 AM, appetite4illusions said:

I'm glad episode seven featured a dramatized dismissal of the "grand conspiracy."

For too long, popular culture has hung on to this theory that the LAPD "framed a guilty man." I'm no apologist for the words that came out of Mark Fuhrman's mouth, but the notion that he planted the glove and the blood is so preposterous that it's mind-boggling people still give credence to it. 

I remember me and my father having really heated discussions about it. My father was ever the cynic and his experiences with cops were less than great, so he had no problem believing a cop like Fuhrman would plant evidence in what would ostensibly be a capital murder case - without really knowing squat about the case! Would put his own freedom and indeed life on the line (In capital murder cases, if you manufacture evidence, you are liable to face the death penalty) without knowing whether OJ Simpson had an alibi that would completely exonerate him

Not to mention, there were fourteen officers that arrived at the Bundy crime scene before Fuhrman who all concur there was only one glove. They all literally would have had to turn their backs as Fuhrman took the second glove, for it to be true.

Completely agree.  What's even more mind blowing is that I don't ever recall such a dismissal being presented in such a forceful way during the case.  When watching that scene I was like, "where was that Marsha Clark in real life?"

But I also understand why a predominantly black jury bought the story.  It's just a shame O.J. Simpson, of all people, recouped some of the payback owed to the black community after decades of persecution by the LAPD.  Here's a guy who was definitely guilty and could give less fucks about the black community.  A truly tragic situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...