is this a real docu?


or what?



I Worship The Goddess Amber Tamblyn

reply

Yes.

reply

Well.. Duh

reply



Some people count sheep. Doesn't work with AlwaysCool, just gets him excited.

reply

No. It's a documentary which loses all legitimacy as it delves into things having nothing to with accurately recounting the facts. Add a healthy dose of attempting to underscore the deeds with needless repitition of the most disgusting portions.
Cut out all that crap and you've got a documentary. Those here saying otherwise need to familiarize themselves with what the definition of a documentary really means.

Just the facts, Ma'am.

reply

Which facts were inaccurate? How in depth did you study the case other than reading wikipedia, crime library and a book?

reply

Hi Filmzrule,

You confirmed my answer to the original question. Is This a real Documentary? I answered the poster, no, which you confirm by calling it a docudrama. I'm not sure what there is to argue in that? Even the title is misleading. In Sin He found Salvation. That's a contradiction in terms when using "Salvation" in the Biblical way it's used here. Futhermore Wikipedia is more useful as a starting point to reference other data than it is an accurate portrayal of facts to depend on. The ultimate source of what went on after Fish took the children was Fish himself, so we never will be certain of anything other than the story Fish told, and the condition of remains found. The man was insane. Newspaper accounts have always been sensationalized, we have no audio record of Fish confessing, and even if we had, nothing to compare that to since voice recognition wasn't available then, hence nothing to verify what the police wrote down and what they didn't.

The main gist of your second post to me seems to be an attempt to derail my opinion by showing the disparity of my meager research as compared to your in depth knowledge. As I've already stated, given complete access to every record kept about the man and his deeds can hardly make you an expert since these are inadequate in the first place.

Since you in fact term this a docudrama your query as to what facts are wrong is completely redundant. I'll never know - but then you won't either. My main complaint about this effort remains. I'm not arguing facts here, I'm arguing that the way in which these facts were portrayed was sleazy and offensive and that this was done intentionally.

reply

An excellent review by someone who understands what the filmmaker was portraying:

http://livingtraditions.blogspot.com/2008/10/review-albert-fish-john-borowski.html

reply

When you have to refer to somone else's review to back up the point your trying to make, it just goes to show the weakness of your own. If you look long enough you can also find someone who's opinion will be black is blue and up is down. Does everyone in your mind not 'understand' something when they disagree with you? If so, you're in for a rude awakening one of these days. If your final opinions are so set in stone as to remain steadfast no matter what further evidence you come across, you're in for a very deluded ride through life, buddy. I hope that's not the case.

reply

I agree with real_hiflyer 100%

reply

It is described as a docudrama which creates atmosphere and emotion through reenactments, but also portrays the facts of the true story utilizing actual photographs and newspapers.

reply

HA! It's barely "real". Wanky setpieces, bad narration, terrible cohesvieness, Joe Coleman is awful.

reply