David Fincher's serial killer chat 'em up MINDHUNTER

Zodiac: The Series?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gZCfRD_zWE

I'm down.

not familiar with much of the cast there except McCallany, who is pretty much always very good.

jesus god every time I think I'm at critical mass of shows to watch, Netflix just heaps another stack on top

new fincher show means they're finally starting phase 2 of netflix shows

lol "already been renewed for season 2" is possibly the biggest pile of marketing bullshit ever

finally, a look at the psychology of a serial killer

This is apparently based on or heavily influenced by the Ressler and Douglas books, right?

yeah it's an official adaptation

but the characters are fictionalised I assume

It's like MANHUNTER but in the MIND

I mean yeah the MIND OF A SERIAL KILLER stuff is sorta played out in the culture, but this isn't really that, or it is in a different kind of way. The beginning of real understanding of the pathologies that drove these guys, and the idea to interview the few in custody at the time, was extremely revolutionary in its day. I assume -- having read several books by both authors -- that that's what the series will concentrate on: the career risks and mental toll taken by these investigators by starting these projects.

I am a fan of Douglas (and of Douglas' mentor Robert Ressler who wrote Whoever Fights Monsters)

I actually met Douglas a few years back & got his autograph. He was pretty cool.

Looking forward to seeing this!!

Jonathan Groff is gr8 too

Wait this isn't parody?

nope

lol that's a bold choice of title if this isn't a zany spoof of Thomas Harris

It is based on the book Mind Hunter: Inside FBI’s Elite Serial Crime Unit written by Mark Olshaker and John E. Douglas

That clarification... does not affect the lol

it is still called MINDHUNTER

I'm guessing this (not very good) British comedy is on nobody's radar

http://empireonline.media/jpg/70/0/0/640/480/aspectfit/0/0/0/0/0/0/c/articles/58c908747c5c5bdd3ca6791b/Mindhorn%20poster.jpeg

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Harris never wrote anything called "Manhunter" anyway, Michael Mann did.

Harris's Jack Crawford character was partially based on Douglas, which is presumably why he semi-borrowed the title back off Mann for his book. It's a rich tapestry

Available on Netflix from today, really looking forward to this.

I'll reserve judgment until I finish the season but halfway in I will say Holt McCallany as Fred Ward is A+

pvmic i just finshed binging the whole thing

omg so good

I HAVE THOUGHTS

- I was skeptical that having Groff as Douglas’s substitute would mean Douglas would aggrandize himself & his achievements bc that’s the way he is, but he does not come off well by the end & i really like that, that really put it over the top for me

- the slow burn of neuroses between the three of them is fantastic, because a job like that cant not eat away at the very fabric of yr “self”

- casting of all the criminal subjects was incredible, and the actors were a+. from kemper to speck, not a bum note in any of them

- groff’s transition from ep 1 to ep 10, physically, emotionally, is SO good. anna torv is magical and i love her forever

love it

kinda want to watch it again? #saddo

oh and holt mccallany was grizzled tv cop PERFECT

3 eps to go here...

Veg said everything I was gonna say. Really enjoyed the hell out of this. The lead actors and the guys playing all the killers are all excellent.

I’m not hugely fascinated by serial killers themselves but I love the detecting and psychology angle so this was squarely in my wheelhouse. It felt like Zodiac: the Series in a lot of ways.

Ha I obviously didn’t see the post st the top of the thread

oh and holt mccallany was grizzled tv cop PERFECT

I'm only 2 eps in but man is it nice to see McCallany again. Lights Out was a fine little series.

don't think i've seen Groff play hetero before

that was a little weird at first, not gonna lie

I've really hardened my heart against this because I'm not much of a fan of Fincher, serial killer fic and stuff where the FBI are the good guys. But I suspect from what I'm reading it will probably win me over and become a mucho guilty pleasure watch.

how bloody/disturbing is this show

How violent/gory is this? The premise seems pretty bloodless, but are there reenactments or flashbacks or even just autopsies/ lots of photos?

ha xp

ha weird

basically I want to watch this (loved Zodiac) but my partner is an automatic no on serial killer shit, and I'm squeamish enough myself these days to not necessarily want to spend 10 hours marinating in murder naturalism.

99% of “gore” is crime scene photographs. there’s no dramatization of the murders themselves vis flashbacks or anything - the horrors are mostly communicated through conversation

there is one v shocking moment in ep1 that is quite gory but passes by v quickly

It’s not very gory overall. There is a scene in the first episode with some brief gore but it’s not serial killer-related.

Apart from that it’s mostly just crime scene photos and graphic verbal descriptions of crimes.

*LOTS* of ookiness and creepy shit though.

X-post

yeah, and the crime scene photos are not lingered upon & are faintly colored or black & white
often by the time you realize what you are seeing it’s already off camera

def not for the faint hearted but nowhere near the gorefest you might expect

fincher himself has described the show as mainly being about conversations & that def bears out

perfect, thanks!

One of my favorite bits was the looks Anna Torv kept shooting at Groff during their first meeting when he'd interject. Close up as he writes in notebook: "BOOK?"

enjoying this so far but Brandy is otm here

Fincher: this is Debbie, she's a real human woman
Me: lmaoooo oh for sure man

— BranDIE Jensen (@BrandyLJensen) October 15, 2017

on put more simply Debbie is basically the Cool Girl from the Gone Girl rant

Otherwise this has been v enjoyable

*quickly crosses off “looking for my Debbie (watch Mindhunter!!)” from my dating profile*

great we've established that this drama contains fictional characters

idk man some characters resemble types of people you find out there in the world, some are more like narrative devices with legs

Debbie’s introductory scenes are silly maybe but she didn’t strike me as unrealistic past that?

I've been re-watching Fringe so it's mildly amusing to see Anna Torv play a Boston-based FBI consultant. Am glad she's getting regular work again too.

I'm about two-thirds in and this is pretty good! And despite the dour subject matter, it's genuinely funny at points - that one killer who couldn't stop crying, the seat-switching scene in the airplane, Holt McCallany in general.

yeah the quippy dialogue is good and I'm glad that they weren't afraid to allow some humor in -- for a show that's pretty tense it's also got a nice contrasting relaxed vibe about it

oh and the music cues are great. the Exile 'I Wanna Kiss You All Over' cue at the end of the shoe fetish episode was so good

I wanted to single out a really excellent shot, when Monte Rissell is talking about how it all could have been different for him if he'd stayed where he wanted to, and the camera tracks in on the back of his head. The combination of his words and the shot was inexplicably moving.

The episode, I think it’s the sixth or seventh, where it’s about the characters coming to terms with their new roles and we see a glimpse of their lives and the toll this is all taking and the ways they’re dealing with the work, was really well timed

i love how flat & deadeyed & sarcastic Ford is in the final episode, compared to his wide-eyed enthusiam in ep 1

oh and the music cues are great.

Eh I don't know... some of them are little too on-the-nose. "Psycho Killer" and "I Don't Like Mondays" come to mind.

"Psycho Killer" seemed pretty bad tbh

this show still rules

i like on the nose

*makes note on little pad*

POST

is this all fincher or is it one of those 'he sets the parameters in e01' deals where they bring in working tv directors for the remainder to ape his style

he directed 4 of the 10 eps

Asif Kapadia, at least, was an inspired choice.

idk man some characters resemble types of people you find out there in the world, some are more like narrative devices with legs

yeah i get that, i guess i didn't think that character is badly written so much as dormant. i'm only three episodes in and her scenes have been p well done and indicative of character imo but she doesn't do anything and hasn't got much purpose, so far. that feels different from a character who is a cipher or a plot device.

i watched one ep and her role seemed to be mainly to ensure that the show isn't literally all men which is.. laudable i guess as a gesture but hardly enough really

one of the leads is also a woman

she doesn't turn up til later though

fair enough.

this is a photo of fbi agents in 1977. note the shaggy hairstyles, the sideburns, the mustache. NOT NEARLY ENOUGH MUSTACHES IN THIS SHOW

https://mikemcclaughry.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/fbi_agents_raiding_cedars_complex_-_scientology.png

it is p amazing who the alarm systems dude with the moustache was. promises an interesting storyline.

not one with a conclusion anytime soon though...

"I've been re-watching Fringe so it's mildly amusing to see Anna Torv play a Boston-based FBI consultant. Am glad she's getting regular work again too."

I just got to ep 3 and was thinking I haven't seen in her anything since Fringe + she's ace!

period detail is definitely pretty half-hearted

in contrast The Deuce has impeccable period detail, but is unwatchable imo.

not one with a conclusion anytime soon though...

yeah am intrigued to see what they do with it.

i agree btw with people saying the rock hits are a bit on the nose, but i think the original score is great at times. some really interesting electronic type stuff, eg in the opening scene of ep 1.

still not totally sold on The Deuce but at the very least Maggie Gyllenhall is incredible in it

from what I saw in the first ep she is great in it, yeah.

but double fucking James Franco is not something I was looking forward to.

I think the lack of really accurate period details balanced with what seems (to us) to be really obvious musical cues are pretty indicative of where they wanted to spend money and how wide they're trying to cast the net to reel in audiences. Zodiac had the deep moviemaking budget and was strenuously period-appropriate, but it sure didn't pull in the audience.

I am enjoying @MINDHUNTER_ but their costumer should know that any self respecting male federal employee circa 1977 would wear a tie clip.

— Mary (@maryfduffy) October 14, 2017

otm

A lot of Kemper's dialogue is taken straight from this interview (or appears to be, assuming he didn't repeat himself a lot).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFfc151Zkg4

I pay so little attention to serial killer stuff that I was under the misapprehension that Kemper was a fictional killer, based on Ed Gein or a composite of other real killers or something. Holy shit, he was was for real.

Kemper is responsible for this quote (misattributed to Ed Gein in American Psycho)

“What do you think, now, when you see a pretty girl walking down the street? One side of me says, ‘Wow, what an attractive chick. I’d like to talk to her, date her.'The other side of me says, “I wonder how her head would look on a stick?’”

The two male leads (and maybe others) of the series seem to be a fictionalized split of FBI agent John Douglas's professional experience into multiple characters with personal details created to flesh out the cast. The actual interviews and most case details are pretty true to life.

it is p amazing who the alarm systems dude with the moustache was. promises an interesting storyline.

― Bein' Sean Bean (LocalGarda), Monday, October 16, 2017 12:58 PM (seven hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

not one with a conclusion anytime soon though...

― Number None, Monday, October 16, 2017 1:03 PM (seven hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the manner in which they deploy this character, using him to open the show, is simple but truly stellar.

this hits the same right notes as Zodiac in that i think the most chilling thing about these types of crimes is the unknown, both in terms of who did and the fact they they're still in the wind and could be anywhere, but even after capture, after the fact, just trying to pin down an explicable reason as to why someone would do such a thing.

enjoying the fact that every time they cut to a Quantico establishing shot of some kind, there's automatic gunfire. foreshadowing the future of violence in america vs what occurs in the '70s and '80s? just a neat device?? idk, i like it.

I used to often work with lots of ADT employees on commercial installations, and still have ADT cups and pens in the house from my old days in the electrical industry. Doing fault-finding on massive alarm systems is enough to drive anyone to murder tbh! I'm only up to ep 3, but the pedantic + slightly off ADT guy cuts a really sinister figure alright.

Yeah Kemper is all too real and there are hours upon hours, possibly days/months of interview audio out there.

Brudos the shoe guy was a piece of work irl - maintained his innocence right to the end, just clogged the system with endless appeals & bullshit & never admitted to a single thing.

Speck was perfectly cast - from everything i’ve read, in person he was like a walking middle finger

man I can’t get into this beyond the blurry shape of details a tv show suggests because I’m going to start admiring the shape of coworkers’ skulls during meetings or something

?

the real life details of the interviews and actions of the actual killers

tbh the info they give in the show is more than enough to get a picture of them, i didnt mean to intimate that we are missing out on anything really
- i was just adding my 2 cents bc someone upthread was surprised that Kemper was real

i realize now i should have led with my actual opinion that they are all gasbag asshole garbageppl anyway

*no one* needs to listen to Kemper talk about himself unless you’re like a BAU rookie & your job requires it & even then, ugh

no I understand the desire to get into this stuff, it’s just not for me!
btw you have an interestingly shaped head

you can watch mindhunter or you can play golf, Bill

my interest in this kind of stuff has its origins in my memories of a double murder in my hometown and the disappearance of the killer for a couple years after (which I referred to in the Stephen king thread iirc), and also a couple towns over the much more spooky slaying of seven Brown's Chicken employees in the dead of night, a crime that remained unsolved for almost a decade and totally haunted the area.

jeez yeah that would do it for sure

i think mine started because I read Helter Skelter, Small Sacrifices & Silence of the Lambs in the same year when I was 13 or 14

i'm five episodes in now - i think this show is really impressive. it's one of the most script-driven shows i've seen in this new era of tv. it doesn't hit say glengarry glenross levels but a couple of scenes reminded me of that, which is a testament to the quality of the dialogue. feel like the show has some pretty strong thematic dissection of men and male violence as well.

i have seen a critic state that the show is "playing off" Groff's queerness.

I will say Holt McCallany as Fred Ward is A+

― Larry Elleison (rogermexico.)

White Laurence Fishburne imo.

i suddenly realized the main dude sometimes looks like dennis from it's always sunny in philadelphia (glenn howerton) and now i can't stop seeing it

oh thank god i'm not the only one

there was a scene where I had that exact same observation and it haunted me for a while

oh shit

"it's one of the most script-driven shows i've seen in this new era of tv"

And it's also the most riveting show for donkey's years. I really thought it would be horrid because of my aversion to the subject matter + Finch etc but I've steamed through it and up to ep 8 now.

http://www.premiere.fr/sites/default/files/styles/premiere_article/public/thumbnails/image/macron.jpg

forgot how much i love exile's "i wanna kiss you all over"

the music cues are very on the nose, so much so that when Debbie paused their foreplay, left the room to change, and "Two Out of Three Ain't Bad" came on, I thought she was going to return with a second person. I don't mind it though, I mean the tunes are good.

i mean they used "psycho killer" so

when "I Don't Like Mondays" came on right after "Psycho Killer" I was like 'wait, have I not been paying attention and all the songs on the soundtrack are about murderers in some way?'

but then I remembered they played "Fly Like An Eagle" over a travelling montage and I realised they were even dumber than that

i really liked that montage though

the songs aren't great and some the acting is questionable but it's still great v compelling

I like pretty much all the acting, the cops and killers have all been cast well. I liked the small town cop from PA, I was kind of worried they'd paint him as being a dumb rube who fucked up and they'd dismiss him narratively in that usual tedious manner they do to make the leads in a show look smarter. But his small role was complicated and interesting, his instincts kinda broke open the case.

Hannah Gross really reminds me of Maggie Siff and reminds me a bit of Ruth Wilson, maybe.

which acting do you think is bad? (ive only seen 4 eps so far)

I have never been so terrified of a can of tuna

yeah me to that was D:

i loved that whole PA sidestory, the actor playing the cop did a great job

i like mccallany a lot - i think the scene where he's saying goodbye to his son was tremendous. jonathan groff and anna torv have had some false moments imo. some of hannah gross + groff's conversations in particular have been pretty meh and in general that relationship feels pretty auxiliary to the entire project.

also ppl don't like the lack of period detail but again this doesn't bother me the core pleasure is talking about serial killer psychology

They get a lot of mileage on the period detail from the cars and from McCallany being able to smoke literally everywhere.

that'll do for me. The Deuce has very expensive wardrobes, hairstyles and sets etc . And it is shit.

I have never been so terrified of a can of tuna

What was the point of that whole cat-feeding set of scenes? I havent seen the last ep yet so does this turn into something? (ie dead cat?)

It turns into a bit of foreboding symbolism

i like mccallany a lot - i think the scene where he's saying goodbye to his son was tremendous. jonathan groff and anna torv have had some false moments imo. some of hannah gross + groff's conversations in particular have been pretty meh and in general that relationship feels pretty auxiliary to the entire project.

― Mordy, Tuesday, October 17, 2017 2:39 PM (forty-five minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

guess i dont disagree with the relationship comment but cant really say til ive finished. i caught Torvs accent a few times but not too bad. mccallany is the best part of the show for me so far.

Ah, I thought it might. xpo

I am not done, but I am expecting this season to end with holden and bill interviewing the can of tuna

and agreed that mccallany is the best, but I'm afraid to check his imdb because I suspect he's been a twilight werewolf or something

https://typeset-beta.imgix.net/uploads/image/2017/10/13/c405ecf7-191f-48f1-9c1d-cd3776cea081-177_mindhunter_107_unit_02157r3.jpeg?w=740&h=444&fit=crop&crop=faces&auto=format&q=70
http://cimg.tvgcdn.net/i/2015/06/30/c8c7e44e-d7ec-4715-b6e1-b898464bc8e2/vegetables.gif

loooool

lol that works too well

I was gonna say, what else has McCallany been in? I instantly recognized him as the “his name is Robert Paulson” guy from Fight Club but he has the familiarity of a character actor you see all the time.

he was also in Three Kings in a good, but small role. He had a key role in the haunted submarine movie Below, if you ever want a decent spookfest and to see his butt.

He was on CSI: Miami in an occasional role for several seasons, and he was super overqualified for that show. He was in Blackhat, the Michael Mann movie. He's been in a ton of stuff. It sounds like he had an interesting upbringing as well, and sounds like a pretty sharp dude IRL.

he was also in Fincher's Alien movie

enjoying the fact that every time they cut to a Quantico establishing shot of some kind, there's automatic gunfire. foreshadowing the future of violence in america vs what occurs in the '70s and '80s? just a neat device?? idk, i like it.

Loved this ^

I was also terrified of the tuna

The bit right at the end where Kemper's big feet flop down on the floor as he gets out of bed. Flop plop. Fuck.

Who's the scary alarm electrician supposed to be?

I came to this from American Horror Story which is a pleasant jump

btk

The music was eh overall but the very last cue was amazing.

Also when can we talk spoilers?

I'm still not finished! but I can avoid the thred...

again I recommend McCallany fans seek out FX's boxing drama Lights Out, though it might be tough to track down these days

Oh shit that’s where I know him from that was great!

otm i dug that too

final scene made me jump like nobodys business GAH

it was a jump and then giggle bit

thought they might interview Jake Blues in Episode 9

lol i started singing She Caught the Katy when they rolled up to Joliet
BUH-NAAAAAAAAA

I accidentally got off the interstate a couple exits early on the way to a destination in the outer Chicago area a couple months ago and ended up driving through that part of Joliet. Looked a little familiar for a minute, and then it dawned on me.

finished this last night. it ended really well and i think they've def got enough material for another season so i'm anticipating that. kinda glad i'm done with the show for a bit tho since watching it was giving me all kinds of anxiety and at least one restless night. some spoiler material below:

the thing i liked most about it was how well they balanced the line between deviant and normal behavior. this isn't a new trope to serial killer fiction -- the subtext of lots of Hannibal was "is Will a serial killer hunter or just a psychopath himself" and they replicate a lot of that with holden. but there's other really interesting stuff they look at too. the principal is probably the principle ambiguity - when is behavior creepy/weird but not psychopathic? even at the end i wasn't sure if holden had done the right thing. his behavior was legitimately concerning and yet his wife was right that he hadn't done anything violent or abusive. it wasn't right that he was ignoring parent's requests but was that wrong enough to ruin his life? maybe. there's a lot of stuff like that throughout the show - esp thinking of stuff like the shoe fetish and transgenderism which the show rightly points out - despite it being associated with particular serial killer cases - are also practiced by ppl who are not murderous. is it right to use these kinds of things as descriptors of sk behavior when they're also non-sk behavior? how do you even parse out what makes something perverse / deviant vs just an unusual fetish or personal identification etc?

the best thing in the show was the conversations with the serial killers and the analyses of the interviews afterwards. i'm guessing holden's /illness/ at the end is just a combination of the sublimated stress from over the season that he hasn't been addressing and the extreme stress over the encounter w/ kemper? his breakup w/ debbie was predictable. i was surprised they never really addressed her sidled up to her research partner during that lab experiment. and holden never tells debbie about why her lingerie/high heels get-up turned him off. presumably that was intentional - if you don't talk about your problems they fester and ruin relationships and ruin your health, etc.

the interrogation in the final episode was amazing. extremely intense and unsettling. the moment when he revealed the rock to the rapist was bone chilling.

I thought the interrogation went well enough, but Holden's cultivation of this hardman FBI agent sucks! He started crossing lines in order to get better interviews with serial killers, now he's just crossing lines because... that's what a badass cop does? The whole "is the tape recorder rolling or not" bit, which he got called out for, is just his reaction to getting busted for saying misogynistic shit on tape. He did a good job of pulling out the details, but the showmanship part was mostly bullshit.

I think the breakdown is the obvious result of all this play-acting. The cracks were showing -- getting unnerved by Debbie's shoes, turning the school principal thing into a FBI matter when he has no real case. Trying to adopt the swagger of a serial killer so he can relate to them when the act is paper thin, it's all really obvious when he goes back to Kemper, because that was his mentor!

I didn't really get the point of the school principal thing - like it was sort of interesting but it felt vague as a subplot. It felt ambiguous in the sense of the writers not knowing what the point of it was either.

It kind of echoed the beginning of the series where Holden's enthusiastic to help local cops but he has no idea how to deploy his skills and ends up offending them. He's got a whole new set of skills, and now he's doing actual damage with his petty meddling.

how long until he brings in the murder weapon and his little "I'm like you" shtick and ends up soliciting a false confession

Is it wrong that I was disappointed in the scene where Anna Torv goes back to Boston, and the writers couldn't just let the clear dialogue and acting convey the fact that she's a lesbian, they had to put a kiss in as well? It felt like the show having its cake and eating it as well -- heaven knows television needs more healthy LGBT relationships and normalized displays of affection, but it also seemed sort of "gotta get that girl/girl kiss on screen."

i assumed they were building towards her character hooking up with holden, regardless of the lesbian scene.

I thought it was pleasantly unclear what the dynamic was going to be

now she's definitely work mom

yeah it's veered away from that i suppose.

the whole can of tuna thing was p weird. and the final scene too.

I thought it was incredibly relatable?

Trying to stealth your way down to the laundry room without pants to put a load in the washer, only to immediately walk back there, forgetting your lack of pants, after hearing a cat. Returning for a few nights, taking your glass of wine to sip on and hopefully spot this mystery cat. Then, forebodingly, the tuna remains uneaten one night. Probably the cat just left the neighborhood, but you study serial killers all day, so....

yeah i get you, i suppose it was just unusually subtle for a tv serial. nothing wrong with that but maybe a slight imbalance to have suggestive tension from an absent cat alongside all these tense interviews with violent rapists.

it's more of the innocuous details of everyday life taking on a new dimension because the work is really getting into their heads!

Bill eventually breaking down to his wife was probably the most heart-wrenching aspect of it

funniest version of it was Holden looking at Debbie's feet and being unable to not think of a guy fucking a shoe

the principal is probably the principle ambiguity - when is behavior creepy/weird but not psychopathic? even at the end i wasn't sure if holden had done the right thing.

The point of this subplot was abundantly clear but it's funny because also, in 2017, "I'm gonna tickle your children's feet and you can't stop me" is 100% a fireable offense and good riddance!

what do you think the point was? to me it's establishing that weird does not mean serial killer. but yeah, a hand on a kids's shoulder could prob = fired today.

yeah the point = ambiguity, changing mores.

i think holden was totally right to talk like a serial killer while interviewing / interrogating the serial killers. it's kinda hard to believe that the FBI would want an agent to refrain from speaking vulgarly/misogynistically for the sake of propriety. surely the more important thing is getting the information / getting justice for the victims?

it still felt kind of weird to me - like i didn't know how i was supposed to feel. i dunno if ambiguity is a good point, just my opinion tho.

xpost

Changing more particularly in the sense that the advent of public consciousness about these kinds of criminals certainly changed what we think of as normal or acceptable behavior. Who hitch hikes anymore? Adult men choosing to be around children are often automatically suspect, etc. Which is why this topic is actually a lot broader than just wallowing in serial killer lore, it's about cultural changes that are pretty broad and long lasting.

x-post

it's kinda hard to believe that the FBI would want an agent to refrain from speaking vulgarly/misogynistically for the sake of propriety. surely the more important thing is getting the information / getting justice for the victims?

Wouldn't surprise me if this hasn't changed as well!

also the principal was about holden trying to take the material they're developing it and applying it to real life. a lot of the back half of the season is about the consequences of the work - see also torv being upset about them trying the one guy w/ the death penalty. they talk a lot about how the end point of this research may be stopping these crimes before they happen next time (not just catching the suspect after the crime) but that kind of approach would necessitate what holden did with the principal - trying to read innocent ppl's behavior to see how it's likely to develop. the question of whether that's an appropriate job for the FBI is an important one. even if the principal should have been fired (he probably should have) maybe holden shouldn't have gotten involved.

it just felt a bit incomplete to me for whatever reason. just nitpicking really tho, i thought this show was excellent.

It's really a pretty fascinating instance of something that had presumably been going on all the while (I always thought this was where folk tales about witches eating children, or vampires, came from) then being named, identified, and studied and in that way leading to massive cultural changes in how people relate to each other--and of course the attendant risk that this new "object" (the serial killer) can now be mistakenly seen even where it is isn't. There's something Foucaultian about the topic (if not the show, really).

The shift in Holden felt v believable to me but I was already a fam of Douglas. The lore is that his ego created a schism with his partners & they differed over methodology

Reading off the questionaire might get you the baseline answers but Holden knows that the subjects are probably just going to tell them what they want to hear & that to him defeats the point of talking to them. To him this is an opportunity...but it’s also a stage. They’re performing the role of subjugated criminal, and he KNOWS it’s a performance. So why not meet their performance with one of his own devising to disarm them & get them to a point where they are no longer in control of their mask

He wants to get into their heads & see who these men were when they were killing, ie who they truly are because that never really goes away - (this is a key element in sexually violent homicides, idk if they address it in the show but it’s similar to pedophilia in that once you act on the fantasy the only thing that will sate the need is to keep doing it).

Holden wants to see who they were to their victims, without the mask of performance. But it is driven from curiosity at first - he does not know that what’s there isn’t something you can see without being changed by it.
The questionaire is the safety glass.
He does not realize that until he’s done away with it completely.
His position of authority in the interview feeds his ego & he wants to be the one to remove the mask. But in doing so he’s changing the nature of the interview AND changing himself.

I think I relate hard to Holden's curiosity, and w/ his impatience w/ ppl who are reticent and find some of that curiosity prurient. I asked Michelle McNamara (RIP) in a Reddit AMA once if she thought that there was a prurient or titillation aspect to interest in True Crime and she gave an answer I really liked:

I absolutely think about this and struggle with this. But I think it's wrong to conflate interest in crime with the creepiness of the criminal. Crime stories shed light on so many aspects of our culture --- what victims get priority, how our criminal justice system works, what certain crimes say about us as a society. They're important questions, and just because lurid shows like Wives with Knives exist doesn't mean people talking and discussing real-life crime stories in a thoughtful, meaningful way can be lumped in with the prurient rubber-neckers. I also always go back to what one detective told me when I asked him about working on GSK: "I love puzzles." He had no shame or regret when he said that. It's been helpful for me to think about it that way.

I’ve talked abt this in the true crime thread but there is also an element of naming your fear, esp given the prevalence of women interested in true crime

we (women) account for a large portion of the victims of these crimes. true crime for me is being afraid of the monster under the bed but leaning down with a flashlight & looking underneath anyway.
because i would rather know what i should be afraid of

for me a little bit is fear but i think it's mostly a part of a general interest in extreme human behavior. looking at stuff like this (as well as other extreme crimes, affiliation with radical groups/ideologies, other sorts of extreme psychological afflictions) brings up important questions for me about what normal people are capable of (and what is required to be capable of things beyond reasonable ken), how radical fringes of society reflect inner pathologies of that society, etc. i really like this show bc i think it's also v interested in these questions.

the Tickled documentary pairs well with this show

my wife fears true crime stuff to a degree, i think she finds home invasion stuff nightmarish, for example she doesn't even want to hear about BTK. She grew up in the San Fernando Valley during the time of the Night Stalker murders and it was a pretty formative experience. she had a ground floor bedroom window that she always kept shut, and it was a bit further out from the site of his killings but he was still stalking around, and she would have sleepless nights and get awakened by every little rustle outside her window.

i guess i didn't even mention when talking about formative crimes in my upbringing about how an acquaintance of my mom's was convicted and sentenced to die for the double murder of his parents. he claimed it was a motorcycle gang. and, well, he wasn't lying! they overturned his conviction years later. this gang stormed in and killed his parents and framed him. he was stoned on the couch and didn't remember a thing.

that's crazy

this is the case

i maybe misremembered the detail about him being there but i thought that was part of it.

do you mean that he didn't remember any details? because he remembered that a motorcycle gang murdered his parents.

Realizing it's a gay actor playing a straight FBI agent puts an interesting lens on the whole thing when you view the show as a whole. I don't think the character necessarily is masking something about his sexuality, but the two plot threads, where we're judging what signs could be indicative of someone having tendencies toward being a serial killer, while perpetually explaining what is within the bounds of normal sexual and social behavior (homosexuality, fetishes, crossdressing, transgender people) really sets up the groundwork for that sea change in social attitudes that backfired in a handful of ways.

The tickling principal plot thread goes overboard in the interest of adhering to shifting social norms -- he should have quit what he was doing because it was inappropriate, but I don't think it was worth him losing his job and being shamed by the community. There's a hint of the overzealousness that led to the satanic abuse panic of the 80s.

Meanwhile, Holden is perpetually teased about how he has a background of moving around, he doesn't have a very deep relationship history ("I've dated some women but none of the relationships lasted very long") and no one legitimately thinks he's a serial killer but he has these seeds of self-doubt. The most jarring moments, where he sees the shoes on his girlfriend and is completely wrenched from the moment, and the end when Kemper hugs him... just great moments poking holes in the self-confidence he's acting out.

And yeah, I think building a rapport with suspects is useful, but he's just crossing the line wherever he feels it's useful without any basic plan. We also have that juxtaposition with the agents he's training in hostage negotiation who genuinely wonder why they're supposed to learn these deescalation tactics when it'd be safer to just shoot people!

McHenry County State's Atty. Gary Pack, whose office convicted Gary Gauger in 1993, could not be reached for comment. Even after the federal indictment and Schneider's confession, Pack said he was keeping Gauger's case open and contemplating a retrial. During the trial, Pack claimed Gauger confessed to the crimes after 21 hours of questioning.

also holy shit at nomar's story

do you mean that he didn't remember any details? because he remembered that a motorcycle gang murdered his parents.

― you are juror number 144 and we will excuse you (Sufjan Grafton), Friday, October 20, 2017 9:52 PM (two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i can't find specifics right now, i thought for some reason he had claimed it at the time but maybe he just later claimed someone else did it and didn't know who. it was a really odd story -- ultimately a couple he was friends with helped defend him, and then the wife left her husband for him.

I went to school with and grew up with the Republic of Ireland's most prolific serial killer, and knew him from the age of 6 as "Nashy". He fled to Ireland in the 90's because he had pissed off the wrong people. He is also a suspect in an unsolved UK murder, as well as killing 4 people in Ireland. I didn't think of him once when I was watching this!

In fact, Google reveals Kieran Patrick Kelly was much worse than him. This Nashy being "Republic of Ireland's most prolific serial killer" is just a local misconception, probably.

you should give your name as "Mindhunter" at Starbucks, regardless

first couple of episodes down and this feels weirdly like masters of sex

both are ongoing narratives about people coming up with new fields of research with case studies, so that kind of follows!

I thought the tuna bit was clever - illustrated a woman's consciousness of being vulnerable (stealth pantless), whilst keeping Torv hard, cool and collected. Kinda like the bit at the end of Alien. The cat meowing was a great choice - cats are mimicking human babies when they do that, also was it someone mimicking a cat to get her attention, small window to dark outside, etc, etc.

the best thing in the show was the conversations with the serial killers and the analyses of the interviews afterwards.

Especially Speck, I thought, because a) it illustrated the unplanned killing type and b) sort of threw a number on the idea of the serial killer as almost a cool super-villain, running rings around everyone (Kemper). Like Speck is just as they say 'a walking middle finger' who seems to live in a haze of anger and violence and so ends up being barely aware of just how far he's gone.

i'm guessing holden's /illness/ at the end is just a combination of the sublimated stress from over the season that he hasn't been addressing and the extreme stress over the encounter w/ kemper? his breakup w/ debbie was predictable. i was surprised they never really addressed her sidled up to her research partner during that lab experiment. and holden never tells debbie about why her lingerie/high heels get-up turned him off. presumably that was intentional - if you don't talk about your problems they fester and ruin relationships and ruin your health, etc.

Loved this bit too

the interrogation in the final episode was amazing. extremely intense and unsettling. the moment when he revealed the rock to the rapist was bone chilling.

Yeah when the long-haired guy starts breaking down

This show his half really good Zodiac stuff and half kinda lame Law & Order SVU stuff and I’m conflicted.

i dont understand where the conflict is :D

Only part I wasnt into, as someone else said, was the whole Holden/Debbie relationship subplot. It felt a little gratuitous, though I suppose there was meant to be the conflict of "what is deviancy, really?" thread of things.

yeah i agree

Also I'm p damn sure they did not have self-stay-up stockings in the 70s.

All these anachronistic music cues and other things weren't really bothering me, but a serial killer in the 70s saying "yada, yada, yada" is a step too far.

finished this yesterday, really enjoyed it - they did a fantastic job of finding great but mostly unfamilar actors for the supporting roles. the guy playing ed kemper was fantastic, such a potent combination of naiveté, manipulation and menace

great to see anna torv again after losing track of her after fringe - she's kind of a unique screen presence. shame she's probably not going to get a chance to use her astonishing leonard nimoy impersonation this time around tho :(

i've obviously been listening to too much last podcast on the left because i ended up saying to my wife 'oh hey i think that's btk' as soon as he showed up and then annoying her with facts about ed kemper as i remembered them during episodes

luv2kempersplain i guess

did anyone mention the Cynics gig poster in the apartment kitchen yet? totally an 80's band. waiting to read thread when i've seen every episode...

catching the 21st century speech is actually kinda fun. it's like where's waldo. "fuckedupness"...

i still have a little of the last episode left. i find this show really frustrating. there's so much about it that's excellent - the look, the sound design, almost all of the acting - but the acting and characterization of holden is super annoying. it's hard to watch a character who just consistently makes the wrong decisions and is overconfident in his abilities and lack of knowledge. at the beginning of the series he feels like an alien who's gradually learning about human beings and their emotions, and then suddenly he's a grizzled jaded fbi agent. some of this might have been intentional but it did not work for me. but i'm still watching the whole thing bc the interview scenes are great and the guy who plays bill is amazing and it's nice seeing all these beat-up looking rust belt cities on tv.

does he consistently make the wrong decisions? he's basically responsible for the program getting off the ground, he frequently cracks open the interview subjects, his profiling instincts on active cases appear to be excellent...

he's play-acting imo, and I keep hammering on it, but I think the facade cracks by the end

hammering on the point, that is, not a fictional character's facade :)

he has some skills but he also seems to take credit, at least in his mind, for stuff that bill does. like in the last episode he's talking about how his gross sex talk helped catch the rapist/murderer, and bill points out rightly that it was him noticing the cut tree limbs that led to the guy being brought in in the first place. they wouldn't have caught the brother/sister/brother-in-law team unless the cop had identified the sister's baby as a weak point and used it to get her to confess. etc. etc. he credits everything to their very basic analysis knowledge when basic police work is still getting most of the work done. ugh. he's annoying.

holden is good at interviewing but he would never actually catch any bad guys on his own. also his interview techniques are built on leading and coercing suspects who they go in assuming are guilty, as debbie points out. he doesn't have any actual investigative skills.

you're right that noticing the cut trees found the rapist but if you remember he aced the polygraph and was going to go free unless they convinced him to confess. staging the interrogation and some of the gross talk was 100% essential to actually getting a confession out of the guy. it's not /just/ the profiling work - there's real detective work as well. but these local police stations don't really need the FBI to teach them how to follow basic leads. they need them for the experimental profiling stuff. and imo it has been essential.

and like the brother/sister/brother-in-law team the local cops weren't investigating them at all bc they found the crying sincere and felt bad for the fiancee. it wasn't until the fbi came in and really followed their hunch (that the crying was bogus) that they were really able to drill into the case.

holden just sucks

he's trying too hard, working a little bit above his skill level

he never takes off the fbi man pants, even when he's off the job. that's how hard he's trying.

booo

I love stuff like this

https://t.co/MU7U33DK05

— Rob Savage (@DirRobSavage) October 24, 2017

^ Breakdown reel showcasing David Fincher's invisible visual effects in the Netflix Original Series Mindhunter.

huh, that's great - i did find myself wondering where they'd found so many pristine vintage tvs!

cats are mimicking human babies when they do that

my favorite Groff-ism

I CAN SEE THAT YOU’RE NAKED

I CAN SEE THAT YOU’RE .. cold

i enjoy his comedic timing

i keep thinking about the comment that one of the killers makes that the urge to kill is like the urge to sneeze - creepy as fuck and distressingly relatable

cats mimick their own kitten vocalizations for life if they're raised by people, but afaik it has nothing to do with human babies. feral cats tend to not vocalize a lot.

cats mimick their own kitten vocalizations for life if they're raised by people, but afaik it has nothing to do with human babies. feral cats tend to not vocalize a lot.

― mh, Wednesday, October 25, 2017

no argument with that

we finally knocked out S1 so I'm ready for this thread

item #1: cmd-F "kristoff" 0 results; come on, nerds

<3 kristoff

http://www.vulture.com/2017/11/mindhunters-deft-commentary-on-toxic-masculinity.html

^^^ dind ding

man that is A+

Watching this again. The writing is fantastic, but the direction is even better.

I love the first meeting between Holden and Debbie meet in the bar, when both characters realize the other is smarter than they assumed. It gets very dense, moving quickly to a discussion of Durkheim's theory of labeling.

Sounds pretentious, right? But rather than submitting us to this directly, Fincher moves the conversation into a crowded bar, creating an excuse to use subtitles. This permits viewers to *read* the concepts and reflect on them, rather than *hear* them from actors and dismiss them on instinct.

I call that smart, functional directing.

i found the technical aspects of this show more enjoyable than the overall experience. i mean, i didn't know we'd have to wait til next year for the BTK thing to go anywhere. this is the first show i've watched in its entirety in a year and kinda wish i'd chosen something else, but i'm def a sucker for this thing.

it will be a true crime if Jack Erdie doesn't win something for the Speck portrayal. just mesmerising.

i think if anyone wins anything it'll be Cameron Britton, and well-deserved too. but you're right about Jack Erdie.

probably because this is a fact-based show, they have a group of killers who are all very different in demeanor and reasoning and accessibility and levels of self-control, while managing to lay out a foundation of some vague common ground. it's refreshing to see an intelligent presentation of these types of people, i mean it goes without saying that the godlike omnipotent serial killer with a plan is such a tiresome cliche. even when dealing w/historical fact i think it would be easy to fall into the "i'm most dangerous when i'm caged" Hannibal Lecter BS but it never does except when it toys with it a bit at the end, when Holden has his panic attack while meeting Kemper.

i guess the best comparison to make with this show really is Zodiac, since so much of it revolves around interviews that are remarkably reminiscent of the Arthur Leigh Allen interview scene.

are there funko pops for this yet? that's all i really want to know.

lol

yeah it def does a better job than most of these types of shows of not fetishizing the killers in that “ooh theyre such geniuses” way
like no actually when you scratch the surface they’re violent dudes who are fucked up & pathetic

i like the way it shows the origin of the language surrounding serial killers too, like ppl i think may take it for granted that it’s always been codified in this way when it’s actually only come about in the last few decades

I guess we're at the beginning of the funkopopalyse right now and I feel that it's a bad sign for the consumer market

after watching this i watched a couple of serial killer interviews on youtube and it's weird how mundane they are. the banality of evil and all that. was surprised by how lucid and articulate ted bundy was though. he knew exactly why he had done what he did. it was like listening to a psychiatrist talk about someone else.

that's the part that's most chilling to me. some people just become emotionally numb but carry this weight after they've killed someone or done something grave, but the interviews they dramatized (and some of the source material) have these matter of fact recitations as if they're talking about going to the store because they ran out of milk

But remember that that is performative. That’s not their “true self”. They both just wear a series of masks. Bundy & Kemper are keenly aware of how they should speak about these acts & know that subverting that not only makes ppl react, but it gives them more attention

If they perform well enough at being “like us”, they’ll go over bcz it weirds people out and intrigues them. And they super, duper did.

i garbled that last part but u get the drift

it’s more chilling when you realize how ~studied~ their act of being lucid & articulate really is

it was a weird feeling watching the kemper interview and getting legit emotional at the part his mom says "i suppose you'll want to talk all night?"

aaaaaand then i remembered the um, neck thing

is the "true self" any more caring or even more lizardlike

or just a pure id ragemonster

i watched some of the real kemper on youtube. that weird feeling that they were just really pretty boring people except for the whole killing thing...

like, they do kinda remind me of people who come in the store and go on and on about boring stuff until i feel like i'm going to fall over. men who like to talk and hypnotize you with stories of that amplifier they owned in the 70's. sometimes i wish they would just kill me...

I both hate myself for wondering and it's gross even being interested in it beyond the analytical thought of what makes people tick! I'm not an expert or hunting killers, so there's no practical reason for me to know, so it's all gawking (at the expense of victims) and intrigue about murder. The cops who are like "I don't care how they tick, I want to know how to stop them" are very relatable

on the other hand I love the Hannibal tv series and revel in his horribleness

so to sum it up, I'm sure I'll look good wearing your skins, ttyl

tbh i dont think there is a true self... it’s just layers of masks

yeah i stand on both sides of the fence too even though i sound ghoulishly invested

i would much rather these violent sexual predators not take up space in jail when there is zero chance of rehabiliatuon of any kind & at a certain point “study” just serves their ego

but i am also not a big fan of capital punishment so

idk

i kinda stan for putting them all on a trash island together in the middle of the ocean & let them lord of the flies it up with no outside attention until they all die/murder each other/eat each other etc

I think they're among the few people that actually belong imprisoned for life, this is one of the few reasons we would ever actually need prisons

yeah maybe

idk

still

trash island is v appealing

https://33.media.tumblr.com/bc3e1b7fd71a708e2b307812afc4d66e/tumblr_nbcw4gGtvf1rl3565o9_250.gif

lolol

the second meeting w/Kemper, he does this thing that i just noticed but is very quietly chilling.

it's a throwaway/not throwaway shot. they're talking and he stands up and walks over to demonstrate something regarding his thoughts on, uh, neck muscles, and after Kemper does it he walks back to his side of the table and as he's sitting, shoots a quick glance over at the guard who's hanging out in the next room, and even though he's in the background and out of focus you can see the guard is turned with his back to them. it's just a quick hit of Kemper pushing the envelope a bit and getting his kicks in.

Loving all the bridges

Why does the actor playing Holden have to be so naive and childlike? Both at work and in his relationship.

He’s like a deer in headlights

Maybe that's just what he's like irl

he is!

jonathan groff is a beautiful angel so thats p much how he is 24/7

He needs a true ILX pua to coach him

What’s a pua?

Pick up artist? his character on Looking could have used one

obvious point but i think they're definitely toying w/the idea that Holden has a disconnect from most people but finds a connection w/some of these killers. which is why i loved Anna Torv's quick reaction shot glances at him in their first meeting, she was kind of figuring him out a bit from the start. even their first first meeting: "Cold season."

I just wanted to say I really like Jonathan Groff. His character on Looking is the reason why. And it's because of him that I've started watching Mindhunter

is he *ever* shown without a suit? I remember him taking off shirt once (when he couldn't have sex) but that's it. odd conceit

I liked this! but yeah the Debbie character was a bit bizarre, just someone for him to talk at and who would ask the 'right' questions to enlighten the audience

I didn't know anything about this going in nor the source material so it mainly made sense in the last couple of episodes where they did the whole 'we need some kind of terminology to describe these people who do a series of murders'. But yes I am glad it wasn't too gorey and the small-town cops weren't dumb. I'm watching Stranger Things at the same time and occasionally mixing up threads.

My burning question after (nearly) finishing this show: all that cigarette smoke - was it cgi?

What’s with Wendy and the cat?

tbh idk either. someone itt suggested it was metaphor i think

P sure the cat is a serial mousehunter

Wendy as surrogate mother merely leaves some food and retreats up the stairs, ignoring plaintive meows

Tench is the man.

Lots of great little asides in this. Episode 4 -- noticing how well Tench initially predicts the ultimate outcome and how far afield Holden is. Also when Rissell crushes the can suddenly after finishing it and asks, "why do we do that when we're done?" I forget Holden's response but I liked Rissell's "Maybe..." reply to it.

Also this show made me recognize the narcissistic and borderline (imo) B.B. low-level socially (as opposed to murderous) psychopathic behavior of a couple we know and it put the fear into me. Not going to talk about it here but if there's ever a relevant thread maybe I would.

Psychopaths (Adult and Otherwise) ??

Tench is the anchor, the fulcrum

Have to say, ep 8 is really weak with the tickling bs as is 9 with needless relationship drama. Netflix : just make the season 8 eps instead of 10 if you’ve run out of pertinent plot points.

Series needs more of tench on the links, in bunkers as a metaphor

Exposition is clumsy and tiresome but it hits nice beats and looks, sounds and feels so damn good

There was at least one shot of Tench on the course, need more info, handicap etc.

There was something really off about all the drama surrounding the oversight committee and who-surrendered-the-tape. It's school marmy bureaucratic crap which any sensible person would only rtde at, instead the whole team takes it so seriously!

thanks Mordy! might be posting on that soon...

i think the tickling bs is kind of interesting in how it's an inappropriate situation but at the same time a potentially inappropriate use of this new pathology, a bit of an overreach, and involves what are hinted at to be internal school staff politics. it's not that the principal is correct but it's that the FBI is a bit of a blunt instrument, and Holden is power-tripping a bit maybe.

the relationship stuff doesn't bother me...i don't know what'll happen next season but maybe that's the last we see of Debbie?

I don’t think Holden is power tripping as much as he’s convinced he’s unlocked something that will save all these people, including tickling victims. It’s a different kind of arrogance.

I wish there was more internal FBI politicking but of course I would. I did enjoy that we got basically one scene on the uselessness of Boston ivory tower types before the writers got bored and just had Wendy move to DC.

Yeah relationship trouble for the sake of relationship trouble just seems predicable.

Ten Years Gone? wtf

never heard LZ in a TV show and I hope I never will again

Yeah relationship trouble for the sake of relationship trouble just seems predicable.

― calstars, Saturday, 25 November 2017 20:16 (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This holds true irl for about 90% of attempted relationships afaict

The LZ track is "In the Light"

I wish there was more internal FBI politicking but of course I would.

Try "Manhunt: Unabomber."

yeaahhhh i mean you’re not wrong, but it’s also pretty corny.

It is, but that show does a great job of communicating what you need hardass bureaucrats for (tactics, getting things done) and what their limitations are (strategy, getting the right things done). Mindhunter is the better show in every other respect.

Surprised veggrrl has not commented on the fact that the writer of the show, who grew up in Australia (Adelaide), named his main character 'Holden Ford'.

oh i made note of this on FB to my aussie friends, it seriously took me out of the first episode

it’s like naming your kid Coke Pepsi
PICK A SIDE

maybe the writer really likes Hitchhiker’s Guide

https://nypdecider.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/mindhunter-s1-ep3-02.gif?w=618&h=278

I keep forgetting to ask this! Does Hannah Gross (who plays Holden's gf Debbie) remind anyone of another actor? She does, to me, so very much! Is it Darlene from Roseanne (Sarah Gilbert)? Something in the mannerisms or facial expression or vocal tics or accent idk?

not sure, but I only recently found out she's the daughter of paul gross and martha burns

She reminds me of Maggie Siff (from mad men and sons of anarchy) and Julianna Margulies.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1111968/?ref_=tt_cl_t1 was who she reminded me of, although it took me a while to place it

that is, Alexa Davalos who plays a lead role on amazon's Man in the High Castle show

Yep

she kinda reminds me of daria

Spotted Tench dude as a two-bit villain foiled by Batman in Justice League.

She reminds me of Debra in Dexter but that might be the hair and the name

yeah she def reminds me of Julia in Man in High Castle

I kept thinking “is that the same... wait, no. maybe?”

Love this show

Posts at the top of the thread about Debbie really wide of the mark (not sure if someone addressed this yet as I’m catching up on the thread but the connection between attitudes toward women of serial killers and non killlers is well illustrated ... and surely fincher, the director of “gone girl,” would be aware of the “cool girl” archetype? Lol)

Have to say, ep 8 is really weak with the tickling bs as is 9 with needless relationship drama. Netflix : just make the season 8 eps instead of 10 if you’ve run out of pertinent plot points.

― calstars, Saturday, 25 November 2017 00:55 (three weeks ago) Permalink

its not 'needless' the relationship drama is very much essential imo, though they haven't fully made the connection it creates a counterpoint to the continuum of male sexual violence imo

i like the Debbie character, i agree on some of the criticisms of her character being wide of the mark. i actually love their first meeting a lot, i like the whole R-rated Bogie/Bacall banter in the bar.

i think she works as a way of underlining the way his work is affecting his personality, through his changes in behaviour towards her over time

i mean by the time they break up, even the way he looks at her let alone speaks to her, it’s like he’s gone dead inside, it’s so eerie

I think, like a lot of the shifts in relationships/behaviours throughout, it's handled pretty clumsily and in a this-needs-to-happen-now kind of way

But it was a lovely thing at the start

yes plus i think his treatment of her is in line with his entire M.O. of being right the whole time and being caught up in his own analytical head.

i don't find her especially unrealistic tbh, not any moreso than anyone else on the show.

i know there’s a better way to put it but it’s like she’s the canary in the coalmine to know that he’s lost himself in his job

I think it works on the obvious level of him not spending as much time on his relationship as he does his work, but it’s also about how the work has made clear how complicated his relationship w her is; I think, he’s recognizing how much of the shit he’s dealing w at work is a logical extension of the beliefs of men generally in their relationships w women

maybe that’s not the intent but imo it’s the effect, and it’s what makes this about everything & not just some niche criminal interest

i think her comment to Wendy that Holden isn't intimidated by being around smarter women and Wendy's reply that "men say that but rarely mean it" is an important moment and not a throwaway, and i think Debbie's response to *that* saying "He really does mean it" is misleading in the larger sense of the show, because Wendy's reply is essential to Holden and his relationship w/Debbie.

also Holden's relationship w/Wendy herself too.

btw, Holt McCallany in Creepshow 2

https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdvncdJzeO1qedb29o1_500.gif

oh my god that rules

:D

I watched it a third time! I had something interesting to say about something but I forget what it was. The less interesting thing is how good the Speck scene was. A terrifying dude, and the entire rhythm and editing of that conversation combined with his manner of speaking was master class.

totally agree

Real Crime Profile podcast (hosted by former FBI profiler & a former Scotland Yard criminal behavioural analyst) has a new Mindhunter episode- great breakdown & insight real life aspects of the show

https://wondery.com/wondery/shows/realcrimeprofile/

not sure, but I only recently found out she's the daughter of paul gross and martha burns

I found out a few years ago that Holt McCallany's mother was Julie Wilson!!!

Anyway, I just started watching this.

Ok, dying that whoever painted Wendy's new apartment was obviously inspired by the Caldor logo.

Real Crime Profile podcast (hosted by former FBI profiler & a former Scotland Yard criminal behavioural analyst) has a new Mindhunter episode- great breakdown & insight real life aspects of the show

https://wondery.com/wondery/shows/realcrimeprofile/

― Squeaky Fromage (VegemiteGrrl), Thursday, January 4, 2018 11:08 AM (one week ago)

this is great so far - listening to the second episode now. is Criminal Minds worth watching?

the first 2 seasons with Mandy Patinkin were great ... Joe Mantegna joined s3 & there was quite a drop off dramatically for me personally. But it was still ok for a while

"great" is a hell of a stretch

dude it’s an opinion i’m not speaking for society or all tv viewers everywhere

i really loved the first 2 seasons and *i* thought they were grear

great

it’s still inherently a network primetime drama so you kinda have to be ok with that to start with.

even entertaining might be enough tbph and I am fond of patinkin

and greg from dharma & greg is in it
also xander from buffy shows up later on
lotta good characters

PROCEDURE!!!!!!!!

also i am a fool for police procedurals, certainly including network shows, but criminal minds was not actually watchable

which puts it in a class with csi miami

kemper

i know someone who talks just like this actor's performance, i'll have to not think about it the next time i see him

just finished this, liked it a lot overall. there is so much sensationalized serial killer drama inundating the media that it was somewhat refreshing to see the characters in the show unfamiliar with and horrified by the entire concept. i think the show made a good point about just how numb our society has grown to violence. holden's unflappable demeanor and his willingness to delve into the killer's mind is something that we expect from a cop show, but it was a nice touch to see holden's colleagues' disgust at how easily it came to him. i've seen a lot of complaining about the finale around the interwebs, but really it just felt to me like another episode of the show? anyway, i'm looking forward to season 2, where hopefully they'll do a little bit more mindhunting, instead of merely mindvestigating.

Debbie's jumpsuit in the first episode is better than almost the entire middle of this series.

halfway in I will say Holt McCallany as Fred Ward is A+
― Larry Elleison (rogermexico.)

Through four episodes--liking it fine, not Zodiac-level yet. I'm glad I can stop obsessing over who Holt McCallany reminds me of, though. Evidently I had completely forgotten what "Calling Occupants of Interplanetary Craft" sounds like; "That's great," I thought, before having to look up what it was.

(I think he's like a cross between Ward and J.T. Walsh.)

Love how Fleetwood Mac's "Albatross" was used. Fleetwood Mac has now had great scenes in the last three series I've watched (also The Americans and Big Little Lies).

The tickling principal episode--which was fascinating in and of itself; they walked the line perfectly there--tackled something hard to capture and did it exceedingly well: what it's like to have your life momentarily fall apart, not from anything momentous, but confusingly, from casual betrayal and an unexpectedly collapsing support system. Tench and Carr line up against Holden; he's usually the bridge between those two, so that stings. That, and all is not well with Debbie. He's trying to do the right thing, and he seems completely alone and lost at the end. (Woody Allen pulled off something similar in Hannah and Her Sisters, the moment where Mia Farrow lies in bed and tries to figure out how everything fell apart.)

yeah I agree. It's not so much the events themselves as what Holden is grappling with that made me find that episode really interesting.

on the podcast for that ep (the one veg recommended) the fbi profiler and scotland yard profiler were both adamant that it was grooming behavior and holden was 100% right.

jim & laura 4 ever

The next episode also ends with everybody shutting doors on Holden (the Richard Speck episode--have to admit, I got a momentary thrill when it was clear they were on their way to interview Speck). First Fincher-directed episode since the first couple.

This is a very unusual series; quite immersed in it right now.

Finale: And now it came at last: George Amberson Minafer had got his comeuppance. He'd got it three times filled and running over.

They've basically Don Drapered Holden at this point; he's alienated everyone (I hated him for the first time during his interview with the majorette killer), and he'll have to spend at least the first episode of Season 2 grovelling his way back into everyone's good graces.

Season 2 details: eight episodes, two directed by Fincher, two by Andrew Dominik, four by Carl Franklin.

👍🏻

Carl Franklin did a couple of the best House of Cards (I remember making note of that); also did a few Leftovers, although I don't remember which ones.

So apparently the show is going to be doing some shooting in the greater Pittsburgh area and they put out casting calls for paid extras to play "hippies, protestors, students and FBI agents." They're doing one casting call at a popular concert venue about 15 minutes from me. I would love to do something like this!

http://mindhuntercasting.com/MINDHUNTER-CASTING/mindhunter.html

S2 filming just wrapped

i'm probably going to give this a screening again before S2 hits (maybe in spring, early summer??) I'm still amazed at how much they managed to put into the first episode, going all the way from the incident at the beginning to Holden and Bill's argument in the car, and so much in between.

I always forget this scene, because it leads directly without break into the first scene with Debbie, but I like the conversation between Holden and the lecturer in the bar. It's *extremely* on the nose, but in a way I enjoy because I suspect it's how those dudes would actually talk about the subject, and it's a good setup for Holden's increasing interest in this kind of violent crime study.

too much of this is on-the-nose tbh im not sure ill bother with s2 altho theres a lot to like

says man who reads robert jordan and stephen king

what does “chat me up” in thread title refer to?

The lead character's job is to get serial killers talking so they can work up profiles.

says man who reads robert jordan and stephen king

― Mince Pramthwart (James Morrison), Wednesday, 9 January 2019 01:22 (three hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

says man who does whatever it is that would insert here to make this pathetic point

cmon ta fuck

settle down there

is this going to be a whole pistols at dawn thing or

my god i think jm just provoked me like a ....mindhunter

ok if my dismissal above was a little too punchy, how's about:

s1 nailed a few really strange and compelling aspects- style, casting, *mood*, the quite excellent ambition in how they foreshadowed our main villain (even if this only ever remains an "all the while, this was happening" contrast, which we can probably discount.

but it devolves disappointingly into our freak of the week, genius maverick move from our guy stuff. and the personal life stuff is formulaic, heavy-handed, etc

its the serial killer mad men, with trite identification of grisly murderers standing in for trite advertising pitch to chainsmoking brillcreemers

I realise my comment looks much more unpleasant than it was intended to be, and i apologise unreservedly. I just meant that I thought you had a higher tolerance for than your feelings about mindhunter suggested.

For PREPOSTEROUSNESS i meant

😎

sorry i should be clearer tbf

i did read it as a kinda scathing comment out of nowhere and reacted badly, but as it was meant its a fair query

can only say i guess that the gaps i feel are in mindhunter pull it below what id wish for based on what it achieves on other levels, whereas the likes of king, if i were to read these days, keep their faults to a level of consistency/vibe within the work that does the job i need it to

obv highly subjective.

nb will probably watch this as a result of going over the cooler parts in my head in order to defend position

what does “chat me up” in thread title refer to?

i guess the evolving BTK sideplot is supposed to be a carrot for us? but i dont really care about that, the show will just as likely suffer as improve if and when the action moves to that case, and no more freak of the week.

i'm not super excited about S2, but what the show does well (pretty much: freak of the week) is too good to miss so i'll def watch

i just wanna watch dude talk to sociology grad students

thanks kinder. Was debating whether to step in myself :)

Despite my feelings that serial killer stories basically appeal to the same impulses as superhero stories -- the daft codenames, the secret identities, the silly MOs, the OTT violence, the titillation, the characters living outside rules of society (which is why I think Heath Ledger's Joker was such a hit, combining the comics and serial killer worlds so successfully) -- I have enjoyed Mindhunter tremedously, even with its flaws.

I've never been a particularly huge fan of the titillation factor in serial killer fiction (or fact!), what does work is the element of solving the mystery or the great spooky unknown out there and trying to stop them, and also the ultimate reasons behind their killer instincts. well i guess it's arguable as to whether or not that involves a bit of the titillation factor, probably it does. but i appreciate how the show doesn't linger long on graphic violence, and how in fact beyond the opening scene of the show the only onscreen violent act is a very quick, non-graphic one involving a bird.

The one thing confirmed about “Mindhunter” Season 2 is that it will feature the Atlanta Child Murders. As executive producer David Fincher told Billboard in 2017, “Next year we’re looking at the Atlanta child murders, so we’ll have a lot more African-American music which will be nice.”

i uh

what

Xpost yes, i thght the lack of violence was refreshing. serial killers interest for me was not ab the violence but the understanding of all types of ppl. understanding society.

I've been waiting for this. (Very awkward quote about the music there--the music in the first season was quite good at times.) I think I started James Baldwin's book on those murders but may not have finished it.

That quote is so gross. Fuck serial killer entertainment.

"Nice"

Clem, what book is it? By Baldwin

I was watching Marcella but just bailed on season two because it's all about child murder and pedophilia and I am like ffs, this is not entertainment.

It's weird how they keep making seasons of shows I don't watch.

i refuse to believe it

(xpost) The Evidence of Things Not Seen:

http://www.amazon.ca/Evidence-Things-Not-Seen-Reissued/dp/0805039392

(Coincidence: reading another book right now, a true-crime thing, that uses that for a chapter title.)

I agree that that Fincher quote is insensitive to say the least, but as far as the show goes, it can't be news that great art comes from the worst sort of human behaviour imaginable.

Season 1 might not have been great art, but it was good art for sure.

Thanks! Will order the book.

Found out that Damon Herriman (Dewey Crowe from Justified) is playing Charles Manson this season & I am v happy with that casting, i reckon he’ll be great

He's also playing Manson in the Tarantino movie

Yeah, the idea that no art should be made about crimes is completely moronic and censorious, though not quite as stupid as the notion that all art is no more than entertainment, as if the reaction of every viewer to every piece of art ever made can be assumed to be the same and thus this subject is off limits.

Works should be judged on their merits but even things we find stupid or cheap probably still prompt a broadening of our perspective as we form those views.

Well, maybe not, but I get Yerac's point.

yeah, like how many more times do we need to see gratuitous rape that serves no purpose to a plotline (fictional plotlines not true crime docs). I was reading a thing about Hannibal and how they purposefully stayed away from those types of things and still managed to make a singular, super expressive and beautiful show about gruesome crimes.

Some things are good, others are bad.

i just started this (s1, e4 so far) and made the mistake of watching an ep right after an old brooklyn 99 and now i can't unsee tench as scully :(

i have other thoughts also inc.the fact that a piece i wrote for arena mag in 1989, abt serial killers as a rising pop cult phenom, quoted the kemper head-on-a-stick line that's upthread -- and that bret easton ellis probablhy read arena mag in those days and so i gave him the idea for american psycho. but not the idea that ed gein said that line

the giant dateline intertitles are excellent and hilarious and always a bit scary

my sister pointed out that holden looks like MACRON so this is a wild ride every time i'm reminded this is the sequence-killer-chatting adventures of macron and scully (but not that scully)

I've thought that myself, he really does.

lol the sequence i am finding it hardest to watch is when he is teaching the little schoolkids abt the "disturbed" -- it's like DON'T SAY THAT, DON'T SAY THAT EITHER, OH NO OH NO, DON'T SAY THAAAAAAAT :(

i didn't really like the holden ford character to start with -- it was like someone over-performing not having a clue, his levels of rigidity and of openness seemed bogus -- but after the tickling ep maybe it's beginning to gel

(i also feel like each ep is beginning with the chesspieces of each character's stance and perspective not in quite the same place (or quantity) they were at the end of the previous ep -- something like that, i don't know how to explain it -- but i like this aspect, it fits in with goffman kinda) (i have read no goffman, but what i imagine goffman is talking about)

huge letters:

JOLIET
Illinois

ok the scene where they brainstorm thru to "serial killer" is bad

mark do u plan to read goffman

not tonight

i'm watching mindhunter

so would u say you’re

waiting for goffman

quantico i'd like to report a murder, it was justified everyone says so

i like that the local cops are mostly smart not dumb

you should read 'relations in public', it's the best

(it's not actually great for what you're hinting at itt but it's great nonetheless)

the kemper scene in e10 is very thomas harris: where lecter says that a "real bottomfeeder" came up with the organised/disorganised category, also (from memory) "do you think you can dissect me with this little tool?" -- also the orderly leaving the pen

(tho i'm guessing harris knows kemper's interviews and habits by heart, so maybe the ideas are running the other way)

I was in a cafe earlier and In The Light by Led Zeppelin came on and it'll forever be associated with serial killers for me now because of this show

Donovan's Hurdy-gURDY mAN the same, due to Zodiac.

Three Dog Night’s “Easy to Be Hard” too

I love Mindhunter but am determined not to allow anything to diminish Hurdy Gurdy Man for me

OK I completed S1 and these are my thoughts!

There are three interlocked structures, two developmental, one (for want of a better word lol) dialectical.

One: is Holden’s own journey. The season has to get him from wide-eyed puppy full of innocent curiosity to an improvising maverick who has (a) semi-mastered a certain kind of interrogative technique and (b) found he enjoys the power of it, to fuck with heads (not all of them the subjects of the research programme) and (c) is hooked on finding out what happens when he takes it further. There’s the FBI rules — which we start off thinking are wrong and fuddy-duddy and end up thinking wait, maybe some of these constraints are good, evil puritan perv Hoover notwithstanding. So in answer to the Q what goes on in the serial killer’s mind, we actually watching a version of it unfolding in Holden: he’s not killing but he is exploring the pleasures of freeing himself from social (or in this case professional) limits.

Two: is Foucaldian lol. The evolution of a new discipline: towards a set point (the viewers’ modern understanding of it, as shaped by endless post-Hannibal True Crime and Made-up Crime serial-killer books and docs. Two tough elements here: one is re-establishing how people thought before any of this arrived, and not having it just be laughable and ridiculous. Like the FBI restrictions on interviewers acting in sympathy with the perp to get them chatty — not because it encroached on entrapment (like Hoover cared about that) but because it might make the Bureau look bad. Respectability in advance of effectiveness.

(Sidenote: I remember seeing a true-life UK copper — a grizzled old sergeant in charge of the motor-pool, as it’s not called in the UK, sighingly describing the effect of The Sweeney on force behaviour in the 1970s. He said that before The Sweeney everyone parked tidily and neatly: afterwards they all pulled in their cars higgledy-piggledy to the kerb, or up on it, and ran about. Also far more cars came in scratched and dinged. Cops watch cop shows and copy them!)

Three: every ep more or less takes a related “issue” and dissects it morally and procedurally, via discussion between the main three (plus subaltern discussion with the old-school boss and the GF and local cops). So far so good so O/G Law and Order: a quasi-Socratic discussion with each character taking a line, throwing in their truth-bombs, to produce a clearer understanding that remains dynamic and dramatic and conflicted and in tension. I haven’t mapped this out, but it feels like they also switch it up a bit: so that for each new ep and issue, the main three (and sometimes the the old-school boss and the GF) come in with their truthbombs from different perspectives. Like they take it in turn to use the “how can you sympathise with this guy who raped and murdered a child?” line, to reshape the discussion from whichever angle. Partly this is because everyone is on a One-type learning curve, as Two evolves. But it feels like there’s a bit of formalist playfulness also going on here, for the purposes of ambiguity and disorientation.

Re One: well, I found early Holden a bit annoying and convincing, because he’s always balancing his two poles, and this was a bit over-evident because he didn’t always get the balance correct (in the sense of convincing).

Re Two: you get the Beethoven’s Fifth / Manzarek keyboard biopic effect, the depiction of someone in the process of arriving at something they don’t yet know, which you the viewer are so intimately aware of and familiar with that it can’t not be funny when they hit on it. Like the scene where they brainstorm through to “serial killer” as the term of art. Something like that probably happened! (Though not in 90 seconds of discussion…) It was a bad and silly scene: but this is tough stuff to do well.

Re Three: possibly a more effective way to deliver all of the above would be Brechtian (i.e.stylised, so that the games and the goals were more foregrounded) and also funny, like a comedy, Brooklyn 99 via The Good Place, maybe. I mean more of a comedy than it is (it’s a comedy, albeit kept very very low-key — that’s why the datelines are in such big letters). Could it have been greenlit as a stylised Brechtian thing what was also stone-face serious? I think not: formal play of that kind is still locked out of real-life television drama. So as a result, one two and three grind against on another a bit, so that the sense of the scriptwriters heavily moving the moral-analytical chess pieces is (occasionally) on the nose. I don’t mind this — it’s kind of part of how a critic she be attending to a drama anyway, trope watch stuff — but I think they could actually have more (more effective?) fun with foregrounding it! It shd be a choice not an unavoidable error — something like that.

Re the Tickling Principal: discussion above abt why this plot line? The ilx conclusion was that it pins down changing mores, which yes, that’s part of it. But another part is this: the evolution of the tale as it’s being worked needs at some (late mid) point to focus the viewer’s spotlight of worry — re getting the wrong guy, or overreacting, or manipulating to a bogus arrest/execution — and to properly dramatise what’s at stake. But there’s no scope in the show — perhaps because of historical fidelity but also because of plot believability — for Holden in particular and the Unit as a whole to have made a horrible moral/professional error, in re an actual case (or an actual interview). One slip like that and it all falls in. So the story has to step sideways, and create an analogy which makes the stakes clear while actually being more or less risk-free for the main project and plot-line. It gets us to think “Did Holden fuck up there? What if he likewise fucks up on main?” But without causing a catastrophic wobble on main.

(by "Brechtian" I guess I partly mean that being "convincing" needn't be such a big deal. Comedy is one way through this, various kinds of formalist anti-realist stylisations offer others: and in fact i think this drama is very low-key formalist anti-realist stylisation as well as very low-key comedy…)

Good stuff.

https://ew.com/tv/2019/07/17/mindhunter-season-2-photos-jonathan-groff-david-fincher/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIazdDw4tao

oooh i am excite

That guy whoever he is really looks like David Berkowitz

Manson (45 seconds in) looks spot-on.

yeah the casting and make-up crews do amazing work on this show, that's an eerily manson-y manson they've conjured up there

it's the same Manson as Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

that's a tough spot to get pigeonholed in

Kinda want to rewatch S1 now.

Is that really the same Manson actor? The do-over looks much more accurate in Mindhunter (which is probably three or four years later, mind you, so not exactly the same look).

Just found a long Fincher conversation with Elvis Mitchell about the new season.

more trailer action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHlJQCyqiaI

the guy playing Berkowitz in this is uncanny

New season’s pretty silly tbh. Several steps towards NBC Crime Show material.

how could nbc crime show material be silly???????!?

https://66.media.tumblr.com/086559e8de27747195afe463d9b3cb89/tumblr_n54sw2HrA91t4ihqpo1_1280.jpg

Sorry, maybe I should’ve said CBS. Network TV crime show contrivances, anyway.

Thought the ending of ep 1 was a bit ott, and the colour grading is *terrible*, otherwise I'm hooked again.

I'm re-watching s1. Ep 2, the girlfriend uses the word 'mentionitis' which I'd be surprised if it was a term in the 70s?

Season 2 starting off with Roxy Music. Yes please.

the end credit tunes are great (and very expensive)

Tusk at the end of s2 e2, unfortunately that one’s always gonna belong to The Americans for me

1. the end credit tunes are great (and very expensive)

My interest in Season 2, considerable to start, just tripled.

2. I always want songs to surprise me, so I'm ducking out for good at this point. (That's on me--I always name specific songs in movies and TV shows when posting.)

decided to rewatch s1 first

i am having a GOOD TIME

Tusk at the end of s2 e2, unfortunately that one’s always gonna belong to The Americans for me

I'm only 4 eps in but the filching of music from Americans is a bit on the nose - Tusk, Talking Heads "Overload", Roxy, Blondie. Cmon man.

Enjoying it so far though. Damon Herriman did a decent Manson for an Aussie (if y'all havent seen "Mr Inbetween" you really should check it out).

Prof lady's gay love sideplot feels a bit shoehorned in, I'm someone who will always be irritated by pointless sex/makeout/love/breakup scenes in shows though. I mean ok, her being gay and having to keep schtumm is important, but still.

Is it bad that I'm more concerned about Wendy being outed than I am about Bill's subplot, which I won't spoil for anyone not caught up?

A lot of that Manson dialogue was straight from his actual court speeches and later interviews, which I guess made it pretty easy. I was a little shocked to see the unredacted, actual Tate and LaBianca crime scene photos on-screen. The original publication of "Helter Skelter" had a lot of strategically-placed boxes over the photos, and when a later edition removed them there was a lot of controversy.

Does no-one else have a problem with the colour on this thing? Look at these fucking oompa loompas!

https://i.imgur.com/LqITHra.png
https://i.imgur.com/RUXrpP1.png

http://www.moriareviews.com/rongulator/wp-content/uploads/Element-of-Crime-1984-poster.jpg

A lot of that Manson dialogue was straight from his actual court speeches and later interviews

i think this is the case for most of the interviews

it was for Kemper in S1 anyway

don't go usin some speech figure!

Took me forever to twig that Kemper was also the guy who played Hazel in Umbrella Academy.

which brain genius at netflix decided to keep the credit-skipper activated for all the expensive outro music

The interviews are all great but five or six episodes in, I have no idea what the central thrust of the storyline is.

I guess it's just solving (or not) BTK and Atlanta.

The Guardian is not fooled:
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/aug/19/the-real-mindhunters-why-serial-killer-whisperers-do-more-harm-than-good

As Clark points out, plenty of people experience violence, rejection and trauma in their childhood, but don’t end up burying severed heads in the garden beneath their mother’s bedroom window. Instead, they have the strength of character to overcome.

I really don't think whether you end up being a serial killer is to do with "strength of character" lol

there is a bit of dramatic nullity to them looking into btk when you know he gets away scot free until he sends a floppy disk to the police with metadata in the 00s

The interviews are all great but five or six episodes in, I have no idea what the central thrust of the storyline is.

The lack of a "thesis" or whatever doesn't really bug me. If anything I feel like the overriding theme of the show is that all that bloody-minded analysis and investigative work is 99% folly

i think the point of that (and a big theme of the season) is that all along these monsters are operating and there may not be any satisfying resolution in sight xp

xxp well, this season ends with their atlanta suspect being nabbed for 2/27 murders ~maybe~, and a title card noting that none of the child murders are closed by 2019, so that may be kind of a thing going on.

and that was a thing in zodiac too obv

I know it's only 'based on' real events but the scene with the cross had me all [citation needed].

haha

The faux (I assume) archival footage cutting in there was amazing though, like Holden is trespassing on history

xp got conspicuously found-footage there for a sec or two

the footage of the march would have been much more powerful without holden's keystone cops act, imo.

Sure, but out of place/theme in a season that's explicitly about the FBI's intrusive and ineffective methods generating further indignity

I found that whole "race to place the cross" scene really bizrre, tbrh. Maybe I missed the point.

personally I took it as "Holden has given himself a self-important, symbolically-important-to-him task that is effectively worse than useless"

I feel like I watched a different season to a lot of the Twitter commentariat. I liked this one way better than the first - no lionization of FBI tactics, replaced instead by a clear indictment of just how untethered from reality their methods are, and just how tone-deaf and worse analytically inclined obsessives like Holden are in the face of systemic problems. The fact that Carr and Tench are so manifestly incapable of dealing with their personal lives despite their supposed perceptive gifts and/or training helps to underline this. Also, I thought this season did a great job of giving the middle finger to MFM-style obsessives who laugh off the human toll, while simultaneously acknowledging just how infectious these narratives can be (Holden's glee at getting to interview Manson for example).

(Also, McCallany is fantastic so the increased focus on Tench over Ford was a huge plus for me.)

and that was a thing in zodiac too obv

just finished this and yeah my first thought was how this ends on the exact same note as zodiac. which, if you're gonna copy...that's a good thing to copy.

I really enjoyed this a LOT, despite a bit of impatience with some of the "domestic" storylines...which felt a little too patly reflective of their work.

also I had my mind blown a bit by this sequence of facts

Surprised to learn Holt McCallany, a brick shithouse who in another age would play heavies and stevedores in studio Bs, a) is theater royalty whose mom is Julie Wilson, b) attended La Sorbonne, c) studied Shakespeare at Oxford, d) has a French-language Dany Boon movie en route.

— Matt Prigge (@mattprigge) August 21, 2019

I still have a few episodes to go but Simon H. otm. I was especially pleased by them putting right on the screen how wrong FBI got BTK from the very start. (Must have a menial job, can't have meaningful relationships with women, etc.)

While the show is obviously critical of profiling (contrary to what come credulous viewers think) it’s also going to far to imply that it’s flatly dismissive of it. I think what attracts the creators’ interest is precisely that profiling takes place in a zone of indeterminacy and intuition that *can’t*, fundamentally, provide certainty. I think that indeterminacy is also what’s so interesting about the show and why it’s not just a fancy detective show (though it is that of course).

Holt McCallany is so good in this. This season I am starting to feel like J Groff was miscast though. He kind of disappears in most scenes.

I wonder if Tench will get a one-season gf next

Also, re the Tench subplot with his son, I know some ppl found the depiction cartoonish, but

reading this old interview between Rooney Mara & David Fincher in which Fincher said when he was a kid he used to fill up baby dolls with hamburger meat and throw them on to the freeway

— Davis. (@realdaveimboden) August 20, 2019

Does no-one else have a problem with the colour on this thing? Look at these fucking oompa loompas!

The colour wash feels right to me. It makes it seem like everything is drenched in cigarette smoke, even though hardly anyone actually smokes in it.

I was trying to figure out why the yellow walls felt right for the period, and that’s it.

There's a bunch of articles on the color grading for the show. I'm into it.

I did cry foul over Bill's natural wood kitchen cabinets. You'da been accused of witchcraft for choosing such prosaic housewares in that era.

I was going to say i felt this petered out to a weird ending, but Simon's comments have made me rethink that. They never really succeeded at anything, which is more real, really.

Even though I enjoyed it, the Gary Numan montage felt really out of place.

I was critical way above about them doing the atlanta child murders this season but it was drastically different than the shitty ass Marcella series 2 that I was was bailing on at the time which was just a nightmare of using gratuitous child predation/murders.

I didn't see it noted yet, but at least the rest of the cases were reopened this year.

Good interview w/ McCallany

https://www.vulture.com/2019/08/holt-mccallany-mindhunter-season-two-interrogation-scenes.html

I always love when an interviewer asks about a scene in a certain way and it makes the actor go back into character just to explain themselves.

i had low hopes for this but it was v good tbh

This was excellent, better than S1. Felt more focused and I even liked all the non-work subplots. It's a little strange that by the end so many things get ignored or don't exactly resolve - BTK, Holden's panic attacks, Bill's family situation, Wendy's role in the BSU - but it fits thematically into the show, that we don't have the answers to a lot of things

holdens tummy

- i am entertained by this show enough that i watched both seasons (though i ff'd some of the brian-nance stuff near the end) so that's the caveat for any negative stuff i say below
- this is a dumber show than it wants to admit. so many "DO YOU SEE???" parallel plotlines, so many antagonistic serial killers who suddenly tell them everything once they find the one button to push (e.g. if you give a racist killer some candy then he's not racist anymore), so many cliched plot and character beats. i think part of this is the result of the 21st century streaming show short season, you've gotta take some shortcuts when you only have eight episodes)
- mccallany is great, most of the serial killer actors are great (though the son of sam prosthetics/makeup was distracting)
- what is holden's deal supposed to be? we get home life and background on carr and tench but not really on holden (i don't remember s1 that well, i know we saw him with his fantasy girlfriend but do we know anything else about him or his life?) he's such a frustrating twerp that it has to be intentional but it also makes the show less fun to watch
- i appreciate that it's ultimately a show about failure. more art should be about failure.

I found that whole "race to place the cross" scene really bizrre, tbrh. Maybe I missed the point.

― Stoop Crone (Trayce), Tuesday, August 20, 2019 10:45 PM (one week ago) bookmarkflaglink

it seemed weird to me too

I’m glad they didn’t hold out re the antagonistic killers longer even tho it might be more realistic but the interviews are the meat of the show and delaying that could’ve gotten tedious quickly I don’t mind the shortcut breakthroughs

sure, i'm just saying for a "prestige" show they pull a lot of SVU moves

there were a couple of classic "get important clues from someone doing their job" law & order scenes - the recording studio guy, the neighbor trying to get to work, etc.

so many antagonistic serial killers who suddenly tell them everything once they find the one button to push

I think a major conceit of the show (and maybe real life) is that these guys LOVE to talk...they just need to be assured they've got a sympathetic (maybe even sycophantic) audience.

Another conceit is that they unconsciously (maybe consciously in Kemper's case since he turned himself in) need/want to be caught...this was a major argument in ILX favorite Hunting Humans too iirc.

Williams is a funny exception that proves the rule since (imo) he's obviously a kind of psychopath who feeds off of protesting his innocence and he has plenty of people willing to indulge that.

On a second watch it's really interesting and poignant how many parallel possibilities and conspiracies are broached in the Atlanta Child Murders and pointedly left by the wayside once Holden finds his perfect suspect. There are a lot of things conceded to making dramatic television but overall I think the show is very smart about what it's about.

I found that whole "race to place the cross" scene really bizrre, tbrh. Maybe I missed the point.

― Stoop Crone (Trayce), Tuesday, August 20, 2019 10:45 PM (one week ago) bookmarkflaglink

it seemed weird to me too

― na (NA), Tuesday, August 27, 2019 3:37 PM (eleven minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

i claimed upthread that this entire project is devised as low-key (i.e. unsignalled) dark comedy, and the cross scene confirms it (at least to me, admittedly the most easily convinced person re my own good theory). just like curb yr enthusiasm i find a lot of it hard to watch w/o pauses. holden is indeed a frustrating (=larry-david style) twerp -- except i don't think groff has quite worked out how to play this (which is why i called him "unconvincing" upthread)

one massive upside is that i went back and reread james baldwin's "evidence of things unseen", his book-length essay abt williams and the atlanta murders and (of course) race in america

xpost to myself: and I think, in general, that once people are given a kind of permission to talk about their perversions they can't stop.

whenever they mention organised vs disorganised i remember the bit in silence of the lambs where HL scoffs at that as useful analysis: "a real bottom-feeder came up with that one"

which is half thomas harris sketching in what a dick lecter is meant to be but also i think half him agreeing that a lot of profiling is just useless rubbish

I think there's a set of overlapping tensions:

1) There's a sense in which cataloging and classifying "deviance" is bound to be self-defeating...and so as in the darkness/light metaphor from the first season when you shine a light you just disperse and refract the darkness (to stretch the metaphor) into ever more nooks and crannies.

2) A Foucaultian idea about "norms"--where those lines are drawn, and in particular, who gets the draw them...and the rather creepy possibility that it's the ~FBI~ drawing them. But this is only an extreme case of something like the DSM defining and then revising under cultural changes what counts as a "disorder."

3) Profiling has a very limited utility in catching a perp in action (catching Williams was a much a product of desperation and luck as anything else) but if the alternative is to say "we can never understand the depths of human depravity" that seems unsatisfying as well. One of the obvious provocations of the show is that extreme forms of deviance (ie, serial killing) are on a continuum with the everyday perversions/deviance that we all have in private. Additionally, serial killing is observable as a ~social~ phenomenon and not merely privative of social norms.

the best decision made throughout season 2 was for every local cop/chief/gatekeeper throwing doubt or an obstacle in the boy wonder's way, it was at pains to portray each of them as people who disagreed from experience but cared, or who had a job to do that needed to work independently of the latest whizz fad from quantico.

most of the development in holden was written into the character being confronted with these scenarios and *not* reacting like a clichéd frustrated genius, which v much was of a piece with the muddy and compromised outcome of the series as a whole

sorry, a bit scattered, too tired to try to make sense rn:

a lot of good things came out of the atlanta child murders setting—i think june carryl has had the absolute best bits so far, with her statements of resolve about how they know what's happening and being ignored and written off—but i liked how it gave an extended balance to the show's sense of the public space, especially with being there a while, moving through neighborhoods, offices, stakeout scenes.

if you compare to a garbage serial killer procedural show like criminal minds, with its standard reliance on cutting to scenes of the unknown (often unshot, on camera, too, to manipulate the viewer) killer killing or torturing more victims, it seems like fincher et al are aware of the need to do something to dislodge the sense of the fbi protagonists as existing within the privileged vantage point on public space, being able to safely make incursions into it, and penetrate the secret places where the killers hide.

so all season long we get BTK doing his thing secretively but comically under the heading of the WICHITA KANSAS titles so hueg as if to declare, this is effectively right out in the open under the noses of the law and the normal safe society, in a zone of the storyline that manages to be somehow secure from the camera-eye's intrusions, out of keeping with the way killer-centric scenes do in a more compressed/single-evil-focus narrative.

i think that has to do with the various developments in the characters' off-work storylines, but the whole thing with doc feeding the cat seems most apt for it. she first gets involved in that when darting down to the laundry room in her underwear, then strikes up this extended fascination, kind of a little perversion (thus the ants at the end, the role of food and luring in it, the wine and pleasure), which is in an out-of-the-way yet public so not safe from discovery kind of place.

comparison point, to BTK rigging himself up in the bathroom or wherever.

along these lines, the profiling unit is made from the outset to be kind of an uncertain/unknown kind of zone, dropped in the basement, defined mostly by the mutual uncertainty not exactly being erased but being modified in the course of the professional relationship that develops between the principals in the midst of institutional politics and private motivations. the bit from the first season, that seems to be a little overdone but maybe is not, about being caught on tape luring speck out by talking about 'four ripe cunts', is essential for destabilizing the sense of the profiling unit as the privileged zone of privacy-within-the-public-world that it would otherwise enjoy by default of the serial killer narrative conventions. the main thing they rely on, speech that produces evidence and data, is turned to a use that strikes everyone but holden—even the unflappable doctor expresses disapproval—as being unacceptably base and dehumanizing and akin to the worst of the worst killers, yet as soon as there's fear of its being caught on the permanent record i.e. belongs to the in-principle-public world, their group integrity seems to collectively vanish for various reasons enacted dramatically.

the 'ease' with which they get/make breaks in interviews seems to me to be basically a matter of long-term wrongfooting the audience, playing to holden and not tench. the use of kemper is essential here. his weird affect, genial candor, matter-of-fact about himself and his criminal deviance, his loquaciousness—this is all in the service of gaining ~knowledge of killers~ so they can be caught, anticipated, predicted, etc., which is to say, in the service of an overarching goal that will never be reached within this narrative, unless you think that by seeing the story catch up to the present-day version of the-art-of-serial-killer-hunting you will be satisfied in that. this goal could seem to be realized piecemeal by individual apprehensions in the course of the story, which of course they go on to do a lot to undercut. but the core idea of gaining this knowledge from interviews of incarcerated serial killers seems to be fundamentally at odds with the identify-and-apprehend plot logic that drives filmic action. two different scales of motion and change, and potentially different orders of character/audience relation to them. the allure of kemper is that his speech seems so open, yet he is so obviously not trustworthy; so his counterpart holden is subjected to corresponding agonies.

(at the party, contrast between tench gamely telling killer stories and holden boring people with his idealistic tripe gets at another angle on this. tench is the most ordinary character because he has the most unaffected relationship to speech, which does not preclude its performative use in social settings. i think looking at the characters in terms of their way of occupying various sociological backstages would be interesting—holden sitting too close to tench on the bed in the hotel room where tench just wants to turn off for the night e.g.)

going on with some bits unresolved, available to be relevant, is part of that—like holden's panic attacks. as the profiling unit becomes more 'successful' and its power more established, we can expect more embarrassing/shameful irresolution inside it.

i thought it was very interesting how at this early date (it had not been too long since the first women were even being awarded ph.d.s from ivy league schools!), they play the doctor as weirdly immune to all manner of social and institutional sexism that would be de rigueur in this sort of narrative. one reason seems to be so that they can keep it in reserve to deploy it for specific purposes. it seems that it's only once the profilers ascend momentarily into the world of dc power politics at the new boss's party that we're given that kind of look at men on 'the good side' rather openly treating women as objects of domination. again, say in keeping with the doc's deployment of an analogy between her relationship with her academic mentor, and the killer she's interviewing, this is a way of placing the secrecies/openness of power and control etc. within the narrative's public and private worlds.

seems like the dramatic power of the atlanta moms has to do with the way that they are not shown with any private grief. they hold down public spaces—the regular breakfast at the restaurant, the organization offices and the march, the public meeting scene—and their inner lives are in those spaces defiantly asserted but walled off. june carryl's glasses in her first appearances are an amazing symbol of that—with the glare from them, her eyes are not at all visible, her private feelings are inscrutable, holden and the camera can only confront them from without and at best see themselves. as is apt, since the atlanta moms represent actual (cosmic) justice and its neglect.

golly thats a cracking post thats better than the show tbh

i would need to watch more carefully but rewatching s1 this year i thought i noticed how the extreme cleanness of the ~80s reconstruction~ was more deliberate than i took it to be; seemed like they were enabling a bit of differentiation between regions of the public/social world, by trimming away certain expected mixtures/holdovers that would normally be visible aspects of history/social interconnection.

when tv's greg of dharma and greg shows up with his fbi team, they are in charge (they assist local authorities etc etc); the law is in charge, the president in charge

on this show, no one is in charge

On a second watch it's really interesting and poignant how many parallel possibilities and conspiracies are broached in the Atlanta Child Murders and pointedly left by the wayside once Holden finds his perfect suspect. There are a lot of things conceded to making dramatic television but overall I think the show is very smart about what it's about.

Yeah, I almost think the most important line of the season is when the local FBI agent asks Holden, "What if a white guy had gotten out of that car?" and all Holden can respond is, "But it wasn't a white guy."

That and Kemper pointing out that the only things they can say with certainty (or what they think is certainty) about serial killers is based on the ones that got caught. (Which notably does not include Kemper himself, who turned himself in.)

yep tho tbf i think holdens theory didnt impede an awful lot on the investigation of other leads until the chief on the ground was left with either no other option or was just searching for the administrative equivalent of a divining rod

I can't remember where I heard it--maybe even John Douglas--but someone referred to Kemper as having "arrived at the Source" of his disturbance...which is a funny implication since it suggests that Kemper more or less did something akin to a completed psychoanalysis by realizing that it was his actual Mother that he wanted to kill, and that his articulateness about himself (feigned or not) is a result of that.

the allure of kemper is that his speech seems so open, yet he is so obviously not trustworthy; so his counterpart holden is subjected to corresponding agonies.

this is really well put and reflects, I think, the logic of the show as a whole.

holden was p much right tho is the thing. the other suspects that he didn't much fancy ended up being wastes of time

i don't think this show is v critical of profiling. holden is obv v flawed but he's supposed to be brilliant.

xxp the hug

yes jim but the question he was asked stands- Holden is certain, even when hes wrong

holden is brilliant

profiling is worthwhile

profiling cannot be perfect

holden doesnt accept this

i think all of season 2 holds the r statements nicely

holden was p much right tho is the thing. the other suspects that he didn't much fancy ended up being wastes of time

― Seany's too Dyche to mention (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, August 27, 2019 12:24 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

we don't know that though. no one, including holden, thinks williams killed all of the kids

Speaking of alternative theories...I did love the ominous silent presence of Homer Williams in this.

holden was p much right tho is the thing. the other suspects that he didn't much fancy ended up being wastes of time

― Seany's too Dyche to mention (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, August 27, 2019 12:24 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

we don't know that though. no one, including holden, thinks williams killed all of the kids

― na (NA), Tuesday, August 27, 2019 10:28 AM (one minute ago)

and holden wanted to continue investigating! baldy boss at the fbi took them off the case, to holden's chagrin

holden's 'brilliance' is depicted mainly as being a matter of recklessly playing a game of identification with his killer-interviewees, which is shown to produce apparent 'finds' of which little has really been made as yet

the doctor is an interesting character because she's made out to be the kind of member of the trio who is least tempted by identification-with. tench is of such sound disposition that he will do what it takes but basically finds identification or sympathetic performance with the monsters disgusting. holden is set up to be problematic because he has a weird bent that others feel the (wise) need to control. the doctor is by professional disposition and personal inclinations not prone to identifying with anyone or anything, which makes her a kind of ideal, but in the way the show focuses on a narrative of striving to understand the unidentifiable-with via scenes of controlled interaction and identification (the interviews), the liability of her role is that she might have no real contribution to make other than a scientific one, and only stands to be compromised by engaging in any identification/participation at all (hence, her own interview scene later in s2).

holden was p much right tho is the thing. the other suspects that he didn't much fancy ended up being wastes of time

― Seany's too Dyche to mention (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, August 27, 2019 12:24 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

we don't know that though. no one, including holden, thinks williams killed all of the kids

― na (NA), Tuesday, August 27, 2019 10:28 AM (one minute ago)

and holden wanted to continue investigating! baldy boss at the fbi took them off the case, to holden's chagrin

― Seany's too Dyche to mention (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, August 27, 2019 12:30 PM (thirty-seven minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

sure, at the end. before that, he consistently rejected the klan as suspects even though everyone in the city kept reminding him that based on history the klan was probably involved. he also rejects any white suspects as possible (based on flawed testing) until the very end of the show when he's like "oh yeah maybe we should have checked out these old pedophiles that everyone told us about three months ago."

xp holden reflects the nature of knowledge in general - to understand a killer one has to identify with them inevitably. his pursuit of this (forbidden) knowledge at least serves an altruistic purpose (to aid in the capture and prevention of future sks) but what is my/the audience's excuse?

well, just to start with, it seems that a false belief would be that the audience is in a position to get understanding by watching, as if seeing an entertaining documentary; i think fincher probably rejects that, wisely, as many filmmakers would

also, the conventional procedural reward would be a renewed sense of security (perpetually threatened but perhaps never really given the fixity of formulas), and another false belief would seem to be that understanding and plot-level apprehension coincide. even in many sk stories they partially deny that belief for the sake of theme or effect, say a killer is apprehended but remains horrifically alien or inscrutable or just won't explain themselves. but the coordination between understanding and the effective action of law enforcement in their protective function is a deep-seated conviction, or wish. so if we go back to your 'forbidden' gloss here, looking for something the audience does/indulges to be excused, i would look for some kind of wishful thinking about securing 'safety' through knowledge. what's forbidden for them is not knowing the evil man, but transgressing the seemingly safe bounds of the ordinary and what it 'knows'. idk.

if there's something to the latter then it probably hooks up with fincher's general pattern of relation to his audiences, which (i couldn't say how this ultimately sorts out) readily invites interpretations of being too shallowly edgy to be really substantial. if that is not the case then the substance would lie in some kind of reversal of expectation about just what is supposed to be edgy or non-edgy in ordinary existence. (anthony edwards in zodiac, tench here—their relations to family in contrast to ruffalo/rdj and holden/the doc.)

^^ “Fincher has a knack for presenting and pacing seemingly dull events in such an involving manner, with such reassuring procedural inevitability, that I am now spending 12 hours in a single month thinking about weird creepy stuff serial killers did, instead of approximately 45 minutes twice a year skimming Wikipedia entries like a normal person”

(I’ve actually noticed watching this that I dislike when things happen. There really is this odd Fincher effect where everything sweeps neatly along a certain process and it feels annoyingly disruptive when something new intrudes on that. And yes, last night, amid that sweep, I did find myself thinking: I read the Wikipedia entry for Dean Corll years ago and wasn’t that a large enough share of my life to spend thinking about him?)

maybe why the tench son storyline doesn't really work for me - too literally "bringing the sk home" (and i keep remembering how the kid got into the case photos last season) xp

xp yes, that's good; i think it might have to do with why zodiac has to be so long.

it seems to be regarded as very costly for tv-makers to have characters that can genuinely have moments of unlikeability, probably one of the few minor novelties of the post-prestige era. betty draper a big one. holden often threatening here to ruin the mood with his annoyances.

xp my impression early on was that they were setting tench jr. up to be an early on-the-spectrum storyline, bc ~tv~, but even after the events of s2 i now think that perhaps he is a big misdirect, perhaps rather inelegant. tench needs something within the family zone of the narrative to make for shaky covert stuff that must be shielded from public view, so bam. perhaps the audience lust for autism characters is just being exploited; easy to get 80s sk-related folx thinking this kid is gonna be killing cats soon, send tench spiralling, etc.

but the opposition between him and his wife in the state-mandated oversight portion is interesting; 'she is not your friend' yet dutifully participating in the process, as opposed to his wife's more understandable bridling at it.

he was going along with it more because he accepts that their son isn't necessarily blameless in the whole thing, while his wife was in denial

one of the less elegantly integrated themes (perhaps because it’s so clearly forefront in everyone’s mind) is the “nature or nurture” thing which Manson underlines.

definitely the most surprising thing I learned in my post-watch wiki trawl

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bateson

Paul Bateson (born August 24, 1940) is an American former radiographer and convicted murderer. He appeared as a radiological technologist in a scene from the 1973 horror film The Exorcist, which was inspired when the film's director, William Friedkin, watched him perform a cerebral angiography the previous year. The scene, with a considerable amount of blood onscreen, was, for many viewers, the film's most disturbing scene;[1] medical professionals have praised it for its realism.[2][3]

In 1979, Bateson was convicted of the murder of film industry journalist Addison Verrill and sentenced to a minimum of 20 years in prison; in 2003 he was released on parole, which ended after five years. Prior to Bateson's trial, police and prosecutors implicated him in a series of unsolved slayings of gay men in Manhattan, killings he had reportedly boasted about while in jail, bringing it up at his sentencing.[4] However, no additional charges ever were brought against him. The experience inspired Friedkin to make the 1980 film Cruising which, while based on a novel written a decade earlier, incorporated in its storyline the city's leather subculture, with which Bateson had identified.

"nature vs nurture" is the main thing the tench sub-story is doing: refusing to resolve in either direction

also i liked (and also i think it's related) when they realised that tales of manson were helpfully distractive with the professionals now invading and somewhat controlling their homelife: the shrink and the social worker both (briefly) turn from judgmental and forbidding to ppl excited to be two degrees of separation from an actual famous monster

The scene where Bill first gets briefed on BTK was like "Zodiac" in miniature. I was like, "Yes, more of this!" The fact that Fincher can make dry recitation of procedural material so tense and involving is amazing to me.

i'm sorry if i ask this in a way that is insensitive, but is holden supposed to be autistic

forgot this isn't twitter and i can't delete stuff when i immediately change my mind after posting

i hadn't imagined so, he's just supposed to be weird. i think the characterization of him meeting his girlfriend was defining, as were further interactions where he clings (not the right word) to his Fed identity: square like he seems, and not embarrassed by it, except that the appearance hides a refreshing/disturbing inclination for free thinking and mind-broadening that in his norminess he is ill-equipped to steer into mature development. thus his susceptibility to visioneering, imagining himself as a heroic innovator, etc.

the mentorship sort of relation to tench is interesting because we're slightly supposed to think that it would work out in a predictable way if not for the fact that tench is a bit too much of a throwback despite his seasoned judgment to be able to authoritatively steer this greenhorn who is eager to drown in the mad seas they are embarking onto; the kid just won't listen

tench is an established caricature cast and written and played to surprise us with subtle and more 2019 touches than that initial position would have us expect

holden is a v 2019 netflix series lead, cast and written and played much more through the lens we would maybe expect from this show if it was being made in the 80s

like...hes clearly on spectrum, its just a handwavey cliche pre-rainman 'weirdo' with a technical gift and no people skills.

whether this is fincher being clever, or how the actors/characters turned out, or an understanding that developed with the writers reacting over time....or i made it up...who knows

everyone keeps decribing this as a fincher project -- and obviously his name is going to be biggiest on the marquee -- but it was devised and written by joe penhall, and i believe it's ultimately his concept that fincher is realising (tho i think penhall is more of a backseat role in s2)

holden reminds me a lot too much of the lead in numb3rs (in role and affect), except he cocks more up

mindhunter is better than numb3rs obviously, everything is

everyone keeps decribing this as a fincher project -- and obviously his name is going to be biggiest on the marquee -- but it was devised and written by joe penhall, and i believe it's ultimately his concept that fincher is realising (tho i think penhall is more of a backseat role in s2)

I mean yeah, but Fincher's style and tone are so specific to his body of work that it can't help but seem like it's in conversation with stuff like Zodiac. It's a very specific aesthetic and it greatly informs how we interpret the narrative! It's very easy for me to imagine the same scripts redone in the style of Criminal Minds or whatever and just being background watching at best.

ok fair, i haven't seen zodiac -- i just feel some of the cloudiness of intent we're identifying (by disagreeing!) may be the consequence of this being a collective project in a way that a kneejerk auteurism is muffling?

ok fair, i haven't seen zodiac

i was watching adventures with tip and oh

oh, here’s a tip: watch zodiac

oh yeah, I just rewatched zodiac last month because my spouse had never seen it and I think it may be my favorite fincher thing by a whole lot.

it’s a masterpiece

It very slowly worked its way into my favorite movies ever, one of the ones I instantly think of when I'm thinking, "I want to watch a movie, what do I want to watch?"

also watch numb3rs, so you don't accidentally make worrisome pronouncements like this

mindhunter is better than numb3rs obviously, everything is

never

I think Carl Franklin in particular brings a slightly different vibe in the last three eps...kind of a southern noir or cary fukunaga TD season one thing. That push in on Williams!

Also that really cool slow pan up to the cloudy silhouetted now conspiratorial APD in the last ep.

I was thinking Numbers was Murder by Numbers. Not the case.

watching numb3rs is murder by numb3rs

bcz it's bad

not good

hug3 if tru3

mindhunter is better than numb3rs obviously

i would have put money on the opposite of this being a classic mark s "i will be taking no further questions at this time" challop deeply considered and thought provoking opinion.

off his gam3

i will be taking no further cheekiness at this time

(I’ve actually noticed watching this that I dislike when things happen. There really is this odd Fincher effect where everything sweeps neatly along a certain process and it feels annoyingly disruptive when something new intrudes on that.

I really like this thought...and it explains that effect in Zodiac where the murders are felt as almost cosmically disruptive to the movie that is supposedly about them! (And aside from the extremely no thanks daylight lake berryessa murder none of them are particularly gruesome.)

one minute of jonathan being whipped for holt speaking french pic.twitter.com/lrxCYNOzVQ

— ً (@mindcunter) August 28, 2019

omg

I liked this: I guess I should watch Zodiac? It's just the cast - it's like they deliberately hired actors I can't stand.

echoing all the zodiac praise earlier itt

and yeah it's tough not to like Ruffalo, RDJ etc by contrast. of course I find McCallany immensely likeable so YMMV

Ruffallo is fine. RDJ, Gyllenhaal and Sevigny are usually passes from me. But I can’t sleep so gotta watch something...

ZODIAC RULES YOU BETTER WATCH IT

anyway I just finished s2

i like that this season showed the push & pull of the actual work of profiling, the tiring drain of it all & the hollow victories of “catching” the “killer”

the Tench kid storyline was a bit on the nose but I didn’t hate it. I love how the actor who plays Bill really wore his emotional exhaustion in every aspect of his scenes, down to his silhouette walking away from camera

next season could get interesting - in John Douglas lore, his experience on the Atlanta case made him much more aware of the victims families & changed his approach to profiling: pulling away from the pure science of the pursuit made him better at his job.

all of the actors playing the murderer’s row really turned it out. The guy playing Wayne Williams was eerily on the money; Berkowitz was perfectly pathetic; and my boy Damon Herriman knocked it out of the park as Manson - though the prosthetic makeup was a bit too noticeable, only a minor quibble. His act of sitting on top of the chair after walking in is one of the memorable details from the real interview.

loved Tench-as-audience-surrogate in that scene

what the show is trying to tell the audience is that murder, especially serial, sexually motivated homicide, is chaos. The pursuit of the “why” never evens the scales in any satisfactory way, even when the right person is caught. The hollowness of the s2 ending is important

also the air of dissatisfaction that comes from their interviews, of hearing these men say over and over how they either didnt commit the acts at all or that they didnt feel anything etc - being immersed in their chaos & trying to bring logical order to that, it really erodes a part of your soul over time - a profiler bears the weight of just how much base violence lies within a person & how many there are just out in the world.
there’s an ironic kind of helplessness in a job like that; a success means there has already been wasted lives, and often just serves to highlight how much more work is needed to apprehend similar offenders.

the whole thing is bummertown usa. that’s why the show is great, because it makes you feel that.

wait that sucks though, the whole usa is bummertown usa, art is supposed to uplift us

have you seen a David Fincher project before

it was kind of uplifting when whatsername tattooed that guy on the stomach

Okay, Zodiac was good! Part of the reason I've been putting it (and Manhunter) off is that I don't like torture/sexual violence in stuff at the best of times when I'm running 'up' I get positively squeamish. But these were fine for me because they were character studies/contrasts in philosophies rather than 'watch this really terrible thing happen and later on we'll make you feel better by killing the baddie'.

I'm the only person I know who didn't care for Zodiac and I don't really know why I didn't

I just finished S1 of this, and read the thread, and can't wait for S2, and there have been lots of great posts itt!

I loved both the tickling principal and thought the Debbie "subplot" were vital to the architecture of the first season. Tickling principal needed to exist to show Holden's own intrusive behaviour, and the danger of when his work goes into "pre-cog"-- and yet, it's clear he's right? Debbie needed to be a part of the story because (aside from her being a human foil for the alien Holden) it showed a real-life consequence of his presumptions; just as Holden created an ideal scenario for Devier to confess, and Devier confessed, and this could be construed as "coercion", Holden created an ideal scenario for Debbie to break-up with him, and Debbie didn't stop him from doing so-- Holden played himself, this situation could've gone much differently.

otm

I had to look up the tickling thing for season 1. I totally forgot about that.

After seeing ten hours of Holden being smart and over-thinking and physically uptight and sanctimonious and patronizing, I texted my ex-bf "am I Holden" and he texted me back "oh definitely"

lol
sad trombone

I don't think I'd let tickling dude near my kids.

no fucking way

oh fuck no

OK dumb question, perhaps, but:

a. Why was Shepard let go?
b. Why was he so mad at Holden about it?

I mean, I guess it's because (under Shepard's watch) there was lying about the "cunts", but I otherwise don't understand why Shepard would be forced out to be replaced by a more sympathetic individual, nor do I understand why Shepard would exclusively blame Holden. (It seems more likely that the higher-ups wanted Shepard gone because they have far greater faith in the unit's work than Shepard himself did? idk. I don't quite get it.)

It’s a bureaucracy

I watched that scene again and again and I still don't get it. "Someone had to take the fall" for what? Who required it? I just don't get it, and I don't understand the basis for most of Shepard's accusations.

Oh wait, I just remembered the last scene with the OPR. Maybe that was the direct cause? Not "cunts" or the principal or anything else but Holden's unrestrained contempt for the inquiry process?

Anyway that scene (where Shepard dresses Holden down) was really intense I watched it several times

That wasn't really clear to me either. Closest I can get is that Holden's behaviour was bad and demanded some response but the bureau didn't want to lose or stifle their boy genius so they punished his boss instead? Which would also mean that Gunn didn't actually make the OPR go away.

I refuse to write multiple paragraphs explaining bureaucracy

can you point us to the guy who wont

credit flows up, blame flows down, rivals for hierarchical fealty plunder and poach one another's institutional resources (esp. the productive or promising achievements of subordinates) in order to define the appearances of success in the face of uncertainly fluctuating external conditions

When Holden is trying to figure out who the snitch is he explicitly rules out Shephard as "having the most to lose" should the tape be discovered. Shephard also, against his better judgment, went along with everything. So the tape being discovered seals his fate. Holden is saved because Dunn is well connected and wants to ride this gravy train.

I see. So basically, somebody in Congress (i.e.) was upset that the unit (including Shepard) did this cover-up, somebody needed to be fired to placate that person, even though Holden tried to take all the blame himself (even to a point where his reckless disregard toward the OPR people seemed as if it would surely result in his dismissal), some people higher-up (Dunn) recognize that Holden is "on to something" and so they decide to blame and fire Shepard, instead, to placate the person in Congress who is mad.

So Shepard is equally angry that a. it was Holden who said "cunts", and then had it redacted, and then subtly persuaded Gregg to lie about it, as he is angry that b. Holden is considered by the FBI to be more valuable an asset than Shepard himself. Have I got it right? (Sorry, I've never worked in a hostile office environment before! I literally did not understand this plot point.)

lol as soon as Shepard left the party I said "oh he was forced to 'retire'."

"I refuse to write multiple paragraphs explaining {insert any ilx discussion}."

Only just learned Anna Torv is Australian, mind blown.

shes v cate tbf, idk what Australians "look like"

Somewhere between “exquisitely delicate beauty” and “yesterday’s chips left out in the sun”

xxp wait until you find out her aunt used to be married to Rupert Murdoch!

I think the lie about profiling the show hints at strongly but tends to dance around is that the psychological monographs on the incarcerated that they're coming up with are no more than window dressing and a way to reframe things to local police in a way that makes them push past biases. There's an undercurrent to every conversation with local cops who think offenders were "born bad" that implies poverty, racism, etc. and season two reverses that dynamic with the mothers who are sure the killer has to be a white KKK member.

It's pushing past the systemic and social biases that actually brings results. Politically, it can't be a younger black man killing the kids in season two because society can't handle the repercussions. That's where they're failing on BTK -- it can't be a man in good social standing because that's not who a serial killer is. All of the reasoning works backward -- coming up with a justification on why someone incarcerated committed the crime, not who committed an unsolved crime -- until they find an existing solved case that fits the current situation to apply as a template.

I re-watched s1 and binged s2. Great posts itt.

The two seasons feel very different in tone and mood. Upthread someone said s1 was an official adaptation of the book of the real-life Tench and Ford? Is s2 similarly biographical or is it a composite/ was the Brian stuff real? Was there an actual Wendy Carr?

The way Tench and Nancy are around Brian is so odd - I mean he's a weird kid and doesn't exactly invite hair ruffling and mad giggles but it all seems to be 'brian go and play' 'brian come and eat your peas'. Which may be just a normal TV trope; kids are often just there for narrative purpose I guess, but this show should be different.

I didn't know anything about BTK or the Atlanta stuff irl, could not believe it went up to like 29 murders or whatever it was. I felt like so much of the 'normal' procedural police expositiony stuff that you might expect wasn't there (in a good way) so it was kind of hard to get a handle on it.

Need to re-watch Zodiac.

also why is Gregg even there, he contributes nothing

much of season 2 including the manson + son of sam interviews are from the book. the brian stuff is not real (iow did not happen to one of the real life profilers but does seem to be based on a true story). the department did work with academics including ann burgess a professor from boston college who is mentioned a few times in the book. there's nothing in it about her sexuality tho and all that stuff feels like it was made up for the show.

The stuff with Tench’s kid was invented for the show.
Wendy Carr is based on a real person.

i read it at the shore last week and i was surprised to learn that even the tickling principal is in the book

Xp dammit

thanks
The book will be on my very slow-moving reading list

it's a v quick read

I liked how the show shows a lot of things that don't go anywhere e.g.that cross, the attempt to recruit security for the concert.

also why is Gregg even there, he contributes nothing

watching him squirm during Wendy's convo with the S&M killer was *chef's kiss*

I recently determined that my sexual preference is "Anna Torv's wardrobe on this show," I think.

finished S2.
the Atlanta story was very well portrayed i thought (had never heard of it prior to watching this).
but, have to admit, the BTK interludes become tiresome.

I am really surprised by how many people weren't previously aware of the Atlanta Child Murders!

Or at least I was until I reflected on the fact that of COURSE one of America's most prolific serial killers wouldn't ever achieve the same notoriety/uniquity/cultural cachet as Bundy or BTK or the Night Stalker, because his victims were black children. Nearly all of the serial killers whose names the average person could recall instantly killed white women.

(I'm not blaming mark e or anyone else for *not* knowing about Atlanta, just saying our culture wouldn't invest as much power in the names of these other killers, because their victims had less perceived value. So it's not as surprising as I would think at first glance. Relatively few people know Gary Ridgway's name, either, because he killed prostitutes.)

I was really shocked I hadn't heard of it! Then again I've only heard of Manson, Bundy... zodiac... That's about it.

I never heard of them! I’m not interested in serial killers, I always forget their names. I’m surprised tho I didn’t know about Atlanta seeing as I’ve.. read a lot of Baldwin and just missed that one.

Or at least I was until I reflected on the fact that of COURSE one of America's most prolific serial killers wouldn't ever achieve the same notoriety/uniquity/cultural cachet as Bundy or BTK or the Night Stalker, because his victims were black children. Nearly all of the serial killers whose names the average person could recall instantly killed white women.

well, there is Dahmer.

I remember the Atlanta Murders from the news when I was a kid. Even at the time there was a lot of doubt that Williams was the only killer, but after he was arrested the killings stopped so the story just faded away.

because his victims were black children

the fact i had never heard of this evil worried me a lot, for exactly this reason.
but to be fair at the time i was more interested in what Suggs was up to as opposed to following stories re mass murders in USA.
that said, it's a story that definitely has not had the same profile as the rest of the USA 70s/80s evil f*ckers, and so, for that reason alone, watching S2 was a sad/dark revelation.

btw a year or two ago there was a podcast about the murders-- "The Atlanta Monster" with lots of interviews with Williams

regarding Paul Bateson btw:

Bateson ultimately served 24 years and 3 months of his sentence, becoming eligible for parole in 1997. On the day after his 63rd birthday, in August 2003, he was released from Arthur Kill Correctional Facility on Staten Island. According to online records kept by the state's Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, his parole was successfully completed in November 2008.[7]

That is the last public record of Bateson available as of 2019; where he is living, or even if he is alive, is not known. Miller attempted to contact Bateson for his Esquire article in 2018 at his last known address, in the Long Island village of Freeport, but was unsuccessful as the phone had been disconnected; emails to different addresses either bounced or were not answered.[5] In his podcast interview around the same time, Friedkin said he had heard Bateson was living somewhere in upstate New York.[1]

A record in the Social Security Death Index shows that a Paul F. Bateson, with the same birthdate and a Social Security number issued in Pennsylvania, died on September 15, 2012.[6]

I don't doubt that the lack of a profile for the Atlanta Child Murders is primarily due to the race of the victims, but on a lesser level it can also be hard to figure out why some serial killers become celebrities and others don't. I've never quite understood why some who killed a handful are household names and others who killed dozens are forgotten. Does it always come down to the nature of the victims?

Add to this that WW was charged with only two, maintains his innocence (and is believed by many in the affected community)...well the whole thing is left in a very unsatisfying and messy place (which was, of course, brilliantly exploited by the show).

I think it's often due to the nature of their crimes, how they engaged w/ the media, the personality of the killer, etc - people remember the guy who dressed up like a clown, the cannibal, the guys who wrote letters to the media and courted public attention

i didn't know about ed kemper before this show tho i feel like maybe i should have

it really does boil down to the serial killer fitting into a very specific role for public consumption. It's very easy to see why Ramirez, Manson, Bundy, Dahmer, BTK, Zodiac, Berkowitz, and Gacy had so much attention lavished upon them vs Ridgway or Kemper or the Golden State Killer or the Grim Sleeper. The latter group had some crimes that were horrific but they didn't have the same "hook" the others did in terms of personality or their communications w/media. Golden State Killer was mostly known as the other Night Stalker til recently, maybe the "original" Night Stalker if the media was being a bit more factual.

Atlanta was a case where the murder spree itself and the investigation were more famous than the murderer. The killings were all over the news, and it seemed to take forever to find the killer--and it was just like they caught some guy.

y'all are profiling the public now

the short version of what I was aiming for before: you do profile the public, to determine where they're not looking for the killer (or whether they're looking at all), often due to stereotypes and social/racial/class issues

that's where the depressing theory that there are a number of unrecognized serial killings, because society assumes certain classes of people just tend to get murdered or die tragically

I feel shittier just having typed that

the closest comparison i can make with the Atlanta murders is the epidemic of murdered women in Juarez -- it's similar in that it took the numbers to reach a huge number before people started paying attention.

all the native american girls and women that have gone missing/ are being murdered too.

and the Texas Killing Fields

and the prostitutes killed and buried on Long Island

*every Mindhunter episode*

HOLDEN: did you kill her?

KILLER: nope

HOLDEN: we heard your dick game was weaksauce

KILLER: I killed her and ate her arm for breakfast, yeah

— Michael Tannenbaum (@iamTannenbaum) September 8, 2019

lol otm

blame everything ever, i mean csi in my mind was the *worst* for that type of formulaity (if a suspect actually denied it, it p much meant they would turn out to be innocent every time) but im sure every crime show ever has a similar setup

thin man movies obv best at it

csi was very little investigation -> conclusion and nearly all wrapped up in premise of the crime and the forensic process

it was always just the creepiest suspect

nah it always had grissom ~ look in their eyes and know~ it was fun but dumb as fuck once youd seen a few of them

apart from the one where the busbhad crashed that was legit good

I think they did a good job casting the killers, they are so creepy

in this show, not csi, fuck that

*every Mindhunter episode*

HOLDEN: did you kill her?

KILLER: nope

HOLDEN: we heard your dick game was weaksauce

KILLER: I killed her and ate her arm for breakfast, yeah

This scenario doesn't play out at all in the second season except for maaaaybe the Berkowitz scene.