News:

For returning members: As Asmodean noted, when he repaired the site after a recent downtime "the local avatars got nuked." If you need any assistance with getting your avatar back, please post in the Ask HAF board.

Main Menu

What are you watching?

Started by Claireliontamer, October 31, 2015, 05:17:45 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

No one

The wheels go round and round.

Waski_the_Squirrel

Tonight, I'm watching the Kenneth Branagh version of Wallander.

It's a depressing vision of Sweden, but another part of me wonders what my life would be like if I had grown up in a secular country, like Sweden.

Tank

Quote from: Waski_the_Squirrel on December 25, 2015, 05:33:45 AM
Tonight, I'm watching the Kenneth Branagh version of Wallander.

It's a depressing vision of Sweden, but another part of me wonders what my life would be like if I had grown up in a secular country, like Sweden.
Probably a lot less confusing :)
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Claireliontamer

I've just watched the Christmas special of 'Sherlock'.  I thought it was  brilliant, completely over the top and a genius parody of itself. 

Sandra Craft

Day two of the Twilight Zone marathon.
Sandy

  

"Life is short, and it is up to you to make it sweet."  Sarah Louise Delany

Velma

One of those classic scifi movies from the 1950's:  It Came From Beneath the Sea.
Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of the astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy.~Carl Sagan

Crow

Retired member.

Crow

Though I'd check out the standup that Simon Amstell did a few years back, I enjoyed his cuntishness in popworld and hosting skills in Nevermind the Buzzcocks. Very good in a way I didn't expect it to be.

Simon Amstell - Do Nothing
Retired member.

Icarus

Some one gave me a ROKU thingy for Christmas. Now I have been watching a trashy series titled; "Orange is the new black".  Wow, that is one nasty set of scenes. So why in hell am I watching such stuff?  It is all because of an NPR interview program where the author
, the  real "Piper", was incarcerated for having made  a mistake in judgment mixed with her lesbian attraction to another woman with criminal intent.  The real Piper was a graduate of the exclusive Smith College and something of a debutante.  She landed in the slammer to cohabit with the dregs of society, some of whom were most intelligent. 

Firebird

Mostly been on a Marvel binge lately. Watched Jessica Jones on Netflix (very good)  and now doing Daredevil (good, though not quite as good)  in between the occasional Dr.  Who. All we do these days is stream.
"Great, replace one book about an abusive, needy asshole with another." - Will (moderator) on replacing hotel Bibles with "Fifty Shades of Grey"

Insoluble

#40
There's nothing on.
I'm happy, hope you're happy too

Crow

I have slowly been watching Making a Murderer, I have a bit of a dislike for documentaries due to the fact you can make any idea credible and stage what you like but damn it is good.
Retired member.

Claireliontamer

Quote from: Crow on January 19, 2016, 08:04:10 PM
I have slowly been watching Making a Murderer, I have a bit of a dislike for documentaries due to the fact you can make any idea credible and stage what you like but damn it is good.

I'm part way through this, it is good!

Claireliontamer

Quote from: Claireliontamer on January 20, 2016, 09:16:39 PM
Quote from: Crow on January 19, 2016, 08:04:10 PM
I have slowly been watching Making a Murderer, I have a bit of a dislike for documentaries due to the fact you can make any idea credible and stage what you like but damn it is good.

I'm part way through this, it is good!

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/making-a-murderer-cold-case-investigator-believes-notorious-serial-killer-was-guilty-and-not-steven-a6824891.html have you seen this article today?

Crow

Quote from: Claireliontamer on January 21, 2016, 01:39:51 PM
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/making-a-murderer-cold-case-investigator-believes-notorious-serial-killer-was-guilty-and-not-steven-a6824891.html have you seen this article today?

I hadn't but I have now. I don't know what to make of it all. After watching the final episode my thoughts on the series was that the lawyers made some massive errors in the defence. This is where I think they fucked up going by what was presented in the show.

1) They never properly focused on the first charge of murder. They spent too long focusing on a conspiracy when there wasn't enough/any evidence for it, there was only suspicion. This is why they lost, they failed to highlight that because the bones, car and bullet were on his land doesn't indicate that he committed the murder. Its just as likely could have been another member of the family as it could have been him.

2) They didn't create a credible alternative story, they managed to poke holes in the time line but not provide an alternative narrative. The one they alluded to placed the police as the perpetrators. Rather than it just being a bias that made him the sole suspect and was an unfair investigation that ignored any potential other evidence.

3) They didn't ask for basic experiment methods to ensure a lack of bias or determine the accuracy of the blood tests.

Ultimately neither case was strong enough for a verdict to be given and whilst there is only the option of guilty or not-guilty available a fair trail isn't possible as it as clear as day to me this was an inconclusive case from both arguments. The Police were bias, the evidence was suspicious with only location really giving it any weight and the trail had been spoilt before it even got to a court. The defence were overly emotional, played along with Stevens conspiracy theory, failed to proved alternative narratives, failed to present a string of other potential suspects it could have pointed towards, failed to ensure their evidence got the best chances possible (even if it was late that would be a cause for review), failed to highlight why Stevens DNA could have been in the car and under the bonnet without the need for murder to have happened without resorting to far fetched ideas as the core of the case.
Retired member.