There are so many errors in this wanna be documentary that the producers should hang their heads in shame. The documentary begins with a broad generalization claiming that serial killers are a phenomenon that only started post World War II in the 20th century, only to turn around and mentioning famous 19th century serial killers like H.H. Holmes, Jack the Ripper and Jane Toppan and ignoring the fact that between 1900 and 1950 more than 180 serial killers were active in the US alone (120+ internationally).
Many facts of the Lipstick Killer they covered were outright wrong: He didn't murder his 6 year old victim in a basement, but merely dismembered her there after killing her at some unknown location. He also didn't blame the killings on an alternate personality like this shoddy film claims. That was what the police claimed after they drugged Heirens with sodium pentothal which then caused him to utter the name "George" under the influence of the drug a couple of times. He never claimed the name of his alter ego was George Murman and especially not that this was short for murder man like the film claims. That's what the press came up with.
They don't even get the pronunciation of Gein's name right and this could have been easily rectified. Not just did Wikipedia list its proper pronunciation as early as December 2007, at the same time news footage from reporters talking to Gein's neighbours and pronouncing his name could be found on Youtube...and the stuff is still there! The lackluster research doesn't just reflect negatively on the producers, but also on their experts. Apart from the fact that none of them got Gein's name right, their statements are usually absolutely useless, merely expressing opinions about the horror of serial killings with very little hard information. Most of the interpretation of how serial killers tick come from a "true crime writer", a person without apparent education in criminology, psychology or psychiatry.
To call this film a documentary would lend more credence to it than it deserves. The film has a massive 90s feel about it, judging by the choice of background music and editing style they used. I was almost willing to cut this film some slack. After all, research in pre-internet times was by far not as quick and easy as it is today, even though that's no good apology for such a project that must have taken months to put together and for which proper research should have still been done.
When I discovered that this was made in 2009 I was actually at a loss for words. How can something so shoddy be released to the public FOR MONEY when it was produced in the era of Wikipedia and Google Books where correct information was just a mouse click away? The problem is that from a less knowledgeable perspective this looks like a pretty watchable documentary. Though antiquated the style may seem, the editing is solid with using plenty of original footage and pictures, though not as much as it could. People without detailed knowledge regarding the cases might end up memorizing false information. Viewer beware. Don't forget a pound of salt when watching this. You might find it entertaining, though to those seeking accurate information, you'll be utterly disappointed as you'll find yourself researching every little fact yourself after discovering that you can't trust anything that is being said in this film.
Many facts of the Lipstick Killer they covered were outright wrong: He didn't murder his 6 year old victim in a basement, but merely dismembered her there after killing her at some unknown location. He also didn't blame the killings on an alternate personality like this shoddy film claims. That was what the police claimed after they drugged Heirens with sodium pentothal which then caused him to utter the name "George" under the influence of the drug a couple of times. He never claimed the name of his alter ego was George Murman and especially not that this was short for murder man like the film claims. That's what the press came up with.
They don't even get the pronunciation of Gein's name right and this could have been easily rectified. Not just did Wikipedia list its proper pronunciation as early as December 2007, at the same time news footage from reporters talking to Gein's neighbours and pronouncing his name could be found on Youtube...and the stuff is still there! The lackluster research doesn't just reflect negatively on the producers, but also on their experts. Apart from the fact that none of them got Gein's name right, their statements are usually absolutely useless, merely expressing opinions about the horror of serial killings with very little hard information. Most of the interpretation of how serial killers tick come from a "true crime writer", a person without apparent education in criminology, psychology or psychiatry.
To call this film a documentary would lend more credence to it than it deserves. The film has a massive 90s feel about it, judging by the choice of background music and editing style they used. I was almost willing to cut this film some slack. After all, research in pre-internet times was by far not as quick and easy as it is today, even though that's no good apology for such a project that must have taken months to put together and for which proper research should have still been done.
When I discovered that this was made in 2009 I was actually at a loss for words. How can something so shoddy be released to the public FOR MONEY when it was produced in the era of Wikipedia and Google Books where correct information was just a mouse click away? The problem is that from a less knowledgeable perspective this looks like a pretty watchable documentary. Though antiquated the style may seem, the editing is solid with using plenty of original footage and pictures, though not as much as it could. People without detailed knowledge regarding the cases might end up memorizing false information. Viewer beware. Don't forget a pound of salt when watching this. You might find it entertaining, though to those seeking accurate information, you'll be utterly disappointed as you'll find yourself researching every little fact yourself after discovering that you can't trust anything that is being said in this film.