Best movie of this year hands down!

Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

4 million dollar book deal...good promotion...make money for slicing someones throat...it's a west coast thing OJ...el libbo netflix' obsession with Trump has to be in there as well...pathetic....she's not married? go figure..good night hubby, don't worry about this knife here...now go to sleep mofugga..

I learned about this case several years ago in the media. In Germany, the media referred to Knox as "The angel with the ice eyes". Even Germanys "Der Spiegel", a usually more serious tabloid used the term.I would see the media in this case as one big Problem. Terms like "foxy knoxy" or "Angel with the ice eyes" suggest something, what is may be not there. In General, the media influence could not be more harmful.I watched the documentary today on Netflix and I am Aware, that an American production may over-emphasize the view of Knox. But I did not find clear evidence for a made up Story. Reading through some of the web sites for the case, the General story-line is accurate and the results of the film-maker is quite consistent with the ruling of the Italian board of Appeals, which eventually finished off the case.After all, there was a burglary that night in that house by a known criminal. There was not a lot of evidence, which linked Knox and her boyfriend to the Scene of crime. The circumstantial evidence was more like about a strange behavior like kissing on the Scene of crime or a blanket covering the victim. I cannot help but think, that Knox behavior is more the behavior of a half-child then of a criminal woman, who just conducted a murder and try to get away with it.I buy the Story of Netflix. Especially after reading through some - even critial - web sites. Therefore I consider this a good documentary. I changed my mind about the case and think - considering the horrible influence and Quality of the media - this was one step into the right direction.Good work, Netflix

Named the "trial of the decade," the story of Amanda Knox first captivated the world in 2007 following the gruesome murder of British student, Meredith Kercher. Since then, the case has been picked apart and reviewed by innumerable forensic analysts and murder mystery enthusiasts alike. The film has garnered high praise and popularity since its release on September 30th of this year, making it clear that many people still have a vested interest in this story. Much like the JonBenét Ramsey case, the case of Amanda Knox was made into a grand spectacle by the media. It has even been suggested that the media may have swayed the ruling of the Italian court. This is supported by the film. In it we see the media put pressure on the government to apprehend the murderer quickly, but this makes investigators sloppy and they make careless mistakes. Evidence is not properly preserved and this in the end radically changes the lives of the two main suspects: Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox. Murder mysteries and "whodunit's" are astonishingly popular among today's film consumers. Everybody wants to play detective, and in the Amanda Knox case, everybody did. Every single person from sea to shining sea had an opinion. The people of Perugia, Italy cried out for justice for Meredith Kercher and then the world followed suit. Again, this is arguably one of the reasons that the case played out as it did. Two convictions, two acquittals, and still no definitive answer as to who killed Meredith.There's always an angle; people, architecture, and yes, cameras. The directors of this film interestingly chose to make use of subtle camera angles and techniques for a variety of purposes throughout the film. The use of intermittent stills of Italian countryside, flashes of newspaper headlines or clips of a busy Perugian street made for nice visual imagery as well as good transitions. Most notably, however, were the peculiar camera angles in the early parts of the film. For example, during interviews with infamous journalist, Nick Pisa, who reported on the case from start to finish, the camera awkwardly hesitates on him as he smiles crookedly following his speech on the controversial way that the media got their hands on Amanda's diary she kept while in prison. This paints Nick in a negative light and even proliferates the stereotype of journalists as slimy, shady creatures, and ultimately garners more sympathy for Amanda, as she was the one being attacked in these publications. This same technique was also used with similar intent when interviewing Detective Mignini, another figure in the story who is generally disliked. Both Pisa and Mignini were misogynistic egomaniacs. They both profited from Amanda's demise. Throughout the entirety of the case they could both be seen basking in the glory of their attacks on Amanda. While Mignini used fear tactics and physical abuse in questioning, just outside the prison walls Pisa typed away feverishly at his computer printing phrases like, "femme fatale," "Foxy Knoxy," and other sexist remarks in what has been called, a "character assassination." Lastly, in my opinion, the film was very effective. It certainly had a target audience: those who have always been interested in the case, but I believe it also drew in others who enjoy documentaries, Netflix subscribers in general (since it was well advertised) and of course your run of the mill murder mystery fans as we discussed in the beginning. For many, this film helped them to see the case differently. With all cards and evidence out on the table, viewers were clearly able to see the facts. No matter whether you find Amanda's shrieks of delight in the end, following the announcement of her exoneration, encouraging or creepy, the film achieved its sole purpose: telling the twisted tale of a chilling murder.

I was able to watch this on Netflix streaming movies. It is hard to believe all this started 9 years ago.When I look at Amanda Knox, listen to the way she speaks, when I look at her backwards-sloping forehead, when I look in her eyes. I KNOW she is guilty, she is obviously a murderer! She killed her roommate.I say that in jest, because it is almost what the Italian prosecutor did. He is a fan of movies, especially detective movies. He is a great admirer of Sherlock Holmes, how Mr Holmes can look at sparse evidence and uncover not only the perpetrator of crimes but also the motive.And ultimately that is what happened. The Italian investigation had no concrete evidence, yet they were able to convict Knox and her boyfriend of 5 days. And they were able to explain a motive, pulled out of thin air. An appeal overturned that conviction. Then a higher court re- convicted them. And finally the highest court in Italy declared them not guilty. All this took place over an 8-year period. I found this to be an excellent documentary, which included interviews with Knox, her boyfriend, the prosecutor, and a British journalist. Who really knows if she had anything to do with it? Until the Italians find concrete evidence Knox will remain "not guilty." And I hope it stays that way.