Manhunt - General Discussion

[FormerMod-a1]

Quote

 

Manhunt: UNABOMBER tells the dramatic and gripping true story of the FBI's hunt for the Unabomber, the deadliest serial bomber in history. The story focuses on FBI Agent and Criminal Profiler Jim "Fitz" Fitzgerald (played by Sam Worthington of "Avatar" and "Hacksaw Ridge"), who pioneered the use of forensic linguistics to identify and ultimately capture the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski (Paul Bettany, "Captain America: Civil War," "Avengers" series and "A Beautiful Mind"). This series features both Bettany and Worthington's first major leading roles on U.S. television.

As a fresh faced Criminal Profiler and the newest member of the Unabom Task Force (UTF), Fitz faced an uphill battle not just against the Unabomber - one of the most sophisticated and brilliant criminals in history - but also against the bureaucracy of the UTF itself as his maverick ideas and new approaches were dismissed by the system.

Shot on location in Georgia.

 

Started Aug 1, 2017.

Chris Noth and Jane Lynch are also in this.

On the A&E/Discovery Channels

[Razzberry]

I was going to request a forum for this show when I saw your post.  Love that Discovery ID is doing scripted dramas, and it starts with a bang from the Unabomber, a barely recognizable Paul Bettany.  

Tuesday nights on Discovery/ID

 

[raven]

I watched the first two hours not knowing what to expect and thought is was good, so I'm in for the duration.   I remember that the brother tipped off the FBI but I didn't know anything about Agent Fitzgerald and I find the whole linguistic profiling really interesting, as was the fact that the original FBI profile was way off base.  The choice to not even show Kaczynski until the second hour was a good one, ramping up the curiosity factor a bit.  

I do wonder how they're going to draw out the story for another 6 episodes. 

[FormerMod-a1]

I was surprised that none of the other agents thought reading the manifesto would be useful, even if only to get into his mind, or learn more about him (if they thought it was a something he copied).  I know they all weren't profilers or linquistic experts, but to just completely ignore it seemed odd to me.

[khyber]

Looking forward to this being high quality.

[meep.meep]

On 8/6/2017 at 5:22 PM, aquarian1 said:

I was surprised that none of the other agents thought reading the manifesto would be useful, even if only to get into his mind, or learn more about him (if they thought it was a something he copied).  I know they all weren't profilers or linquistic experts, but to just completely ignore it seemed odd to me.

This is probably based on the profiler's book, so of course he's the only one with the smarts to read the manifesto.  

[SandyToes]

We wondered about that, too.  The FBI is looking like real idiots here, especially the guy with the beard.  Haven't gone back and researched the story so as not to be "spoiled" by how this unfolds.

After this week's episode, we may just wait and record, then binge watch. The ep ended and we both shouted, 'NO!"  Really well done.

[FormerMod-a1]

Yes, it seems they are presenting the rest of the team as "old school/vintage cops" when this was the 90s.  Seems a bit odd.  Not that I don't think these kinds of attitudes aren't still around, but you'd think the team hunting the Unabomber would be a bit more open, a bit more elite...  something.  Of course, even if Jim Fitzgerald didn't write them quite this bad,  I'm sure certain aspects are being amped up for dramatic effect.  And then there's distilling weeks/months,/years into a few TV episodes so just seeing part of the story.  All those 'boring' moments that don't make it to screen might have been better interactions.

[DXD526]

Quote

The FBI is looking like real idiots here, especially the guy with the beard.

Wow, I really want to smack that guy. He just keeps getting more insufferable. It was a depressing experience watching this week, wondering how many cases get bungled because of people like that. People who don't like being questioned and have the seniority and arrogance to dismiss anyone that threatens them. Depressing.

[meep.meep]

If you want to smack him, then he's doing a good job acting!  And I think he is.

To me, the acting is great, but the way they're telling the story and the way they've chosen to portray the FBI team leaves a lot to be desired.  Worthington and Bettany are really good.  Most of the supporting players are really good too.

[LADreamr]

There is a lot that's good about this series and I'm definitely hooked, but some of the dialogue is just painful. When it's about or with the Unabomber, it's fascinating. Bettany is incredible. But it seems like any discussion outside of the case just sounds so amateurish.  And if I never have to hear, "Dude!" again, that will be great.

[Razzberry]

There's supposedly a rule that you need conflict to tell a good story. I don't happen to agree, but that's why we always get the asshole bosses, nagging wives, and defective detectives. We're getting the Trifecta.

I just don't believe that no one cared to read the manifesto, they would have salivated over it, or anything from him.  Fitz wrote the book so it's his word, but I'm not buying that part. Overall I'm loving it though, and Paul Bettany is mesmerizing, so I'm all in. 

[LADreamr]

Agreed.  Especially don't buy them blowing off the manifesto, because when that was published, everyone was all over it.  There was mass fascination among the public; how did they not care?

[millahnna]

I vaguely recall from the news after he was caught that the FBI having a crazy wrong profile was actually a thing for a really long time in the case.  If they were that stubborn about their profile, I have no trouble believing that at least some members of the task force were completely dismissive of the manifesto as well. But since the series is based on the profiler's account, meh.  Grain of salt and all of that.

[Quilt Fairy]

Based on where we find Fitz in the beginning of the series, I'm assuming that this case forced his marriage onto the rocks.  But the way the wife acted in tonight's episode drove me crazy.  If your husband doesn't have a 9-5 job, and is working on something really important, I think you have to recognize that fact and suck it up.

[Razzberry]

[MerBearHou]

Well, Elizabeth Reaser annoys me in everything she does and this is no exception. 

I'm captivated by this series but it is beyond annoying how much the FBI discounted Fitz -- everything he suggested was rejected from the get-go (I get that there's push/pull in series to make for drama).  Does the FBI not welcome thinking outside the box whatsoever??  That's how you have breakthroughs.

[SusieQ]

Just heard Fitz on the radio (Fresh Air) talking about his book. Yeah, it sounds like things were changed to make it more "dramatic".

In particular he says he never spoke to Ted K in prison. He did say that there was concern that the warrant might get thrown out as noted in that part of the show. 

[LADreamr]

Jesus. I'm finding Ted Kaczynski the most likeable person in this series. 

[meep.meep]

I've never seen Sam Worthington in anything but Avatar.  He can actually act.

It's too bad the subject wasn't first revisited in a documentary.  It's really hard to tell how much is hyperbole and how much is real.  How knuckleheaded would you have to be to alienate all three of the women in your life at the same time?

[MaggieG]

I'm really enjoying this show. Was the story Fitz told to Ted's brother about the sketch true? 

[springbarb]

The show is fascinating, but I just do not care about Fitz's romantic life. Don't care about the wife. Don't care about the linguist who made a pass at him. Like, I get where she was coming from, but I also am annoyed with her--of course he came to her, she's the one who helped with the language in the first place. I think the takeaway from this episode is how Fitz sucks to the women in his life.

[pennben]

So, I just binged the series this evening.  I think it is really well done.  And now I'm annoyed that I have research to do and books to read to dig down to get back to the real story!:)  I was buried in long work days when this all played out, so I ping the highlights but don't really remember the details and want to dig more.  So that, to me makes this a successful series.

As for this last episode with him losing the three central women in his life at that point.  You aren't supposed to care about them because this show has set them up to be merely props to his internal struggles.  That is a hugely frustrating thing for me.  I really thought the linguist would have more agency, but nope, she may have provided the tools to break the case, but she ultimately is just a prop in this series to show how dangerously close the profiler is to becoming the criminal that he is chasing. Sigh.  I'm assuming she's real, but honestly I'm not sure and that's why docudramas can frustrate me even though they fascinate me.  They always give me homework!

Anyway, I've really found this well-done otherwise.  

And like MaggieG, I want to find out about the sketch story, I'm guessing it's true, but I had never heard that and wow, the iconic sketch was a distorted memory.....so many layers to that. 

ETA:  I just went to IMDB to identify the real characters played by the woman FBI agent and the linguist.  They are listed by only their first names, not full names as respectively,Tabby and Natalie, no last names like other real life folks portrayed here.  Apparently a Natalie Rogers was a linguistics specialist at Stanford who helped on the case, but my quick search shows nothing else on her.  I'm guessing she didn't approve of her full name being used in this series since she's only listed by first name.

As for rebellious Agent Tabby, who leaked the letter to him by fax and gets fired for her faith in him. , I don't think she exists, other than a character to drive the plot as I thought.  From Fitzgerald's interview to Newsweek on the mini-series:

Quote

What was the moment you realized the Unabomber was Ted Kaczynski?

I spent five months at the Unabomber task force, looking at known writings of people we had as suspects. In the summer and fall of ’95, we had about 2,500 different subjects! I go back to Quantico in mid-February 1996 [to work on another case]. One of the bosses at Unabomb Task Force (UTF) faxes me a 23-page document. I ask who it’s from. He says, ‘Oh a guy from the midwest who came up as a suspect. Just let us know what you think.’

I took this 23-page document off the fax machine. I look at my dog-eared and multicolored version of the manifesto and, in two hours, I realized the faxed copy I just received was an outline of the manifesto, using much of the same wording, definitely the same topics and themes. I called back my boss at the UTF and said, ‘You’ve got one of two things. This is an elaborate plagiarism; the author of this new document took the published manifesto in the Washington Post and put it together and made it look like something.’ He said, we know that’s not it.’ So I said, ‘You’ve got your man.’

It was a HE! And the he was his BOSS! And Fitzgerald hadn't been taken off the case only to return triumphantly and drip disdain over a woman agent who put herself in peril and leaked him information.  Gaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!!

I guess ya just got to make the truth sexy, as if this story wouldn't be fascinating enough, so lets throw in a couple of "chicks" who worship you along the way but also must be cast aside in your heroic tale.....sigh again.  Why would that be necessary?  I'm just going to assume now that his wife was an absolute saint and maybe wanted him to be home for a birth/death of a child, perhaps left a quick message and told him not to worry if he couldn't make it,  and he rolled his eyes because she didn't realize he was on a mission and did not have three seconds to spare listening to her message and she should have known that and not burdened him.  

And mostly, this is a criticism of the fiction parts of this story, not the guy, but boy howdy, I wonder how every single person he interacted with during this time feel about him now that he's basically only had quibbles about the show.

Edited August 28, 2017 by pennben

[Razzberry]

I missed last week because Dish, I assume, took the show off DiscoveryID, and is running it on Discovery instead.

[Rock knocker]

It's always been running primarily on Discovery

[Quilt Fairy]

I found this latest episode, which was all about Kaczynski's troubled youth, to be quite boring.  I'm in it for the chase.

[Ki-in]

28 minutes ago, Quilt Fairy said:

I found this latest episode, which was all about Kaczynski's troubled youth, to be quite boring.  I'm in it for the chase.

I agree. I had no idea, however, about him being the victim of such an experiment. Or the sending an explosive note in science class. I figured he had little to no interaction with women in the romantic sense. These facts were interesting but could have been done in between the search for him.

Edited August 30, 2017 by Ki-in

[jrlr]

1 hour ago, Quilt Fairy said:

I found this latest episode, which was all about Kaczynski's troubled youth, to be quite boring.  I'm in it for the chase.

I found this episode really fascinating, but maybe it's because I was already aware of the MK Ultra experiments.  The fact that he was put through this at sixteen is pretty hideous.  Maybe if Ted had just sent a mail bomb to that evil asshole professor he would have stopped there (I'm not being serious, it's clear that the beliefs that he wrote about in his manifesto were already quite developed when he entered Harvard).   It does make me wonder what happened to the other students who were deemed "suitable" for this government mind-fuck. 

[pennben]

I wasn't expecting a Kaczynski-focused episode, so I was put off initially as I too generally am more interested in the chase.  However, I have no recollection of the Harvard experiments done on him (double-checked to make sure that was real) and subsequently found it fascinating to learn about.  It really is astonishing that this was allowed to happen.  Apparently, the center at Harvard has permanently locked away his study from being revealed.  There is another article I'll link to in a bit that suggests it will be released after he dies, although if that is the case, it seems as though if he wanted, it could be revealed with his consent.

Now that my radar is up in trying to spot contrivances in the narrative, I found an article that touches on some dramatic license they took in this episode.

On, the one hand, I had thought that it was likely true that the mother had merely signed a permission slip and the awful parts were added by the ones doing the study.  Not so:

Quote

There is an actual letter from Wanda to Murray saying, “Thank you for choosing my son, and I really hope you’ll be able to help him.” It doesn’t go into all that detail about how he’s a creep and a bed-wetter and a compulsive masturbator. We decided that it’s a little too cruel to have an actual letter from Wanda to Murray, and that it helped tell our story better if it’s a fake letter, even though in reality, Wanda signed a permission slip and wrote on it, “Maybe you’ll be able to help my poor son. He’s totally messed up. A Harvard psych professor — here’s what he needs in his life.” 

 On, the other hand, I had no recollection about any discussion of his sexuality at the time, so I assumed the hints that there may have been childhood confusion with his one friend were just thrown in to juice up the story, but although I still think they may be fudging it, there is support for their decisions:

Quote

There were drafts of this script where we went into his sexual history, which is really interesting. At one point, he wanted to have a sex-change operation. His relationship with his [childhood friend] is sort of borderline homosexual, in a kind of 11-year-old experimental way. We kept trying to thread those moments through in a way that was compassionate and that was part of the total picture of Ted Kaczynski. … but as soon as you put in “Ted Kaczynski wants a sex-change operation,” suddenly everything becomes about that, where it isn’t really about that. It isn’t about sexual confusion; it’s about a desire to just connect with someone, anyone, who can understand me and feel my pain

Anyway, the second article is interesting from the filmmakers perspective of what they were thinking for this episode. 

Back to the chase! And here's hoping no pesky women get in the way of our intrepid investigator going forward!:)

Edited August 31, 2017 by pennben

[khyber]

I found this last episode fascinating. I'm enjoying the heck out of this series. 

[MaggieG]

I know I'm not supposed to but this episode made me feel a little bad for Ted. When he was standing outside the kid's house with his homemade musical object and he watches the kid get keyboard, my heart broke for him just a little. And then I remembered he's the Unabomber and I shouldn't lol. Paul Bettany is doing a great job.

[LADreamr]

I felt the same.  I thought this episode was one of the best hours of tv I'd seen in some time, and while I had to keep telling myself not to be so sympathetic, what happened to him was horrific and inexcusable. 

[Razzberry]

I thought it was a great episode.  It was easy to empathize with him up to a point.  I think everyone has lost a best friend to someone else, but most get over it.  Ted, not so much.  I also found his ideas juvenile and derivative, but the way that professor befriended him only to tear him down was cruel.

[jrlr]

3 hours ago, Razzberry said:

I thought it was a great episode.  It was easy to empathize with him up to a point.  I think everyone has lost a best friend to someone else, but most get over it.  Ted, not so much.  I also found his ideas juvenile and derivative, but the way that professor befriended him only to tear him down was cruel.

It wasn't just cruel, it may have been one of the pivotal reasons that this kid with already-existing psychological problems went over the edge.  

[GHScorpiosRule]

I was going to watch this, and it's been queuing up on my DVR. But after reading everyone's posts about the changes...I may just delete. Maybe I'm too set in my ways, or I don't know, been spoiled by Helter Skelter, the docu-movie, not the Beatles album, that did a FANFUCKINGTASTIC job, that I have no patience for "dramatic license/titillation" bullshit.???

Helter-Skelter still scares the bejesus out of me.?????

Edited September 1, 2017 by GHScorpiosRule

[raven]

I felt a ton of sympathy for Ted as a child and as a teenager.  It's hard to be the lonely oddball, made more difficult by being advanced two years beyond your peers.  That's without even getting into how awfully he was treated by Murray, befriending him and then putting him in those experiments.

Regarding the artistic license, from the article @pennben linked, I thought this was interesting :

Quote

The one really sad thing [was] Ted talks about the Murray experiments in his autobiography or in some of his journals, and there’s this moment when he says, “Why did I keep going back?” In the show, we say, “It’s to prove that he couldn’t break me,” which I think is the heart of the matter. But in his journals, Ted says, “He just promised me at the end there would be a party with girls at it, and I thought if I just hung in there, I would be invited to that party. Still to this day, it bothers me that there was no party.” You just think, “Wow.” I feel like if we had had Ted say that, it’s too much — nobody would believe it. But when you read it in his journals, it’s really heartbreaking because he was literally looking for connection.

I think if they had shown Ted thinking a party, it would have made him less sympathetic.  Still, I would rather have heard maybe some piece of it.

Paul Bettany is excellent in this.  I really enjoy the linguistics bit and just ignore how the women around Fitz are just props (ughh).  Though Fitz is being shown as correct in his interpretations, he doesn't come off as the greatest person; throwing his colleague under the bus made me want to slap him.  I get the rules and all, but he's the one who confronted Ted's brother!! Unless that didn't happen either.

It was fascinating when he showed the one sketch that was supposed to be Ted was really the sketch artist.   Memory can be faulty and subjective.  The bit where Natalie explains to Fitz about determining where the people in the middle of the nachos (sorry, I binged a bunch of eps and don't remember the location); where it was determined they came from because of words they didn't have was also really interesting to me.

Though we have a pattern - Fitz is doubted!  Fitz looks like a fool!  Fitz is proven right!  the story is so interesting and the performances are good, I'm really enjoying it. 

[pennben]

Yeah, I'm not going to fact check this one.  This one finally let loose the notion of being anything other than telling their "hunter v hunted: same or different" story they've been building to.  All the fascination I had by binging the first four or five episodes is just gone. Honestly, I spent the whole episode annoyed that the point of this has been to build up to a dramatic 'confrontation' between profiler and subject.......that never actually happened!

I guess on the plus side, it intrigued me enough to fill in my gaps through my own research on this topic that I only had vague memories of, and it was a fantastic binge for those first few episodes.  So there's that. 

So, I guess I don't fully know where I land, other than knowing this episode finally tipped me over the edge into full disappointment tonight.  I just feel like real life can always be more interesting as a story than an interpretation thereof that has an agenda.  I do admit an interest, though, in looking up Helter Skelter (mentioned by @GHScorpiosRule above), even though its apparently another docudrama, as it is something I was too young to really understand and have the haziest memories of, but a strong desire to fill them out. 

I'll watch the conclusion here if I can keep my eyes from rolling back too far in my head based on what I now expect to play out:)

Edited September 6, 2017 by pennben

[GHScorpiosRule]

@pennben, you can buy Helter-Skelter on dvd really cheap! I got it from lovingtheclassics.com (the stupid site is down or the link isn't working on my work PC).  It's mostly a drama, but George DiCenzo, who plays VincentFucking!Bugliosi, turns toward the camera at the end, speaking to the audience. Steve Railsback plays Manson. When I watched this the first time, I thought for SURE Manson's psycho sycophants were the REAL ones, and not actresses. They were THAT good. And SCARY.

Edited September 6, 2017 by GHScorpiosRule

[jrlr]

What a dissapointing episode.  Okay as far as suspense with the FBI/warrant/arrest, but all the stuff with Fitz was so ridiculous and irritating.  Poor Fitz who has alienated everyone in his life has no one to turn to when Ted is caught; poor Fitz is completely ignored by the ENTIRE office full of agents after the capture; poor Fitz doesn't get any credit because Genelli (?) claims ithe linguistic forensice idea was his.  And worst of all was the idiotic scene with Fitz in Ted's cabin gettng his fingerprints on evidence and even using Ted's typewriter.   I'll certainly watch the last episode, but this ultimately banal series could have been much, much better and I expect better from producers Kevin Spacey and John Goldwyn.  

[Razzberry]

I thought it was a terrific episode.  The scene at Ted's was exremely well done and the neighbor Jerry jumping on him was awesome. Bettany's really looking dirty and crazy.

I wish I knew what really happened behind the scenes because Fitz's account has him solving the case single-handedly.                                    

Everyone else is portrayed as stupid, jealous, and an actual hindrance to his genius.  

He finds the 'smoking gun' needed with a phrase that's commonly said either way.  I don't see how that's a unique or identifying feature.        

Rejecting the connection on the basis of a different typewriter, really?

His wife gives him the boot and he rebuffs the advances of his co-worker.  Call me cynical.

Edited September 6, 2017 by Razzberry

[pennben]

14 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

@pennben, you can buy Helter-Skelter on dvd really cheap! I got it from lovingtheclassics.com (the stupid site is down or the link isn't working on my work PC).  It's mostly a drama, but George DiCenzo, who plays VincentFucking!Bugliosi, turns toward the camera at the end, speaking to the audience. Steve Railsback plays Manson. When I watched this the first time, I thought for SURE Manson's psycho sycophants were the REAL ones, and not actresses. They were THAT good. And SCARY.

I ended up buying the book dirt cheap and noticed that Amazon has the movie as a rental, so I'll watch it as soon I have time.  Coincidentally, did you see that one of Manson's followers (Leslie Van Houten) was granted parole today? Apparently she had been granted it last year, but it was overruled.  Time will tell this go round.  Thanks again for the recommendation!

[roughing it]

On 9/1/2017 at 2:49 PM, GHScorpiosRule said:

Helter-Skelter still scares the bejesus out of me.?????

Me too!  I can't even look at Manson's face whenever they show him.  Nasty, horrific nightmares that movie (and book, because I couldn't lay off) gave me.

[pennben]

As to the finale.....Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, no.  I made it 10-15 minutes.  Initially them helicoptering the cabin out of the woods over the town looked like a live action reenactment of the animated movie Up.  Then, they have the courtroom scene where the search warrant, the potential fruit of the poisonous tree, would be adjudicated.  What is shown is pure fiction, by the way.

Cut to the Stanford linguist who consulted on the case walking in to sit by our intrepid FBI agent  (as he waits tensely to go mano a mano with the Unabomber) ....focus on her gently caressing his shoulder as she gets his attention as she sits down.  "I'm am just a prop to show how strong you are and how attracted to you I am.  You are the smartest and the manliest man who ever manned and I am blessed to just be in your presence even though you don't love me, like I you. I sincerely hope this shows just how hero-worthy you are you genius manly man", she seductively whispers.  Whoops, no, silly me, that's not what she said, it was a degree or two more subtle:   "I want you to know I'm here because none of this matters.  He can tear your resume apart on that stand, he can burn linguistics at the stake. I will still be here".

No wonder the real life woman did not allow her name to be attached to a prop.

And then, then, he is the only person to figure out Ted's lawyers are going for an insanity defense.  Only him, no else one picked up on what was happening (even though in real life the insanity defense was a public movement by his family from arrest to trial).  How in the world has any crime been solved since this guy retired.  It is a wonder we aren't all dead because of all the incompetence without him.  Am I alive?  I'm now not sure, did I die, as did we all, when he retired from the FBI, and we have just been living in purgatory until we've been enlightened by his brilliance? Who can know, who can know....other than Agent Fitzgerald, of course.

This was all in the first 10 or so minutes! I'm usually a completionist but nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, no. How could something so promising end up so, so embarrassingly disappointing. 

Edited September 13, 2017 by pennben

[LADreamr]

You didn't miss anything by missing the rest. The linguist situation made me stabby, too.  This series's use of women, in general, did.  Really lame ending to a sometimes brilliant series. Paul Bettany for the win. Everyone else, meh. 

[pennben]

Thanks, even though I deleted it, I wondered.  I think you are right that Paul Bettany stands out.  They made the 'good guy' good beyond belief, those around bad/against him/props, all of them caricatures, but they let the Ted character breathe, which allowed Bellamy to bring him to life.  I think that was the foundational flaw that allowed this show to collapse onto itself by the end.  

[LADreamr]

But I think the unintentional irony was that the "good guy" turned out to be such a dick, and Ted was sympathetic, to a degree.  But for an episode that included a trial, survivors of his bombings, a suicide attempt, and Ted going from having his life exactly the way he wanted it, to his defense being completely out of his hands, the finale was really boring.

[raven]

18 hours ago, LADreamr said:

But I think the unintentional irony was that the "good guy" turned out to be such a dick,

I actually think that was intentional - he comes off as a jerk in the first episode IMO - sort of "look how Fitz became the thing he was chasing".  I haven't read his book and doubt I will but, though he did the linguistics, I don't think he embellished/fictionalized the way they did in the show.  I tried to look at the Ted/Fitz conversations that never happened as the show trying to give us Ted's POV on his defense, etc.  Unfortunately, since we know they never met, it just comes off as overly dramatic and awkward, despite Paul Bettany's excellent performance.

It's a shame that the show decided to do so much fictionalizing - I've read interviews with Ted's brother about turning him in, how he felt about his brother, how they fought to keep him alive.  There's enough drama with the family stuff, Ted's background, Fitz and the linguistics and the real FBI work without all the false padding. 

They did actually move the cabin though I don't think Ted ever saw it again. 

[LADreamr]

I agree that the fictionalizing really hurt it, although I loved the scene early in the series with Ted in jail, explaining to Fitz how all the evidence could disappear, based on the content of the search warrant. That's one place where it really worked. 

So much of the stuff they dramatized was just unnecessary, and at times painful to watch, in all its soap-opera-y-ness (Sorry, that's terrible writing).  But after hearing his NPR interview, I'm not sure Fitz's douchiness is all that fictitious.  

[Calvada]

I'm finally getting around to watching this - episodes have been accumulating on my DVR.  Knowing a little bit about the actual investigation, this is full of exaggerations, mistakes, and just plain made-up shit.  And as a lifetime resident of Wisconsin, I wish they would get the facts about Leo Burt right.  They said he disappeared in the late '70s.  Instead he has been a fugitive since the bombing of Sterling Hall on the University of Wisconsin campus in Madison in August 1970.  They said he was part of "attempted bombings."  I'm not sure how you can call the Sterling Hall bombing "attempted."  It was one of the  biggest car bombs in the history of the US until McVeigh/Oklahoma City (same bomb ingredients - ammonium nitrate and fuel oil), and it killed a researcher working in the building.  He was not born and raised in Chicago, but grew up in Pennsylvania until he enrolled at UW Madison.  But give the TV folks credit, he was born in 1948.  I think the FBI did consider Leo Burt as the Unebomber, but not for the reasons they gave in this movie.  He was a known (alleged) bomber, so he was considered.  

I am going to finish watching it (I'm about half through it), but I'm going to do it with the mindset that this is total fiction.  

[Mumbles]

I kept looking for a forum for this show in the regular show lists back when it was running and just discovered this one now. Never too late!

Quote

The show is fascinating, but I just do not care about Fitz's romantic life. Don't care about the wife. Don't care about the linguist who made a pass at him. Like, I get where she was coming from, but I also am annoyed with her--of course he came to her, she's the one who helped with the language in the first place. I think the takeaway from this episode is how Fitz sucks to the women in his life.

Ugh, this was the worst part of the series for me, the subplot of the suffering wife raising the kids and getting insecure and jealous of her husband's female colleagues. Such a sexist cliche for such an otherwise good show.

I had always assumed Kaczynski was completely nuts and was surprised how cunning and sneaky he was.

I thought the red light example of technology controlling our lives was very good, something I never thought of before.

I could only imagine what Kaczynski would think of Facebook - people willingly ceding the details of their private life to a corporation - if he were free. It doesn't seem as if anyone's interviewed him in a while.