Nice effects though.

An absolute waste of money

It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Michael Peterson has a problem - well two problems actually. His wife is dead, he says from falling down the stairs and repeatedly hitting her head. Amazingly, the couple's best friend had also died in remarkably similar circumstances several years previously, with Michael and Kathy bringing up the victim's two young girls after the tragedy. In what is almost a painfully long series (it's well made, but not exactly a thrill ride) Michael's character is put under the microscope, as is the honesty and expertise of the prosecution's expert witnesses. Michael is a difficult, outwardly unemotional character that is difficult to like or have sympathy for, but his treatment during this case by law enforcement officials, lawyers and even his own family members is deeply questionable. Fascinating but overlong, this is a serious indictment if the US Justice system and its practises.

Regardless of whether you believe Michael Peterson is innocent or guilty of the crime he is accused of, this documentary is extremely well done and appropriately portrays the twisted justice system, how evidence can easily be fabricated or misinterpreted, and how members of the jury and the public, are incapable of "unhearing" things that have been said in the courtroom. The influence of the media - the bias the individual reporters have and the way they choose to relay the information they receive - heavily impacts the way the public view the alleged crime, and in this day in age, people cannot easily escape the media's coverage of such incidents. I found myself on the fence about Peterson's innocence right up until the last couple of episodes. Something Peterson's attorney (David Rudolf) said has resonated with me, and I believe it will for a long time, "Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence". This documentary will forever change the way I view crimes portrayed by the media, and what it means to plead "guilty".

This was completely a biased tale of a bizarre man that ultimately is painstakingly unsatisfying. The editing is atrocious and could have been trimmed at least by half and knowing that he had a 15 year relationship with the films editor completely discredits this film among many other things.

I agree with a couple of reviews below. Firstly, this thing is dragged out. Secondly, I guess it was made in partnership, in some way, with the defense so really focuses on Peterson's side of the story without really giving a fair focus on the prosecution's side. Peterson did also come across to me as, not only a narcissist, but a raging sociopath. The defense is pretty flimsy. I mean, really how in the hell could a human gush so much blood from falling down some stairs? Has that ever happened in history? The defense makes a point that in a blunt trauma beating there is always some kind of fracture or whatever. Who cares!? Maybe Peterson didn't cause blunt trauma with the blow poke. He could've used a raking motion or something to cause lacerations. Stuff like that isn't explained and I don't understand why. My feelings is that the prosecution didn't have quite enough evidence to convict Peterson without a reasonable doubt but at the same time the defense IS pretty flimsy.In any case we're dealing with raging sociopaths, motivated probably by money. Once the victim found out her husband was banging gay guys, most likely some kind of monetary consequence was revealed, divorce or whatnot. While at the same time we have idiotic prosecutors with their lying and evidence tampering to prosecute Peterson at any cost. But really, who's kidding who. He did it. Peterson's guilty. Period. I mean, maybe he didn't do it. Maybe it was a ghost, right? There's no way in hell all that blood was caused by a stair fall. No way.