There are two flaws in this serialized documentary I consider critical and fatal. First, the opening episode includes a variety of scenes in which the murder victim's words are imagined through animation and a voice actor. The animation colorfully romanticizes the relationship between the murder victim and the man convicted of her murder, in the murder victim's own voice, although she isThere are two flaws in this serialized documentary I consider critical and fatal. First, the opening episode includes a variety of scenes in which the murder victim's words are imagined through animation and a voice actor. The animation colorfully romanticizes the relationship between the murder victim and the man convicted of her murder, in the murder victim's own voice, although she is of course powerless to respond, while her family - who continue to believe the murder verdict was correct - is powerless to stop her words being used in such a manner. It is deeply unsettling watching from this perspective, as though a murderer has unburied the body of their victim and put it on display - indeed the producers, one of whom is the "legal advisor" of the convicted murderer, do not hesitate to literally put this corpse on display, featuring actual photos of the deceased victim prominently in the show.
The show's second fatal flaw is the massive one-sidedness of the narration, which presents a defense to the trial without providing any substantive presentation of the claims and evidence against the convicted individual. In that regard, it is unclear whether the name of the show - "The Case Against Adnan Syed" - is ironic or whether it is intentionally misleading, for it is thoroughly committed to the defense of the convicted individual and seems to consciously avoid any evidence that may support the jury's findings. This is deeply unsatisfying viewing, and leaves the viewer with many questions that a viewer suspects have answers, but these simply aren't provided by the storyteller. The lawyers are advocating zealously for their clients, but in a documentary, the client should be the viewer, not any actual client. It is disconcerting to watch this in real time, with the actual client in prison, seemingly surrounded by people who have "drank the kool-aid" without any real analysis of the risks that existed in the appellate process. From a viewing of this documentary, these lawyers all seem irresponsible and failing in their duties to their client, just as at least one of these lawyers, as a film producer, are irresponsible and fail in their duties to their viewer.
For these reasons, and many others that are secondary to the stated issues, this is a massively disappointing and unpleasant series to watch.… Expand