While the crime committed was interesting, the documentary focused on the wrong topics and was too slow. None of the investigators were interviewed and the focus instead lied on the mental state of the killer. Most interviews were of reporters and prosecutors giving their opinions. Not sure what the point of this documentary was.
73 Reviews
There is some merit here, but it's not for everyone
rmgaspar-49er8 July 2021
It is a bit of a cold crime at this point, this would have benefited from earlier release. It is also a case without a lot of mystery, everyone knows what happens (the doc also tells you in 10 minutes). So, it has to be about how the story is told, how much inside information the show can bring.
As most of the Netflix series, this is longer than it should. Episodes are not that dense. But it's still within "OK". The main merit I found - and this is not to be taken for granted in crime series - is how it manages to involve absolutely everyone. Elize, the killer, obviously, now and then. Police sheriff who investigated. Victim's family. Elize's family. Prosecutor. Lawyers for the defense. Significant press members who were covering it at the time. Fomer school colleagues who had relations with the couple. You do get everyone's opinion and insights. Good editing in this aspect.
It shows victimization and lots of fingers pointed. If you hear the killer, there will be victimization, for granted. It is part of what will incluence viewer's opinion. Documentary lacks brilliance or new evidence. It is for those who followed the case then. If you are all new to it, lack perspective, it might look flat.
As most of the Netflix series, this is longer than it should. Episodes are not that dense. But it's still within "OK". The main merit I found - and this is not to be taken for granted in crime series - is how it manages to involve absolutely everyone. Elize, the killer, obviously, now and then. Police sheriff who investigated. Victim's family. Elize's family. Prosecutor. Lawyers for the defense. Significant press members who were covering it at the time. Fomer school colleagues who had relations with the couple. You do get everyone's opinion and insights. Good editing in this aspect.
It shows victimization and lots of fingers pointed. If you hear the killer, there will be victimization, for granted. It is part of what will incluence viewer's opinion. Documentary lacks brilliance or new evidence. It is for those who followed the case then. If you are all new to it, lack perspective, it might look flat.
A series that shows the self-victimization of a brutal killer
eleonoramfazio8 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
It's my first time commenting, and I wouldn't have done it if I hadn't read the other two reviews, but I feel like I have to. Sorry for my bad English, I'm italian.
I found this documentary well done, and I don't think the creators' intent is to justify the victimization of Elize but simply to impartially show the reality of the facts. I also think that she is a brutal murderer and certainly a skilled manipulator - the lawyers helped her look less guilty - but I absolutely do not think it is necessary to give a low rating to the film.
I think that the requirements to be based on to rate a film product must be different, otherwise it is better to abstain. As a person who has seen many crime series, I believe this serie is well done and compelling.
I found this documentary well done, and I don't think the creators' intent is to justify the victimization of Elize but simply to impartially show the reality of the facts. I also think that she is a brutal murderer and certainly a skilled manipulator - the lawyers helped her look less guilty - but I absolutely do not think it is necessary to give a low rating to the film.
I think that the requirements to be based on to rate a film product must be different, otherwise it is better to abstain. As a person who has seen many crime series, I believe this serie is well done and compelling.
The dead has no voice
rxbandits848 July 2021
It's like my grandmother used to say: "The dead has no voice".
Elize is a human that did a huge mistake, and she still has her rights, but it's a bit disgusting to interview a cold blood killer and let her talk trash about the person she killed and mutilated. And of course, the dead husband has no way to defend himself from all the nonsense and accusations coming out of his killer's mouth.
The documentary makes you almost forget that she shot him in the head and cut his body in small pieces and threw it in the bush, such a poor lady.
I watched until the end but I can definitely say I don't really see the point of watching this documentary.
Making a cold murder a victim.
Elize is a human that did a huge mistake, and she still has her rights, but it's a bit disgusting to interview a cold blood killer and let her talk trash about the person she killed and mutilated. And of course, the dead husband has no way to defend himself from all the nonsense and accusations coming out of his killer's mouth.
The documentary makes you almost forget that she shot him in the head and cut his body in small pieces and threw it in the bush, such a poor lady.
I watched until the end but I can definitely say I don't really see the point of watching this documentary.
Making a cold murder a victim.
What a sick bitc$
sandase9 July 2021
This woman is disturbing. Her and Marcos are both flawed, that's why they were together. He had an esteem issue, and she had many too count. Evil woman, who enjoys harm onto others. The way she laughed when she put that poor little mouse in that plastic tub with that snake shows how sadistic and evil she is. Calculating, cold and manipulating. She should have been an actress. Her tone of voice drove me nuts during this documentary.
Interesting case
nie_martin9 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I was looking forward to seeing this documentary, considering the great impact this case had, its particularities, and because this was a Brazilian production (there are not many Brazilian shows on Netflix, let alone of this type). I really liked how the show was construed and how it kept me glued to the screen, even though I already knew who the murder was and how the crime had happened.
We are given different perspectives on the case, even from the murderer herself, which enriches the story and helps me reach to my own ideas.
I dont agree with some of the comments that say that the show wanted to portrait Elize as a victim; I believe that the show simply gave her space to tell her side of the story - which is always quite interesting in my view -, as it gave to the prosecutors to tell theirs. It is for the viewer to listen and decide which version seems to be more reliable.
It is quite impressive to see and hear some of the comments that were made about Elize (not really the ones regarding the crime she committed and how she committed it, but on her past life, her role as woman, a wife and mother). Of course she shouldn't have killed him and dispose the body as she did (she committed a crime and must be punished for it), but she clearly was not treated as a princess during her marriage (or maybe not as the kind of princess anyone envisages to be), her husband was certainly not a keeper. It is very unnerving to hear some of the victim's friends and the prosecutors say that they knew this was going to end like this because they looked at her or because they knew she was a prostitute at some point in her life, or saying that he was a gentleman and that she should had been forever grateful that he rescued her.
This does not mean that I believed her side of the story more, but simply that I believe that these kind of comments are necessary, specially from the people that are in charge of the investigation, that should have tried to see this story in a more objective manner. In fact, I still dont know if what she did was planned or not, since both sides of the story seemed convincing, but at some point I got kinda of sympathetic for her for things not remotely related to the crime.
As I said, this is a solved crime, that, at first, seems to look like it might not be as interesting as other cases, but I have to say that I ended up questioning a lot things: her decisions, the steps she took after the crime, why she acted like the way she did, what would I do in that exact same situation if I was in her shoes (inside her side of the story), etc. Also, there are several social aspects that are raised in the show that are interesting to follow: e.g. How this procedure was treated by the press just because the murderer is a women and her husband was rich, misconceptions about people, how your past experiences may shape your future decisions, how the penitentiary system works in Brazil (very particular rules) and how it tries to ensure the reinsertion of the prisoner in society.
In conclusion, I liked the show and, if you are a fan of these kind of documentaries, I would encourage you to give it a try.
We are given different perspectives on the case, even from the murderer herself, which enriches the story and helps me reach to my own ideas.
I dont agree with some of the comments that say that the show wanted to portrait Elize as a victim; I believe that the show simply gave her space to tell her side of the story - which is always quite interesting in my view -, as it gave to the prosecutors to tell theirs. It is for the viewer to listen and decide which version seems to be more reliable.
It is quite impressive to see and hear some of the comments that were made about Elize (not really the ones regarding the crime she committed and how she committed it, but on her past life, her role as woman, a wife and mother). Of course she shouldn't have killed him and dispose the body as she did (she committed a crime and must be punished for it), but she clearly was not treated as a princess during her marriage (or maybe not as the kind of princess anyone envisages to be), her husband was certainly not a keeper. It is very unnerving to hear some of the victim's friends and the prosecutors say that they knew this was going to end like this because they looked at her or because they knew she was a prostitute at some point in her life, or saying that he was a gentleman and that she should had been forever grateful that he rescued her.
This does not mean that I believed her side of the story more, but simply that I believe that these kind of comments are necessary, specially from the people that are in charge of the investigation, that should have tried to see this story in a more objective manner. In fact, I still dont know if what she did was planned or not, since both sides of the story seemed convincing, but at some point I got kinda of sympathetic for her for things not remotely related to the crime.
As I said, this is a solved crime, that, at first, seems to look like it might not be as interesting as other cases, but I have to say that I ended up questioning a lot things: her decisions, the steps she took after the crime, why she acted like the way she did, what would I do in that exact same situation if I was in her shoes (inside her side of the story), etc. Also, there are several social aspects that are raised in the show that are interesting to follow: e.g. How this procedure was treated by the press just because the murderer is a women and her husband was rich, misconceptions about people, how your past experiences may shape your future decisions, how the penitentiary system works in Brazil (very particular rules) and how it tries to ensure the reinsertion of the prisoner in society.
In conclusion, I liked the show and, if you are a fan of these kind of documentaries, I would encourage you to give it a try.
Interesting, but way too slow.
Sleepin_Dragon28 August 2021
It's an interesting crime, but I found the direction very off putting, the focus always somehow seemed to be in the wrong area, we never seemed to get answers to any of the relevant questions.
I was interested to learn about some of Brazil's legal system, including the week out of Prison, that was fascinating.
Overall, I felt it was too long, they milked every single drop out of the story, it seemed never ending. If you're watching the English dubbed version as I did, do you agree that the voice overs all sound too cheerful?
Interesting story, slow production, 6/10.
I was interested to learn about some of Brazil's legal system, including the week out of Prison, that was fascinating.
Overall, I felt it was too long, they milked every single drop out of the story, it seemed never ending. If you're watching the English dubbed version as I did, do you agree that the voice overs all sound too cheerful?
Interesting story, slow production, 6/10.
The Crime POV of Elize Matsunaga
xiaoprinz16 July 2021
I think some people who wrote reviews and disappointed is not getting the point that this docuseries titled her name, her Point of Views. In some ways I get that she is a manipulator, this serie is not 100% supporting her as a victim and the crime as the result. You can also see how investigators againsts her theory and forensics clearly didnt agree with her explanation.
I believe it is a crime of passion, but on how she murdered her husband I still believe in forensics results, because it is proven and can't be manipulated againsts her words.
There are some proof that her husband really think he is untouchable by taking his mistress to the same restaurant where people recognized him as regulars. Although we never get to hear the victim POV. Why people really put on negatives the fact that she was a prostitutes, and ditched the fact that her husband also regularly paid the services?
But then again, we will never know how and what make her do it because I dont believe her story as it is not genuine on how she do it, but then again, I do believe this is a crime of passion. Either premedidated, or not.
I believe it is a crime of passion, but on how she murdered her husband I still believe in forensics results, because it is proven and can't be manipulated againsts her words.
There are some proof that her husband really think he is untouchable by taking his mistress to the same restaurant where people recognized him as regulars. Although we never get to hear the victim POV. Why people really put on negatives the fact that she was a prostitutes, and ditched the fact that her husband also regularly paid the services?
But then again, we will never know how and what make her do it because I dont believe her story as it is not genuine on how she do it, but then again, I do believe this is a crime of passion. Either premedidated, or not.
absolutely outrageous!
aminerahimi11 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I had to create an IMDB account to write a review for this documentary. Like so many other viewers I don't understand the point of this documentary. Is this cold blooded murderer supposed to get some sympathy from the viewers for her future appeals? I find it disgusting and troublesome that the documentary makers are trying to victimize this murderer and blame the victim who cannot even defend himself!
It's really shameful and pitiful enough that she gets to leave the prison five times a year for a week, I cannot understand what she is trying to accomplish with her interviews!
To be honest I understand from personal experience that psychological trauma has a heavy toll on a person but she could have just left the luxurious life and money or the cheating husband without committing murder and dismembering him. She always had the choice to leave but she did not want to leave that comfortable life and let some other woman enjoy it. It is absolutely outrageous that the documentary tries to portray her as a victim after this heinous act and justify the husband's murder!
It's really shameful and pitiful enough that she gets to leave the prison five times a year for a week, I cannot understand what she is trying to accomplish with her interviews!
To be honest I understand from personal experience that psychological trauma has a heavy toll on a person but she could have just left the luxurious life and money or the cheating husband without committing murder and dismembering him. She always had the choice to leave but she did not want to leave that comfortable life and let some other woman enjoy it. It is absolutely outrageous that the documentary tries to portray her as a victim after this heinous act and justify the husband's murder!
Elize Psycho.
Guanche4820 September 2021
Very good, but only if you like scary, very scary horror and gory stories. It can cause nightmares, that's how intense it is.
I found the doc very interesting and intense.
It surprises me that the focus on her so big is, almost like a movie star, that's the negative part of this all. I think she is especting a kind of pardon?
As far I'm concerned this woman should never leave prison again. She's dangerous, a psychopath you don't see coming.
Don't watch it if you are not a fan of the horror things that happens in real life.
I found the doc very interesting and intense.
It surprises me that the focus on her so big is, almost like a movie star, that's the negative part of this all. I think she is especting a kind of pardon?
As far I'm concerned this woman should never leave prison again. She's dangerous, a psychopath you don't see coming.
Don't watch it if you are not a fan of the horror things that happens in real life.
A documentary shouldn't try to favor any viewpoint
jenny-jd10 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Why is this 'documentary' trying to make me feel that it is okay that some trash woman not only murdered her husband but even went so far as to dismember him, which is already so demented on its own- but even more so being someone that she claims to have loved in any way; and then tried to steal his life of wealth.
I don't believe for one second that anyone could dismember a body under extreme panic, that is a calculated move and not something just anyone could get through. She knew she could accomplish that because she was planning to do it from the beginning.
Butchering an animal does not somehow make you immune to the trauma it would cause a normal person's brain to even just see someone getting dismembered, let alone be the one doing it; and neither does being a nurse or watching surgery.
The only people who can do things like this are the ones with a truly sick and deranged mind.
This is not a documentary, it is biased misinformed garbage.
Documentaries do not portray any certain viewpoint which would sway the viewer into any one direction.
This is pure nonsense.
And what was with that nonsense woman in the green top continually going on and on about sexism and violence against women... Like wtf does any of that have to do with this.
I don't believe for one second that anyone could dismember a body under extreme panic, that is a calculated move and not something just anyone could get through. She knew she could accomplish that because she was planning to do it from the beginning.
Butchering an animal does not somehow make you immune to the trauma it would cause a normal person's brain to even just see someone getting dismembered, let alone be the one doing it; and neither does being a nurse or watching surgery.
The only people who can do things like this are the ones with a truly sick and deranged mind.
This is not a documentary, it is biased misinformed garbage.
Documentaries do not portray any certain viewpoint which would sway the viewer into any one direction.
This is pure nonsense.
And what was with that nonsense woman in the green top continually going on and on about sexism and violence against women... Like wtf does any of that have to do with this.
Centered in the killer's point of view.
alesilvacastro12 July 2021
It's a bit unsettling to watch the killer herself talking about the crime for the documentary though it is intriguing at the same time.
Although it could have had one less episode like every other crime series of Netflix, it leaves you wondering if Elize is a cold-blooded murder or committed a crime of passion.
I don't agree that is biased to Elize. Of course it is going to feel this way because it's centered in her narrative. On the other hand they show the investigator, prosecutor and the victim's family and friends talking.
It's up to the viewer form their own conclusion.
Although it could have had one less episode like every other crime series of Netflix, it leaves you wondering if Elize is a cold-blooded murder or committed a crime of passion.
I don't agree that is biased to Elize. Of course it is going to feel this way because it's centered in her narrative. On the other hand they show the investigator, prosecutor and the victim's family and friends talking.
It's up to the viewer form their own conclusion.
Interesting but too long
Movie-Guy-6527 October 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Certainly is interesting but feel it could of been more interesting if it had been edited to a couple of hours.
But what was disappointing was when a journalist had the audacity to accuse those who questioned whether Matusunga did the murders without help of being sexist. Ridiulous.
But what was disappointing was when a journalist had the audacity to accuse those who questioned whether Matusunga did the murders without help of being sexist. Ridiulous.
Badly made series
nanieo20 July 2021
What a boring, repetitive series and so badly made.
It could have been better, because its quite a interesting story line, but it just could not capture my attention. Choppy, trying hard to extend the length of a time for the series by repeating the same bits again and again.
Honestly do not waste your time watching this.
It could have been better, because its quite a interesting story line, but it just could not capture my attention. Choppy, trying hard to extend the length of a time for the series by repeating the same bits again and again.
Honestly do not waste your time watching this.
Netflix bias
aneborges19989 July 2021
I am Brazilian, I can't understand why ??? She is a cold murder,There's no excuses for the crime, the worst part is show to the world that in my country they can leave the prison many times in a year. There is no Life in prison here.
Behind almost every crime there is a man
nataliarizava26 October 2021
Behind almost every crime there is a man. In this case the one to blame is the stepfather of Elize Matsunaga. It's disturbing how no one talks more about the sexual abuse she suffered when she was a child. She did a terrible thing yes,but it's clear that she's been adused and mistreated since childhood and by her own husband with these terrible consequences at the end.
What's the point?
miahucic8 July 2021
Netflix crime documentaries have been really dissappointing lately.
The murderer keeps repeating herself, making bunch of excuses for cold-heartedly executing and mutilating her husband's body.
What is the point for this doc? Trying to make the victim out of murderer? We should feel sorry for her? .. I don't think so!
You should have got a divorce, lady.
The murderer keeps repeating herself, making bunch of excuses for cold-heartedly executing and mutilating her husband's body.
What is the point for this doc? Trying to make the victim out of murderer? We should feel sorry for her? .. I don't think so!
You should have got a divorce, lady.
imagine the uproar if the sex was reversed.
kxxxxxx9 July 2021
Ive watch tonnes of tru-crime documentary and this is one of the worse & most shameless. 4 hours of non-stop self-victimization of a brutal killer & victim-blaming. She ends with saying theres more brutal crimes committed than hers (shot husband in head, cut him up like animal & dump like trash) out there and media only focus on her because her husband was wealthy? Wow really netflix? U guys approved this?
Definitely worth watching if you like true crime stories
ska-5451911 July 2021
I almost didn't watch it due to the negative reviews. It feels like people are leaving reviews of what they think of Elize rather than actually about the watchability of the docu-series.
It is very watchable and interesting. The way the show is directed, you become quite absorbed into the story. You get to really understand who Marcos and Elize were, and why the relationship erupted as it did.
I didn't think Elize came across as likeable. She seems like another Amanda Knox character, quite self-absorbed.
But what this docu-series does do is give a story. And it doesn't just give Elize's version. There are plenty of voices calling Elize out for being a psycho - the prosecutor, the friends of Marcos, and his siblings.
This show isn't a eulogy to the victim, but it also isn't a one-piece propaganda for the murderer.
A series about the murder without Elize's voice would be incomplete. The fact that Elize is very good at portraying herself as Little Miss Innocent is not the fault of the producers. For a discerning viewer who likes to analyse, this docu-series is excellent.
It is very watchable and interesting. The way the show is directed, you become quite absorbed into the story. You get to really understand who Marcos and Elize were, and why the relationship erupted as it did.
I didn't think Elize came across as likeable. She seems like another Amanda Knox character, quite self-absorbed.
But what this docu-series does do is give a story. And it doesn't just give Elize's version. There are plenty of voices calling Elize out for being a psycho - the prosecutor, the friends of Marcos, and his siblings.
This show isn't a eulogy to the victim, but it also isn't a one-piece propaganda for the murderer.
A series about the murder without Elize's voice would be incomplete. The fact that Elize is very good at portraying herself as Little Miss Innocent is not the fault of the producers. For a discerning viewer who likes to analyse, this docu-series is excellent.
She doesn't deserve a tv show
ratynhosm9 July 2021
Zero sympathy for either of them. May they both be reincarnated as mice.
thisisdonna-5471920 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I wish the content of the third episode had been showed in the first so as to immediately reveal the character of these people and to save me the tedium of watching this sordid little story. For those who have the humanity to show compassion to animals, please be warned that the third episode shows these disgusting humans revelling in the feeding of a live mouse (who is so terrified that it urinates, for which they mock it) to a snake. This alongside frequent discussions and images of theit hunting 'conquests"'. The abhorrent animal cruelty aside, this is a ponderous and biased documentary with incredibly unsympathetic main players. Its sole merit is the way in which it initially makes Elize sound credible, only to dismantle this by revealing the extent of her psychopathy. I was just left feeling, "Well, it couldnt have happened to a nicer man".
Shameless
kevinsnoto15 July 2021
Found myself mumbling "are you kidding me?" every 5 minutes. Treats the viewer with no respect whatsoever. For instance it will glance over basic questions like "but why did she drag him off and dismember him?" with an answer like "because she had to ferry him corpse out of the hotel without anyone noticing, silly! How else would she have done it?" Totally absurd.
awful documentary glorifying a killer
cmminca13 July 2021
This woman is pure evil, her husband cheated on her, boo hoo (get a divorce lady) she shoots him and cuts up his body. No remorse from her ever. She did the crime while her infant daughter was in the house. FYI, her husband she killed & dismembered, was a billionaire, she would have been a rich lady for life if she just divorced him. Her life was pampered & spoiled. Again no remorse while she prepares for possible release in near future. Her quote at end of film is that shooting her husband and dismembering him wasn't that bad of a crime. The reason it got so much publicity was because her husband was a billionaire! No its because a supposed nice lady shot and killed her husband then dismembered him all by herself. Her thoughts are to regain custody of her daughter who is cared for by paternal grandparents. Take your blinders off lady, they don't give custody to cold blooded killers You will really hate this woman after watching this trash show.
Handles Complex Topic Well
guscarolvi15 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I am writing this review mainly to balance out the reviews on here so far. This documentary is centered around the first interview with a woman who murdered her husband. It was a case that was famous in Brazil due to the victim being the extremely wealthy heir to a food empire. However unlike the impression many the other reviews give, a wide array of other viewpoints are included in the documentary such as testimony of the victim's family, the family's attorneys, investigators, the lead prosecutor, the victim's friends, reporters that worked the case and others.
What I think many find so disturbing is that it does humanize the murderer. However this is not terribly unusual for the genre except in this case it is a woman. Thus many of these reviews show the pervasive sexism which is addressed in the film. This is not to say it "excuses" the crime, but to say it does provide insights into why it occured and how it was handled by prosecutors and the press. The fact the producers dared to deal with misogyny at all is why there are so many outraged posts on this documentary (unlike say the 500th documentary on why Ted Bundy was a "genius").
I just want to point out that for all the cries of reverse sexism in these reviews, in actual fact women who kill their abusers usually receive more severe sentences. I do not know the stats in Brazil (I assume they are worse) but in the US on average women that kill their abusive husbands get 15 years *longer* sentences than abusive men who kill their wives. Men who murder their wives often are depicted as temporarily insane, for instance a Kentucky man cut off his wife's head and got 5 years in a psychiatric ward as his entire punishment. Whereas a woman who fired a warning shot at her husband (which hit a wall) after he tried to choke her to death got 20 years. Anyway the point is it is actually the societal norm to emphathize with men no matter what the circumstances of the case are.
This is evident in how many minimize Marcos' (the victim) behavior as simply that of a "bad husband" when it seems like a far deeper issue than that. Marcos essentially couldn't have normal relationships with women. He "dates" exclusively prostitutes. This is how he met the woman who murderd him, Elize. She was a prostitute who then became his mistress (he was married at the time), then his wife. Marcos goes on to repeat this same pattern by cheating on Elize with another prositute who he intended to marry. The power dynamic of a extremely wealthy man basically buying a poor woman companion cannot be overstated. It shows not someone who was simply "shy" but someone who needed to have complete power in relationships.
Elize was from a very poor background with significant trauma early on. Her father abandoned her, and her mother essentially did as well, going to work in a far off city and leaving her with her sexually abusive step-father. Anyway, again this is not to say murder is a perfectly fine option and she should get a prize, but her background shows why she would be vulnerable to an abuser, and would snap in such a terrible way. I think what people are conflating is *excuse* with *causality*. There are important social questions raised here: allowing rampant child abuse creates screwed up adults, and when wealthy men can do whatever they want poor women resisting them may feel totally desperate. Basically Elize is shaped by the multiple traumas of living in a society that is patriarchal and classist. She became brutal to survive. This doesn't make her an angel, or even likeable, but it makes her a 3-dimensional human.
The tortured logic of the prosecution was interesting to behold. For instance the uber creepy medical examiner and the lead prosecutor invent this idea that she must have had an accomplice. This was to prove premeditation which would have increased her sentence. But the nonsensical part of this, is that the accomplice avoided being on camera by using secret tunnels under the building and so forth. However the obvious problem with this is that Elize left a complete trail of evidence of her commiting the murder on those same security cameras. So it's pretty clear that camera issue never even occured to her. (The lead detective also thinks the accomplice idea was ridiculous.)
Imo it seems pretty clear from the evidence that it was not premeditated. She is a law school graduate, so has some intelligence, yet the entire crime was pulled off in a sloppy way where it was 100% obvious she did it. The disposal of the body for instance clearly had no forethought (it was in bright blue plastic bags in eye shot of the road with all identifying material intact). Both she and her husband were gun collectors and hunters so there were plenty of ways she could have set up an "accident" where she shot him and got away with it.
I think it is hard for people who haven't experienced abuse to really understand the mindset, and often people have a hard time grasping the impact of abuse that isn't physical. But the fact that she lived in this strange closed off world with him, where he constantly questioned her sanity, degraded her, etc creates a super warped sense of reality. Also it can't be forgotten that he did have immense power and privilege so the idea that she could simply walk away may have seemed impossible to her (ie- that he would take her daughter and drag up her history as a prostitute in court).
Anyway given all that was presented it seems far more plausible to me that she snapped and shot him. Whether this was actual "self-defense" I am not so sure. I think it was more anger/revenge and just reaching a boiling point. Her history of being abandoned also may have made the prospect of him leaving her more devastating too. Given that she herself claims she can't really name the emotion she felt when pulling the trigger, my guess is she was kinda just on autopilot and maybe even dissociative. This obviously it was not a choice she should have made, but it doesn't make sense that she sat down and plotted it in any way given how badly it was done.
Anyway, enough spoilers, just rebutting some of the other things I've seen written which fall back on the conspiracies and so forth. It seems a lot more mundane just with a really rich guy. Basically a wife shot her cheating husband during an argument. But what makes it interesting are the personal stories and the issues it raises about class, sex, race, etc in Brazil.
All told it is highly watchable and effectively contrasted point and counterpoint to weave the story through several interesting turns. The film-makers didn't really force a heavy-handed conclusion and instead raised questions with ambiguous anwers. So if the main point of watching "true crime" for you is a simple story arc of total villain who is righteously defeated, this does not deliver that. Instead it documents the human failings, idiosyncrasies, emotions, irrationality, and trauma that can lead to a bizarre turn of horrendous events.
What I think many find so disturbing is that it does humanize the murderer. However this is not terribly unusual for the genre except in this case it is a woman. Thus many of these reviews show the pervasive sexism which is addressed in the film. This is not to say it "excuses" the crime, but to say it does provide insights into why it occured and how it was handled by prosecutors and the press. The fact the producers dared to deal with misogyny at all is why there are so many outraged posts on this documentary (unlike say the 500th documentary on why Ted Bundy was a "genius").
I just want to point out that for all the cries of reverse sexism in these reviews, in actual fact women who kill their abusers usually receive more severe sentences. I do not know the stats in Brazil (I assume they are worse) but in the US on average women that kill their abusive husbands get 15 years *longer* sentences than abusive men who kill their wives. Men who murder their wives often are depicted as temporarily insane, for instance a Kentucky man cut off his wife's head and got 5 years in a psychiatric ward as his entire punishment. Whereas a woman who fired a warning shot at her husband (which hit a wall) after he tried to choke her to death got 20 years. Anyway the point is it is actually the societal norm to emphathize with men no matter what the circumstances of the case are.
This is evident in how many minimize Marcos' (the victim) behavior as simply that of a "bad husband" when it seems like a far deeper issue than that. Marcos essentially couldn't have normal relationships with women. He "dates" exclusively prostitutes. This is how he met the woman who murderd him, Elize. She was a prostitute who then became his mistress (he was married at the time), then his wife. Marcos goes on to repeat this same pattern by cheating on Elize with another prositute who he intended to marry. The power dynamic of a extremely wealthy man basically buying a poor woman companion cannot be overstated. It shows not someone who was simply "shy" but someone who needed to have complete power in relationships.
Elize was from a very poor background with significant trauma early on. Her father abandoned her, and her mother essentially did as well, going to work in a far off city and leaving her with her sexually abusive step-father. Anyway, again this is not to say murder is a perfectly fine option and she should get a prize, but her background shows why she would be vulnerable to an abuser, and would snap in such a terrible way. I think what people are conflating is *excuse* with *causality*. There are important social questions raised here: allowing rampant child abuse creates screwed up adults, and when wealthy men can do whatever they want poor women resisting them may feel totally desperate. Basically Elize is shaped by the multiple traumas of living in a society that is patriarchal and classist. She became brutal to survive. This doesn't make her an angel, or even likeable, but it makes her a 3-dimensional human.
The tortured logic of the prosecution was interesting to behold. For instance the uber creepy medical examiner and the lead prosecutor invent this idea that she must have had an accomplice. This was to prove premeditation which would have increased her sentence. But the nonsensical part of this, is that the accomplice avoided being on camera by using secret tunnels under the building and so forth. However the obvious problem with this is that Elize left a complete trail of evidence of her commiting the murder on those same security cameras. So it's pretty clear that camera issue never even occured to her. (The lead detective also thinks the accomplice idea was ridiculous.)
Imo it seems pretty clear from the evidence that it was not premeditated. She is a law school graduate, so has some intelligence, yet the entire crime was pulled off in a sloppy way where it was 100% obvious she did it. The disposal of the body for instance clearly had no forethought (it was in bright blue plastic bags in eye shot of the road with all identifying material intact). Both she and her husband were gun collectors and hunters so there were plenty of ways she could have set up an "accident" where she shot him and got away with it.
I think it is hard for people who haven't experienced abuse to really understand the mindset, and often people have a hard time grasping the impact of abuse that isn't physical. But the fact that she lived in this strange closed off world with him, where he constantly questioned her sanity, degraded her, etc creates a super warped sense of reality. Also it can't be forgotten that he did have immense power and privilege so the idea that she could simply walk away may have seemed impossible to her (ie- that he would take her daughter and drag up her history as a prostitute in court).
Anyway given all that was presented it seems far more plausible to me that she snapped and shot him. Whether this was actual "self-defense" I am not so sure. I think it was more anger/revenge and just reaching a boiling point. Her history of being abandoned also may have made the prospect of him leaving her more devastating too. Given that she herself claims she can't really name the emotion she felt when pulling the trigger, my guess is she was kinda just on autopilot and maybe even dissociative. This obviously it was not a choice she should have made, but it doesn't make sense that she sat down and plotted it in any way given how badly it was done.
Anyway, enough spoilers, just rebutting some of the other things I've seen written which fall back on the conspiracies and so forth. It seems a lot more mundane just with a really rich guy. Basically a wife shot her cheating husband during an argument. But what makes it interesting are the personal stories and the issues it raises about class, sex, race, etc in Brazil.
All told it is highly watchable and effectively contrasted point and counterpoint to weave the story through several interesting turns. The film-makers didn't really force a heavy-handed conclusion and instead raised questions with ambiguous anwers. So if the main point of watching "true crime" for you is a simple story arc of total villain who is righteously defeated, this does not deliver that. Instead it documents the human failings, idiosyncrasies, emotions, irrationality, and trauma that can lead to a bizarre turn of horrendous events.
A poorly made documentary
dawnrubin13 July 2021
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
