Fascinating performances by Colorado local actors. Who would have thought this state garnered so much talent. I was memorized by personal stories told by Hack Hyland, Suzanne Yazzi, Kit Thompson and Ronda Belser. This film is less to do with JonBenet and more to do with human emotions.
37 Reviews
Not what you think.
ladyemma-18 May 2017
This is not a documentary about the JonBenét Ramsey case. This is a film about the community surrounding (and yet still on the outside of) the JonBenét Ramsey case. It's about opinion and speculation and participation, and about how personal experience shapes opinion and vice versa. Ultimately I thought it was an interesting character study/art experiment. If you go into it thinking you'll get some juicy new updates on a tired murder mystery however, you're going to be disappointed. Keep an open mind.
It's alright
happykidyears18 March 2021
A beautiful portrait of tragedy and sympathy.
robbieclaravall8 May 2017
The unsolved death of six-year-old American beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey remains the world's most sensational child murder case. Over 15 months, responses, reflections, and performances were elicited from the Ramsey's Colorado hometown community, creating a work of art from the collective memories and mythologies the crime inspired in Green's new documentary, Casting JonBenet.
Casting JonBenet does not play it in the conventional fashion. Kitty Green tackles the details of the case not like a detective crime episode, but on how the universe responds and reacts to such a horrible crime. It has an audition style, just people coming and going, auditioning for different roles to people who have been involved with the case, them reciting the lines and reacting to it. It acts like a study of how a myriad of people relate to and rationalize different aspects of tragedy based on their own personal experiences. It's not merely a small-scale story of just the death of a little girl in Colorado, it's a wide-scale phenomena; how varying forms of tragedy can affect and traumatize beings in their own distinct way. The concept on how the execution brings together different views about love, grief, sorrow, and hate perfectly blends together.
All that said and done, this documentary may feel pretty hollow at times. It sometimes feels repetitive, an experiment on actors sharing their opinions and theories of who they think murdered JonBenet. It's strange because although this is a documentary, things still felt quite open and vague. I do know that this is an unsolved case, but I think it's weird for me to research information about the case after watching a documentary about it. I do admire its originality; however, it would've been better if it included more objective facts than subjective opinions. Saying this may be ironic because it just contradicted the last paragraph on how I praised it because it doesn't try to give answers about the case, but I would like it more if it was balanced. If it perfectly crosses the line between bias and unbiased. It just didn't.
Casting JonBenet is still worth a watch despite it being dodgy at times. It is not more of a documentary but an opinion piece, examining how JonBenet's death affected the public and how the case is viewed now, just over 20 years later. It never gives any clear answer, it just leaves the viewer to come up with their own conclusion about the case. In my eyes, this is not a question as to whodunnit at all, but it is about society, and how the hometown community opens up their personal and raw feelings on the matter, tying together a beautiful portrait of tragedy and sympathy.
Casting JonBenet does not play it in the conventional fashion. Kitty Green tackles the details of the case not like a detective crime episode, but on how the universe responds and reacts to such a horrible crime. It has an audition style, just people coming and going, auditioning for different roles to people who have been involved with the case, them reciting the lines and reacting to it. It acts like a study of how a myriad of people relate to and rationalize different aspects of tragedy based on their own personal experiences. It's not merely a small-scale story of just the death of a little girl in Colorado, it's a wide-scale phenomena; how varying forms of tragedy can affect and traumatize beings in their own distinct way. The concept on how the execution brings together different views about love, grief, sorrow, and hate perfectly blends together.
All that said and done, this documentary may feel pretty hollow at times. It sometimes feels repetitive, an experiment on actors sharing their opinions and theories of who they think murdered JonBenet. It's strange because although this is a documentary, things still felt quite open and vague. I do know that this is an unsolved case, but I think it's weird for me to research information about the case after watching a documentary about it. I do admire its originality; however, it would've been better if it included more objective facts than subjective opinions. Saying this may be ironic because it just contradicted the last paragraph on how I praised it because it doesn't try to give answers about the case, but I would like it more if it was balanced. If it perfectly crosses the line between bias and unbiased. It just didn't.
Casting JonBenet is still worth a watch despite it being dodgy at times. It is not more of a documentary but an opinion piece, examining how JonBenet's death affected the public and how the case is viewed now, just over 20 years later. It never gives any clear answer, it just leaves the viewer to come up with their own conclusion about the case. In my eyes, this is not a question as to whodunnit at all, but it is about society, and how the hometown community opens up their personal and raw feelings on the matter, tying together a beautiful portrait of tragedy and sympathy.
A Unique Look at a Well-Known Tragedy
matthewssilverhammer26 March 2018
Casting JonBenet is, obviously, about the infamous JonBenet Ramsey case that captured the disturbed attention of America in the 90s. However, it's also a documentary about documentaries, recognizing and embracing the fact that editorializing is impossible to sidestep when you have humans behind the scenes. An art house doc that often gets a little too self-reflective for its own good, it's still a uniquely disturbing and absurdly funny way of depicting the truth vs. social consciousness.
Ridiculous
lynne-0578025 January 2020
An absolute ridiculous excuse for a documentary. All I got from this was....ugly people trying to gain something from this poor girl's murder. There was no need for this bizarre documentary to be made. I actually have a very hard time referring it to a documentary because it is so far from a documentary it's laughable. I'm disgusted in everyone that took part in making this, the fact that a 6 year old child was murder obviously didn't register with any of these money grabbing idiots. Shame on you Netflix for airing this !!!! Stick to the facts and not some money hungry wanna actors sharing their opinion. Get a real job !!!
Unusual documentary hybrid
Billiam-49 February 2022
Unusual documentary hybrid takes the occasion of a casting to shine indirect light on a high-profile unsolved true crime mystery; fascinating and unsettling at the same time it does presume that its audience already is informed about the actual case.
Drek
jeremystulberg1 May 2017
I never review films on IMDb, but I had a particularly strong reaction to this one. It started out as an intriguing concept, and I was very impressed with the creative vision of the film, which seemed like it could add a new layer of commentary to a tired, old story...That impression lasted for about 10 minutes. After that, the film very quickly devolved into a one-note gimmick, which somehow managed to be disturbing, ghoulish and often boring at the same time. Ultimately, I was left with a hollow feeling of numbness about this murder, as well as the non-professional actors profiled. The film felt so craven in its blatant exploitation of the crime (as well as the interviewees). It was downright grotesque if you give more than a passing thought to the fact that it's all based upon a child's murder...one that has been examined ad nauseam over the course of the past 20 years. In the end this film felt like more of an exercise, or an experiment gone awry. It had no heart, or center. It was utterly empty.
Think of it as a social experiment
loveandthunderstorms10 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
So, this film is obviously polarizing based on the reviews here. I felt compelled to write my own review because I think the film would make more sense if we thought of it as a social experiment and not a documentary. If you're looking for a typical documentary experience, or even looking for more information on the Jonbenet Ramsey murder, you're going to be disappointed. Some may even be incensed by what they watch in this film.
As others have stated, the basic premise involves a group of local actors in or near the Boulder, CO area who are "auditioning" to portray the people involved in this case. Right off the bat, this description is misleading, as these actors are not industry professionals, but rather people who work as actors but are essentially regular people. And this auditioning process we see in the film is actually the role itself. This aspect was the first to make an impact with me. The decision to use these local actors is ingenious. As actors, they're able to immerse themselves in the character and speculate on what their character may have been thinking or feeling during the events that took place. However, they're also not so professional that they won't open up and begin chatting about their own theories. The thoughts flow naturally and the actors speak freely. We see this organic flow of thought when these people are placed in their "roles", essentially placing them within the mystery itself. We see a group of people who already have civilian knowledge of this case who are speculating on a mystery, while also projecting their own personal experiences, resulting in a wildly fluctuating and differing opinion of what they think may have happened and why. And this is exactly what we, the public, did back in the 90s.
I was a freshman in college when the Jonbenet Ramsey murder occurred. The media storm that followed was intense. In 1996 and 1997, most people were still getting their news via newspaper, magazine and television. It seemed every publication had a Jonbenet story, in every issue. These media outlets were all trying to "out-scoop" each other by finding details or clues that their competitor may not have. This resulted in a media free-for-all and a fight for sales. There were/are so many blanks to fill in regarding this girl's murder and yet, there were also so many details being released to and scrutinized by the press, and we the public couldn't help falling into the same game. It's human nature to want to know the answer to a compelling mystery, especially one such as this. It's also not unusual for the human brain to try to fill gaps in information in an effort to decipher something which is incomplete and impossible to solve definitively. It's faulty thinking in the sense that the information we use to fill those gaps is manufactured and colored by our own personal experiences, opinions, and attitudes. The actors in the film projected their own experiences to form many differing theories. And that's what happened back in '96/'97. I count myself among them. These actors, strange or narcissistic or gossipy as they may seem, are all of us.
I think some of the negative reviews here are a bit contradictory and missing the point. One reviewer said the film "seemed like it could add a new layer of commentary to a tired, old story" and was disappointed when that didn't seem to happen. Well...this isn't just a "story" and just because it's old doesn't mean it's "tired". This murder case isn't, and never was, a story for our personal consumption. It holds our fascination for the reality and shocking nature of the crime. But searching for additional meaning or commentary about the case or murder is pointless because there is none. This film doesn't seek to shed new light on the murder. It's shining the light on us and it isn't the most flattering light. We watch films about this little girl because we all have some sort of morbid curiosity about her or the murder. How could we not when the news would publish photos of Jonbenet's body showing the little marks on her skin that were supposedly caused by a stun gun? We were given so much that it drove our imaginations. Often, discussions about the case would begin with, "Well, if that were me..." or "I would never..." We projected. We interjected ourselves into this mystery and chatted with friends and co-workers about the ransom note or the suitcase under the window. We were torn between our intense desire for justice and our own morbid fascination. I use some of the negative reviews here as example because on the one hand, these negative reviews say how morbid and exploitative it was to watch such blase attitudes about a little girl's murder, while in the same review complaining that they didn't get what they wanted out of the film. And this is exactly what I'm talking about. Some people watch this film hoping to get something more about the case, something to fill whatever void they may have in this mystery. But isn't that our own exploitative nature being exposed? For these people, I would advise finding a more traditional documentary that will discuss all the details and facts. And after viewing it, I challenge any viewer who didn't witness the frenzy in the 90s to not create your own theory or speculate on at least one person involved. It's what we all did and continue to do and I think some of the negative reviews miss the contradiction.
As a result, the actual murder case, the real people involved and any real facts fall to the wayside in this film. It's haunting in the way the actual case and Jonbenet herself seem like fading background photographs in this wildly colorful montage. I think it is here where the film's statement lies. When someone says, "This case took on a life of its own", I think this is what they're referring to. The public became so enmeshed in the tedium and sensationalism that the case itself fades into the background. Our theories, colored by our own experiences, feed the frenzy until you're left with what looks like a vapid, exploitative pony show. I think this is why there are so many reviews stating this film is pointless or exploitative. But that is the reality of what happened in this country in '96/'97. We all had an opinion, a theory. We personalized it. And we all just spoke up about what WE thought occurred. We became armchair detectives and regurgitated "case facts" that we read here or there like we knew what any of it meant. In an effort to satisfy our own curiosity, we interjected ourselves into the narrative and essentially took it away from the actual people involved. I think this film portrays that perfectly.
As others have stated, the basic premise involves a group of local actors in or near the Boulder, CO area who are "auditioning" to portray the people involved in this case. Right off the bat, this description is misleading, as these actors are not industry professionals, but rather people who work as actors but are essentially regular people. And this auditioning process we see in the film is actually the role itself. This aspect was the first to make an impact with me. The decision to use these local actors is ingenious. As actors, they're able to immerse themselves in the character and speculate on what their character may have been thinking or feeling during the events that took place. However, they're also not so professional that they won't open up and begin chatting about their own theories. The thoughts flow naturally and the actors speak freely. We see this organic flow of thought when these people are placed in their "roles", essentially placing them within the mystery itself. We see a group of people who already have civilian knowledge of this case who are speculating on a mystery, while also projecting their own personal experiences, resulting in a wildly fluctuating and differing opinion of what they think may have happened and why. And this is exactly what we, the public, did back in the 90s.
I was a freshman in college when the Jonbenet Ramsey murder occurred. The media storm that followed was intense. In 1996 and 1997, most people were still getting their news via newspaper, magazine and television. It seemed every publication had a Jonbenet story, in every issue. These media outlets were all trying to "out-scoop" each other by finding details or clues that their competitor may not have. This resulted in a media free-for-all and a fight for sales. There were/are so many blanks to fill in regarding this girl's murder and yet, there were also so many details being released to and scrutinized by the press, and we the public couldn't help falling into the same game. It's human nature to want to know the answer to a compelling mystery, especially one such as this. It's also not unusual for the human brain to try to fill gaps in information in an effort to decipher something which is incomplete and impossible to solve definitively. It's faulty thinking in the sense that the information we use to fill those gaps is manufactured and colored by our own personal experiences, opinions, and attitudes. The actors in the film projected their own experiences to form many differing theories. And that's what happened back in '96/'97. I count myself among them. These actors, strange or narcissistic or gossipy as they may seem, are all of us.
I think some of the negative reviews here are a bit contradictory and missing the point. One reviewer said the film "seemed like it could add a new layer of commentary to a tired, old story" and was disappointed when that didn't seem to happen. Well...this isn't just a "story" and just because it's old doesn't mean it's "tired". This murder case isn't, and never was, a story for our personal consumption. It holds our fascination for the reality and shocking nature of the crime. But searching for additional meaning or commentary about the case or murder is pointless because there is none. This film doesn't seek to shed new light on the murder. It's shining the light on us and it isn't the most flattering light. We watch films about this little girl because we all have some sort of morbid curiosity about her or the murder. How could we not when the news would publish photos of Jonbenet's body showing the little marks on her skin that were supposedly caused by a stun gun? We were given so much that it drove our imaginations. Often, discussions about the case would begin with, "Well, if that were me..." or "I would never..." We projected. We interjected ourselves into this mystery and chatted with friends and co-workers about the ransom note or the suitcase under the window. We were torn between our intense desire for justice and our own morbid fascination. I use some of the negative reviews here as example because on the one hand, these negative reviews say how morbid and exploitative it was to watch such blase attitudes about a little girl's murder, while in the same review complaining that they didn't get what they wanted out of the film. And this is exactly what I'm talking about. Some people watch this film hoping to get something more about the case, something to fill whatever void they may have in this mystery. But isn't that our own exploitative nature being exposed? For these people, I would advise finding a more traditional documentary that will discuss all the details and facts. And after viewing it, I challenge any viewer who didn't witness the frenzy in the 90s to not create your own theory or speculate on at least one person involved. It's what we all did and continue to do and I think some of the negative reviews miss the contradiction.
As a result, the actual murder case, the real people involved and any real facts fall to the wayside in this film. It's haunting in the way the actual case and Jonbenet herself seem like fading background photographs in this wildly colorful montage. I think it is here where the film's statement lies. When someone says, "This case took on a life of its own", I think this is what they're referring to. The public became so enmeshed in the tedium and sensationalism that the case itself fades into the background. Our theories, colored by our own experiences, feed the frenzy until you're left with what looks like a vapid, exploitative pony show. I think this is why there are so many reviews stating this film is pointless or exploitative. But that is the reality of what happened in this country in '96/'97. We all had an opinion, a theory. We personalized it. And we all just spoke up about what WE thought occurred. We became armchair detectives and regurgitated "case facts" that we read here or there like we knew what any of it meant. In an effort to satisfy our own curiosity, we interjected ourselves into the narrative and essentially took it away from the actual people involved. I think this film portrays that perfectly.
An utter failure
drnossal5 January 2021
I thought this might be interesting, a juxtaposition of a teleplay production about the Benet case combined with actual documentary information. Alas, the film contains literally zero facts, just auditioning semi-pro actors offering their personal thoughts about certain aspects of the case. These people aren't any different from your average Joe, offering up largely uninformed opinion on the few bits and pieces they recall from 25 years ago. There are a couple of moments of humor, but probably the most signal moment is the sex educator guy demonstrating his flogging equipment on camera, as if that had any bearing whatsoever on the Benet case. Yeah, it was kinda funny in an awkward way, but man, talk about desperation on the part of the film makers.
You can't properly call this film a documentary, it is just a series of talking heads and not very interesting or well-informed ones at that. I get the impression the actual Jon Benet production stalled out for some reason and the producers were left to salvage some kind of experimental pseudo-documentary in order to get a partial return for their investment. Unfortunately, it completely fails to inform or engage the viewer and honestly just comes across as a crass exploitation of the Jon Benet name in order to draw eyeballs. I fell for it, you shouldn't.
You can't properly call this film a documentary, it is just a series of talking heads and not very interesting or well-informed ones at that. I get the impression the actual Jon Benet production stalled out for some reason and the producers were left to salvage some kind of experimental pseudo-documentary in order to get a partial return for their investment. Unfortunately, it completely fails to inform or engage the viewer and honestly just comes across as a crass exploitation of the Jon Benet name in order to draw eyeballs. I fell for it, you shouldn't.
Fascinating film on the human condition
timothyongb4 May 2017
A brief look at the IMDb reviews put up there and one will be able to find a lot of hate for this movie. They say: there are no new insights to the case, basically a bunch of random strangers gossiping about and dramatizing the death of a child. This film is all of that, and because of that, it is great.
I came into the film not knowing a single thing about the case. (I've yet to reach twenty and I do not live in the west) And it is through this film, through these gossips by these strangers that I have managed to piece together a vague sense of what the case is all about.
But this understanding of mine that I received on what happened to the child is a dramatized and subjective rendition of the proceedings.The people interviewed are your regular Tom and Jane on the street. The answers they share are less of an expert's and more of the opinion being spread out on the streets, what the people believe. The subjects feel very assured of what they believe, which theory they believe. Their answers to the questions are filled with the passion of a group of people sharing their ideas on the case. They draw from their personal experiences and from their subjective ideas. Many of the interviewees personalize the case too much and as such it is definitely not something to be taken as the truth.
Though this leads to some extremely fascinating scenes where the interviewees appear to be relating and perhaps even sympathizing with the proposed perpetrator in their theories of the case. Further more the fact that these interviewees are actually auditioning to be acting as the people they talk about serves to further blur the identities between the 'perpetrator' and the regular human being. Perhaps we all have the potential commit an act or play a part in something so horrifying. After all, we are all human. We make mistakes.
In this respect, the film reminds me of the great documentary 'The Act of Killing' where the lines between the identity of fiction and reality, history are blurred. Of course 'Casting JonBenet' does not solely focus on the blurring of identity and the aspects of human nature, but there are moments where the tragic loss of the child can be felt from through the subjects, how they felt about it, how they can relate to the death. A little superficial perhaps, but it does not feel sentimental as many conventional documentaries would have done if they were in the shoes of such a topic. It feels earnest and real.
This movie is not the typical documentary typically known to the mainstream, it's goal is less focused on delivering information to the public in an entertaining manner but rather, just as some of the best documentaries do, it focuses on exploring the human condition. This film is less about the case of Jonbenet but more about the normal person's interpretation, reaction and their personal bits of introspection regarding the tragic incident.
The film certainly is not without faults, there are plenty. But my main complaint would be that the reaches not much of a conclusion and the montage near the end emphasizes a little too much on the film's concept and ends up feeling more manufactured than earnest and emotional.
I came into the film not knowing a single thing about the case. (I've yet to reach twenty and I do not live in the west) And it is through this film, through these gossips by these strangers that I have managed to piece together a vague sense of what the case is all about.
But this understanding of mine that I received on what happened to the child is a dramatized and subjective rendition of the proceedings.The people interviewed are your regular Tom and Jane on the street. The answers they share are less of an expert's and more of the opinion being spread out on the streets, what the people believe. The subjects feel very assured of what they believe, which theory they believe. Their answers to the questions are filled with the passion of a group of people sharing their ideas on the case. They draw from their personal experiences and from their subjective ideas. Many of the interviewees personalize the case too much and as such it is definitely not something to be taken as the truth.
Though this leads to some extremely fascinating scenes where the interviewees appear to be relating and perhaps even sympathizing with the proposed perpetrator in their theories of the case. Further more the fact that these interviewees are actually auditioning to be acting as the people they talk about serves to further blur the identities between the 'perpetrator' and the regular human being. Perhaps we all have the potential commit an act or play a part in something so horrifying. After all, we are all human. We make mistakes.
In this respect, the film reminds me of the great documentary 'The Act of Killing' where the lines between the identity of fiction and reality, history are blurred. Of course 'Casting JonBenet' does not solely focus on the blurring of identity and the aspects of human nature, but there are moments where the tragic loss of the child can be felt from through the subjects, how they felt about it, how they can relate to the death. A little superficial perhaps, but it does not feel sentimental as many conventional documentaries would have done if they were in the shoes of such a topic. It feels earnest and real.
This movie is not the typical documentary typically known to the mainstream, it's goal is less focused on delivering information to the public in an entertaining manner but rather, just as some of the best documentaries do, it focuses on exploring the human condition. This film is less about the case of Jonbenet but more about the normal person's interpretation, reaction and their personal bits of introspection regarding the tragic incident.
The film certainly is not without faults, there are plenty. But my main complaint would be that the reaches not much of a conclusion and the montage near the end emphasizes a little too much on the film's concept and ends up feeling more manufactured than earnest and emotional.
Just Terrible
stylynn102 May 2017
An awful movie that turns the death of a child into "entertainment" and for what purpose? Don't hope to learn anything new here; there is nothing but speculation and bad acting. The "film" managed to trivialize the life and death of this little girl and somehow, people found it to be profound. Um, seriously? Instead of making this movie, the film makers should have donated the money to an organization that helps children. Shame on Netflix for even posting this garbage.
Nonsense
catnymph20067 May 2017
This is nothing but a compilation of opinions from wannabe actors, sheds no light on anything whatsoever, did not even pull any emotion from me for the tragedy of this poor child's murder. Some conservative opinions, some wildly out there, no basis in fact for most of those opinions. Don't see the point of hearing some boring people tell me what they think happened. I stopped watching after one particular woman had a crazy but detailed idea of how she thought it could happen involving Patsy waking and finding something going on then reacting but it going terribly awry. Just total conjecture and wild imagination at some points.
meta-film done right
reid-hawk10 May 2017
Out of the recent trend of documentaries of actual films that portray real stories, which are not as confusing as they sound (like "Katie Plays Christine"), "Casting JonBenet" is the best. I think I should say that before this movie I had never heard of the JonBenet murder and subsequent case; maybe I've been living under a rock or something. I say this due to the fact that it may have enhanced my experience with this film, and that people who are not entering it blindly might not enjoy it as much. After I watched the film I went online to judge the reactions of people, and far and away most general audience members seemed to dismiss this film as garbage. Many people stated that it added no new information to the case or that it was boring. To those people I would say that they missed the point, as pretentious as it sounds. This was a seemingly world famous case, what new information could they provide? What makes movies like "The Thin Blue Line" or "The Jinx" so good is that they actual had some real impact on the world by adding evidence not previously seen. Other movies/miniseries, like "The Imposter" or "Making a Murderer" show us cases that we otherwise never would have heard of. This movie has neither of those luxuries, so instead it does something different. It films the people in the community that Jonbenet Ramsey lived in and tasks them with playing the parts of members of the Ramsey family. All the while, the camera crew is filming these people and gleaning their insight into what they think about the murder. Their opinions range from insightful to off-the- wall batsh*t insane (think movies like "Room 237), and I enjoyed every second of it. Parts of this movie had me and my friends rolling on the floor with laughter due to just how peculiar and funny these characters playing characters really were. Other moments, like the ending montage I wont spoil, had me sitting in silence completely engrossed at what was on screen. Being able to have moments like that within the film make this movie truly special, as well as the first amazing film of the year. My only issue with it is that it lulls at some points towards the final 3rd, but even then it is still a very watchable film. Don't let negative reviews online discourage you from watching this movie. Watch it for yourself and make your own mind up
Stupid. Absurd. Exploitative. AVOID! (0/10)
webmaster-110030 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I love Netflix, and I love a lot of their original productions. They have produced so much incredible content, in such a short amount of time. So when I sat down to watch this "documentary", I was expecting a quality film.
While there's been a slew of new documentaries about the JonBenét murder lately, recycling a case that hasn't evolved much in years, I thought "hey, it's Netflix, I'm sure it's good". It turns out that you have to take the title very literally. This film is entirely about Colorado locals who go through what must have been a parody of what a casting for a real documentary about JonBenét (using crazy people instead of real actors) could have looked like.
Indeed, you see a number of different people auditioning for a handful of the principals, such as the real-life John and Patsy, the brother Burke and various others. Most of the time, these "actors" talk about themselves and not about anything related to the Ramseys or the murder case. One disgusting guy describes bondage involving breasts, another explains how a handwriting expert identified an injury to her ankle based on what her writing looked like.
The "documentary" offers no new information or insight into the case - instead it replays various moments and occasionally far-fetched theories. One such theory revolves around the nine-year old brother smashing her sister's skull with a hammer - this is dramatically re- created with kids pounding a watermelon with said hammer.
The subject of JonBenét's bed-wetting is also brought up - for what reason I'm unsure.
While it's entirely possible that the real-life Ramsey family is not entirely innocent in what happened, it's absolutely disgusting that they are subjected to this garbage film. I'm not sure I can see the art in joking about the brutal death of a six-year old, especially in such a gratuitous and ridiculous way.
I'm sure the "documentary" is meant to be a commentary on how the media, reality TV, social media etc. in this day and age is used to promulgate scandal, sex and murder in a blase fashion. This inane "documentary" does nothing to halt this trend - in fact, it does the opposite.
While there's been a slew of new documentaries about the JonBenét murder lately, recycling a case that hasn't evolved much in years, I thought "hey, it's Netflix, I'm sure it's good". It turns out that you have to take the title very literally. This film is entirely about Colorado locals who go through what must have been a parody of what a casting for a real documentary about JonBenét (using crazy people instead of real actors) could have looked like.
Indeed, you see a number of different people auditioning for a handful of the principals, such as the real-life John and Patsy, the brother Burke and various others. Most of the time, these "actors" talk about themselves and not about anything related to the Ramseys or the murder case. One disgusting guy describes bondage involving breasts, another explains how a handwriting expert identified an injury to her ankle based on what her writing looked like.
The "documentary" offers no new information or insight into the case - instead it replays various moments and occasionally far-fetched theories. One such theory revolves around the nine-year old brother smashing her sister's skull with a hammer - this is dramatically re- created with kids pounding a watermelon with said hammer.
The subject of JonBenét's bed-wetting is also brought up - for what reason I'm unsure.
While it's entirely possible that the real-life Ramsey family is not entirely innocent in what happened, it's absolutely disgusting that they are subjected to this garbage film. I'm not sure I can see the art in joking about the brutal death of a six-year old, especially in such a gratuitous and ridiculous way.
I'm sure the "documentary" is meant to be a commentary on how the media, reality TV, social media etc. in this day and age is used to promulgate scandal, sex and murder in a blase fashion. This inane "documentary" does nothing to halt this trend - in fact, it does the opposite.
I liked it because it was so different.
ed-613646 May 2017
This movie was not what I thought it would be. It innovates the genre of documentary. It is a fresh way to tell an old story. Be prepared to see something new.
I'm surprised by some of the reactions from other reviewers. I assume they think we should let this horrid crime drift into history. And because it involved a poor, innocent little child, I really do get their point. The girl is innocent even if we're not sure who else is. But should we just "let it go" and not push for an answer? Someday, perhaps new DNA testing will tell us WHO and then JB will get a bit of her well-deserved justice. If we forget, simply because it was tragic, then we allow the guilty to walk free.
I'm surprised by some of the reactions from other reviewers. I assume they think we should let this horrid crime drift into history. And because it involved a poor, innocent little child, I really do get their point. The girl is innocent even if we're not sure who else is. But should we just "let it go" and not push for an answer? Someday, perhaps new DNA testing will tell us WHO and then JB will get a bit of her well-deserved justice. If we forget, simply because it was tragic, then we allow the guilty to walk free.
Difficult to follow
enunezjr10 May 2017
It's a bunch of aspiring actors with recollections of JonBenet's murder. The facts, though there, are difficult to decipher, especially to someone who isn't well versed on the facts of the case. I was hoping to learn about the case and what happened, guess I'll have to go elsewhere.
Disgusting
jenny-9139921 April 2019
This is the worst thing I have ever seen. A six year old child is abducted and murdered, and we are faced with loads of self involved adults. Absolutely sickening, the people involved in this production should be deeply ashamed of themselves. It's been a long time since I've witnessed something so completely offensive.
Jonbenet deserves more.
A unique, uncomfortable, but utterly compelling documentary
themikeman-6586629 April 2017
This is not your average true crime documentary at but boy is it a good one! The recollections from the locals is very haunting as well as their own personal experiences and how it connects to the murders. There are uncomfortable parts but that just makes it more compelling and emotional.
Not a documentary, not a drama
cjrose-5434730 April 2017
This was neither a documentary nor a drama. If you had no previous knowledge of this sad case, you'd be none the wiser after watching this collection of, frankly opinions and gossip. There was more entertainment value in listening to the auditionees personal life stories. 90 minutes of my life that I'll never get back.
Watch this with an open mind
KatooHvdW5 May 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this production last night. Although being European, the case of Jonbenet has been in our media substantially as well, from the moment it happened until this day. This is not a documentary and I don't review it as such. I find the concept of "Casting Jonbenet" very innovating and intriguing. I had to forego on all of my prejudices about what to expect of a documentary and what to expect of a movie, because it is neither.
In the beginning, I was surprised about the approach and I found the presentation of the different versions of Patsy confusing. Then, I got the point and when gradually the other characters and actors were introduced, I felt more comfortable with the concept and really got into it. If you fight this concept, you won't be able to appreciate this production, so in my opinion you should watch it with an open mind.
It was very confronting when I started to realize that all of these actors had a story of their own. Sometimes they had a connection with the Ramsey's through friends or work, sometimes they had their own traumatic experience that synchronized them with the character they were supposed to play or the crime itself. Somehow, for me, these private testimonies brought the whole case alive and present again.
You should get past the uncomfortable feeling some of the amateur actors give you, like the SM-fetishist, the Santa Clauses (what was that??), or the guy that played the creepy pedophile. Sometimes it was funny how these people went into method acting-modus, how serious they took the job. Although I must admit, with some of them I wasn't sure if they were really ordinary people or if they were acting to be an amateur actor...
The last 5-10 minutes of this production is a perfect ending to it: a long slow-motion shot of all of the actors, in one big scene, with all of the possible scenario's of that fatal night, all in one.
The last we get to see is a vision of the perfect little girl Jonbenet was, in the spotlight, all dressed up. I think that was an appropriate tribute to the poor girl who must have suffered a great deal during her short lifetime as well as in the final hours leading up to her death.
In the beginning, I was surprised about the approach and I found the presentation of the different versions of Patsy confusing. Then, I got the point and when gradually the other characters and actors were introduced, I felt more comfortable with the concept and really got into it. If you fight this concept, you won't be able to appreciate this production, so in my opinion you should watch it with an open mind.
It was very confronting when I started to realize that all of these actors had a story of their own. Sometimes they had a connection with the Ramsey's through friends or work, sometimes they had their own traumatic experience that synchronized them with the character they were supposed to play or the crime itself. Somehow, for me, these private testimonies brought the whole case alive and present again.
You should get past the uncomfortable feeling some of the amateur actors give you, like the SM-fetishist, the Santa Clauses (what was that??), or the guy that played the creepy pedophile. Sometimes it was funny how these people went into method acting-modus, how serious they took the job. Although I must admit, with some of them I wasn't sure if they were really ordinary people or if they were acting to be an amateur actor...
The last 5-10 minutes of this production is a perfect ending to it: a long slow-motion shot of all of the actors, in one big scene, with all of the possible scenario's of that fatal night, all in one.
The last we get to see is a vision of the perfect little girl Jonbenet was, in the spotlight, all dressed up. I think that was an appropriate tribute to the poor girl who must have suffered a great deal during her short lifetime as well as in the final hours leading up to her death.
Horrible to watch
dennisbuhlp27 May 2018
The nadir of bad Ramsey "documentaries"
SteverB4 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
It is almost unbelievable to me that this film ever saw the light of day. There have, through the years, been good and bad documentaries about the JonBenet Ramsey case, but this one tops them all in its grotesquerie and obvious cash grab for the 20th anniversary of JonBenet's death.
I don't know what other reviewers saw when they write that the film was "utterly compelling" or "meta-film done right", or my personal favorite, "fascinating film on the human condition." What?
The adults in the film were bad enough, but to subject little girls and little boys to this material seems like it should be actionable.
There is no fascination here, there is nothing compelling. There is only rehash of this sad murder story that ended up making me feel sorry for the remaining Ramsey family if they ever chose to watch it -- something I thought could never happen. AVOID!
I don't know what other reviewers saw when they write that the film was "utterly compelling" or "meta-film done right", or my personal favorite, "fascinating film on the human condition." What?
The adults in the film were bad enough, but to subject little girls and little boys to this material seems like it should be actionable.
There is no fascination here, there is nothing compelling. There is only rehash of this sad murder story that ended up making me feel sorry for the remaining Ramsey family if they ever chose to watch it -- something I thought could never happen. AVOID!
A look at how we interact with tragic crimes as a society
mgracefry4 May 2017
I believe the earlier reviews here are trying to make this documentary into something it's not, and judge it for something it's not trying to do. This is not yet another whodunit, and we're not asked to reexamine the evidence or create new theories. I certainly did not see it as another exploitative money grab that this tragedy seems to attract. This was a look beyond the crime itself; it was a fascinating exposé on how the general public interacts with true crime by exploring -on set- the thoughts and feelings of unknown (and CO local) actors and actresses on one of America's most notorious murders in modern history. What makes this documentary so great is not the casting or acting by any means - it's the film's ability to grasp onto these people's stories and perspectives and allow us to see ourselves in them. There's a thousand theories about what happened that night, but rather than drag the viewer through another dozen of them, the viewer is allowed to see just how deep society's fascination with mysteries and tragedies goes. Rather than mocking or exploiting the death of this little girl, it encourages us to ask ourselves why we form such personal attachments to the losses of others and why we are so curious about the darkest, most deviant human behaviors.
Very disturbing and disrespectful to the family and memory of this precious child.
jabailey9113 May 2017
I didn't get through the first episode. Was very very disturbing that they made this show. It seems that they are milking the tragedy of this little girl's death for all the profit they can get out of it. Whats worse is they are attempting to add a touch of comedy to it. They stooped way too low on this one. Sick, tasteless, immoral, are words that come to mind trying to watch this. And yes this is the on;y review I've done. I don't usually do reviews but I had to speak up about this. Its that bad and unconscionable.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
