AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Derry Herrera Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

pdiepersloot Murder mysteries as a genre, so it seems, has gained significant momentum over the past few years. Netflix acts as an active supporter of the genre seeing it has recently produced series like The Keepers which proved extremely succesful. The Jinx is yet another mystery crime documentary series which explores multiple murder cases and the people possibly involved in it. This tendency therefore quickly brings to mind a documentary like A Thin Blue Line which, in my opinion, could be seen as the blueprint for these new Netflix series. What the abovementioned documentaries all have in common is its use of reenactments resulting in an overt dramatization of the displayed themes and storylines. Yet whereas normally the use of reenactments in documentaries might seem questionable, it is within these documentaries that I believe it serves as to illustrate more clearly the inconsistencies surrounding the given suspects and stories. So instead of using it as a way to show what (theoretically) has happened according to the filmmakers, it rather serves as a tool to communicate the flaws surrounding the existing theories about the given events. Its used as a means to pose questions, not answers. It is for this reason that, in my opinion, the documentaries' credibility is by no means undermined. Moreover, further research concerning any of these documentaries does not result in contradictory findings as is the case with another murder mystery documentary series produced by Netflix; Making a Murderer. Surrounded by inconsistencies, irregularities and questionable evidence this documentary proofed to have taken a few liberties with their findings. The Jinx, as noted, does however build a surprisingly strong case against Robert Durst without its evidence being disputed by other sources. And its not like these other sources don't get the oppurtunity to present the case in favor of Robert Durst. Even Durst himself has the oppurtunity to explain what has happened and how he was (or wans't) involved. However during the six-episode series a pattern slowly emerges which undeniably lead to one single conclusion. The documentary surely offers an interesting portrayal of a man caught up in allegations and trials. Furthermore it offers psychological insight into a man who has been subject of many investigations in the past 30 years. And last but not least I find the images produced to be of absolute importance for the world to see. That being said I must conclude that its the story which makes it a great documentary. Not by way of its storytelling for it mostly shows talking-heads, offers little archive material of evidence, and fails to capture the gruesomeness to some extent. Nonetheless the story itself intriques and just screams to be told. Hopefully it is not too late.

lawrelwill I really enjoyed this documentary and find this story fascinating. The one detail the filmmaker missed is this: The reason Robert Durst sent the cadáver letter is bc he was concerned about Susan Berman's 2 dogs NOT about her. He did not want her dogs left unattended with her dead body for several days. Look at all the photos of him with dogs, including on his wedding day when he is holding the husky.He cared about animals but not people.

CineCritic2517 The Jinx; A documentary about the deaths of a handful of people starring the main suspect who is interviewed after having served time for one of the killings as he maintains his innocence. Stretched out over six 45-minutes episodes, the documentary basically tells the story of Robert Durst's life with Durst himself collaborating the story entirely apart from having anything to do with the deaths and killings that make the story interesting. After three episodes, this repetitive dynamic becomes quite a drag. Glued together with archive footage and private family footage of the man's past, we basically get treated to the blather of people involved in Durst's life or in the lives of the people he presumably killed and law enforcement officials involved in the cases. The term blather is not used lightly here. There is surprisingly little sappiness to be found in the comments made. The documentary never makes a case for why the viewer should care about any of these people or their viewpoints, or what Durst himself has to say or lie about the deaths of the victims.People get killed all the time, Durst very probably was involved in all of the cases presented, yet denies this. It shouldn't take 6 plodding episodes to document this.4/10

Thomas Drufke I had never heard of Robert Durst before finding out about a 6 part documentary that HBO had done while listening to ESPN 1000 in Chicago. It was a pretty strange way to hear about a TV series, but I'm sure glad I did. The Jinx is a disturbing look at a once accused murderer who ended up getting away with several crimes. Now of course I say that now that I have seen the series. So I have a pretty good idea whether or not he did what he was accused of. But the impressive part about Andrew Jarecki's approach is that as bad as this person is to us, he paints the picture in a way that there's a possibility that what we think may actually be wrong. He tells us what he thinks in the later episodes, but he does so after years of research, and even after meeting the man himself.The early episodes give us an inside look at the actual process done by the police and law enforcement officials in each case. It was nice getting the complete background before we saw Robert Durst on screen yet. I believe it was episode 3 that we found out Durst reached out to Jarecki in order to tell his own story for the series. It immediately smelled rotten. As much as I think he did kill the 3 people, and maybe even more, Durst was a fascinating person to watch. He's a smart man, and even though he blinks way too much like people are saying, I don't think that was a dead giveaway. He's a very strange person that perhaps could have just been in the wrong place at the wrong time? No, I highly doubt that, but I'm glad Jarecki still interviewed people from both sides. I also didn't find the recreation scenes to be distracting like I do with most documentaries. The whole process of filming and interviewing was handled really well.The final few episodes were really chilling as Durst slipped up on the microphone and accidentally said some things that could be held against him on a later date. Fortunately, I think Durst is currently on trial or arrested for something if I remember reading correctly. Anyway, Jarecki gave us a unique documentary here that serialized something that I didn't think could really be serialized. It was a compelling and disturbing look into a possible murderers life, pre and post crimes.+Jarecki's directing style +Took its time and gave evidence for both sides +Recreation scenes 9.0/10