A three-part mini-series on one of the world’s most fascinating news stories. And thousands of questions around the world. By airing the documentary “MH370, the missing plane”, one of the most watched programs of the moment, the Netflix streaming platform restarted discussions about this incredible mystery, with Internet users tearing themselves apart in their theses and arguments of speakers. .
“This Netflix documentary on flight MH370 may be the worst documentary I’ve ever seen. Pure nonsense and a waste of time. There are many baseless speculations which are completely nonsense. A lot of bullshit,” American viewer Brandon fumed on Twitter. Audie on the same social network, like many others, feels that his vision “leaves him with more questions than answers”. Amidst this flood of opinion, Briton Elma lamented the “conspiracy theorists”. Shining There’s more here than actual facts.”
A view shared by many aviation experts who did not miss the release of this documentary on the disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines flight that led to the most comprehensive search in aviation history. In France, critics of Xavier Teitelmann, a former military pilot, Posted on TwitterMore than three million people have visited.
A speaker says he was betrayed by the product
“Indignation” even evokes “charlatanism,” he recalls of such facts as discoveries of debris and plane communication. “Yes, there are many other Hollywood scenarios (…) but the facts are stubborn and there is no doubt. Unfortunately, Netflix chose to exclude any analysis of the facts in order to focus on impossible scenarios, to undermine the work of thousands who contributed to the investigation and to establish confusion,” the consultant regrets.
It’s rubbish when it’s a serious matter, per aeronautics expert and former test pilot Bertrand Wilmer of the Paris Court of Appeal. We must reason with facts, not speculation. Open scenes, any idiot in the village chatting at the coffee counter could do it. In this kind of investigation, you have to close the doors, not open them. Otherwise, we enter subjectivity. This is due to reality show. »
It really is the heart of critics. As well as viewers, experts on the subject criticize the documentary for its emphasis on documentary, although these were rejected in official hearings. Or to provoke them without contradicting them. One of the mini-series’ speakers, Mike Exner, an aviation expert, had to issue a press release saying he had been “betrayed” by the product.
The director defends himself against “lending to conspiracy theories”.
“They told me that it would mainly focus on the relatives (of the victims). Regarding the story of the flight, they assured me that they would stick to facts and reality,” she wrote in a quick text. She (Cont) uses stories (Other Interlocutors) Conspiracy theorists, unsubstantiated, ignore most of the factual evidence presented to them (myself and many experts). In other words, they used these theories to grab the audience’s attention. »
Comments and editing are accused of sensationalism in order to reach a wider audience. “Public opinion is interested in it because there is a kind of suspense and accidents often claim many victims. The general public is worried because they also take the plane”, concludes Bertrand Wilmer, who does not close the door to the solution of this puzzle that claimed the lives of 239 people, including four French people.
Meanwhile, the work of director Louise Malkinson, already known for making other detective documentaries, has held its own. Guardian, for wanting to “give credence to conspiracy theories”. His approach, he says, is “instead of showing what a tragedy like this can do to people.” “I know some theories are more outlandish than others,” acknowledges someone who is not presented as the author of the journal work. And to defend himself against invoking unreliable interlocutors: “These are people who have been involved in the story from the beginning, and they question what has been taken as the official story,” he concludes.
“Web specialist. Infuriatingly humble coffee ninja. Wannabe zombie advocate. Subtly charming tv fanatic. Avid social media scholar.”