LISTENER

Nathan

  • 11
  • reviews
  • 0
  • helpful votes
  • 15
  • ratings

fantastic and informative

Overall
5 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
5 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 06-01-25

learned so much more that i dodnt know about the Manson Family here than any podcast

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

The Mammoth book of BS

Overall
1 out of 5 stars
Performance
1 out of 5 stars
Story
1 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 25-11-24

none of these crimes are bizarre, imagine a photo of a crime, thats what this is, due to oversaturation of cases, i remember nothing

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

the narrator let's things down a lot

Overall
4 out of 5 stars
Performance
2 out of 5 stars
Story
5 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 22-09-24

so the narrator has about 4 voices in his repertoire which makes it hard to figure out who's talking. But his biggest failure is Francis Dolarhyde is supposed to have issues with the letter S due to his cleft lip. this is emphasised early in the book by avoiding plurals and words with the letter in general. HOWEVER, when dealing with Freddie Lounds, this affliction dissappears for some reason, I lost count after 30 words with the letter S and the interaction carried on fir a while, they all sounded like the rest of the way he speaks. Poor, poor narration. This along with his very limited vocal range makes me wonder why he was chosen, maybe he was cheap? his actual narration voice was good, but his character voices were well below sub par.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

lazy writing

Overall
1 out of 5 stars
Performance
2 out of 5 stars
Story
1 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 18-09-24

The main story i have come across so far is the Paul Bernado and Karla homolog. this is a deep story and doing it in 14 minutes is ridiculous. There are some inaccuracies, without getting into the nitty gritty and being PG the body parts of the dismembered girl were not tied to concrete, they were incased, it even says so about 60 seconds later. It also doesn't go into the MAJOR controversial "deal with the devil". Karla made her deal before the tapes were seen, if they had been seen she would have never gotten the deal she did. so much is just skipped and written blasé. there are plenty of others, but this one is the one I have just listened too and am quite familiar with.

Due to this I thought I would give 10 minutes to seeing if the next story, which is a 4 minute story, (yes 4 minutes) was wrong, and what do you know, it is.

Wayne Broden never confessed to Nomra Vallencourt it was someone else (Raymond Sauve) which is said at the very end, but it leads like it is Wayne Boden, fir example, the author states "12 months later her killer struck again" when it wasn't the same murderer, and it was 15 months not 12.

Jean Way was found on 17th not 16th.

How can you get so many inaccuracies in 4 minutes? this is supposed to be their job? I'm sure there's more but this was a 10 minute Google search.

Then we come to Robert Pickton, you're gonna tell Canada biggest serial killers story in 20 minutes! I see Fred West on the cover, I wonder how that will get butchered.

And then I came across a stupid contradiction, with Tsusto Miyazakis chapter. writer sayd "he charred the remaining bones in his furnace ground them up and sent them to his family, Then 60 seconds later says he took his next victim to the same place and the bones of victim 1 were still there. Are they a blackened powder send to the family? or still out in the open? How can you be so incompetent?

The only reason why it got the stars it did is it covers cases that aren't normally covered in true crime, and then i feel compelled to do my own research as this writer is so bad. But i wonder how much else is inaccurate when back to back stories are?

There are much better compilation books. Get some Robert Green or Greg Olsen

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

very good

Overall
4 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
5 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 17-09-24

only negative point is the way she can come off stuck up at times mentioning niche poets and other incidents. but overall very good, have recommended it to colleagues

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

its like a plagiarised kids school homework.

Overall
1 out of 5 stars
Performance
1 out of 5 stars
Story
1 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 17-09-24

most of these stories are 5-10 minutes long. Seems like the writer (definitely not deserving to be called an author) wenton Wikipedia and just submitted that to his publisher, and to make it even better the narrator can't pronounce a lot of things and sometimes randomly raises his voice for a split second. Save your money/credits. There are books on here that take 4-6 hours per story and have 12-16 stories. 4-6 may seem a lot per story, but he didn't copy his stuff from Wikipedia. Get some Ryan Green or Greg Olson, not this wish "true crime" Ryan

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

some inaccuracies

Overall
3 out of 5 stars
Performance
4 out of 5 stars
Story
3 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 08-09-24

There are a few inaccuracies but the one that sticks out the most is on the "Death of a cheerleader" chapter, the author gets a victims name, age and proffesion wrong, and fails to mention John Ortiz-Kehoe is believed to be wrongly convicted. He calls her "19 year old Rose Lattimer" when she's actually 18 year old Rose Larner and wasn't a model, she wanted to be a police officer. it's disrespectful when you get things that wrong, as a writer, do better.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

Katherine Ramsland is a con artist

Overall
1 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
1 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 27-08-24

in her H.H. Holmes chapter she states it has been written about many times, so she named it "psychopath" to offer an updated neuroscientific explanation. she explains not a single thing, like she thought of a quick blurb (probably the quickest Holmes chapter in existence) and then shat it on to some paper, the chapter is 5 minutes 40 seconds, you can't even explain the start of Holmes' scams in that time frame but she claims she can talk about him, his crimes and then give her neuroscientific explanation. I've left a lot of reviews about her but she's the laziest most misleading crime "author" (i say author in the same breath as stevie wonder could play in the NFL) how she got to be part of this compilation is the biggest mystery. its not often, actually its never been the case until her where I prefer Wikipedia to an author.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

again with the inaccuracies

Overall
1 out of 5 stars
Performance
1 out of 5 stars
Story
1 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 24-08-24

its not hard to get facts right, to add to my earlier review, there is no "Worthington" in Sussex, theres a Worthing. I know this because I grew up there. this guy is the worst narrator for pronouncing things, he can't even pronounce Britain's most famous river, its the river bloody Thames! not tames. The author just takes short cuts and is a hypocrite. rushes the details to pump out drivel one after the other. if members of the public are picking apart the stories (which I see many of the reviews do) then its clear this isn't a good book. Save your money and credits. Go listen to Peter Greens books narrated by Steve White, they're delivered much better and far more accurate.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

only half good

Overall
3 out of 5 stars
Performance
3 out of 5 stars
Story
3 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 20-07-24

the first half of this book is hard to listen too, the narrator speaks so quickly and without any form of enthusiasm like he's just reading a book report. its been edited in such a way that it comes across like he can do a whole book in one breath, at speed. The second narrator is much better, actually has some passion to his proffesion with good cadence which tells a good story which draws you in. I would rate 5 stars if the second narrator did the whole thing. but due to only being able to listen to half of this 3 stars will have to do.

Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!