Revealing the True Identity of D.B. Cooper

 "Another mystery post? What is this, "Unsolved Mysteries?" Who do you think you are, Robert Stack?"

Not hardly. No, this is different and for two very important reasons:

1) Other videos I've posted on Jack the Ripper were extremely well made with painstaking production value. Whereas this one is terrible.

2) The other videos explain the mystery without a definitive resolution. This video solves the case.

In part 2, the video from 0:00 up to 36:00 is pertinent to the conclusions of part 1. It involves the discovery of a "smoking gun" and therefore highly recommended if you've watched part 1. 

Everything from 36:00 on is solely devoted from the case to examining the FBI's actions in the shooting of "D.B. Cooper."

I don't know whether you know about the story of D.B. Cooper, I assume everyone does. (Here's Rich Evans explaining.) D.B. Cooper was never found and the case remains unsolved to this day.

But as I say, this video claims to have solved the case and I am convinced. But I'm also annoyed that I have to watch 4 hours of video when the pertinent information could be edited down to 40 minutes to an hour. I don't usually use the term "Boomer" as a criticism but this is Boomered to the toppermost. There's no other way to put it. Pointless segments, slow pacing, clueless camerawork, making it unnecessarily personal, extraneous exposition, basically extraneous everything, and so on. Somewhere in the second hour we're treated to a tour of D.B.Cooper's home and I have to admit, I was not interested in learning where the TV and the couch were. Call me crazy. Somewhere in hour 3, I'm watching video of people in a van finding a place to park and shouting "could this have been edited out?!" 

"No, the people need to see the parking of the van. Tell the world." 

Ponderous, man. Ponderous.

But that's the long and short of it: good information, the chance to find out the true identity of D.B. Cooper - one of the all-time greatest mysteries - but if you get into it, go in knowing that it's going to be a slog. You decide for yourself; choose your own adventure.

Reminder: Rifftrax Live: Rad in 1 Week

 

Just a reminder that "Rifftrax Live: Rad" is showing in theaters in one week, 8/17. Get your tickets.

Don't get left out... If I were you, I'd go over there and buy as many as you can!

Tommy Boy: The Musical

 

RIP Robbie Robertson

Robbie Robertson has died at age 80. The last surviving member of The Band is Garth Hudson.

I reviewed Robbie's documentary about himself and The Band here.

The Secret Identity of Jack the Ripper (1988)

 

In a previous post, I mentioned it was the exact anniversary of Jack the Ripper's first murder. I would like to correct that, or adjust that slightly. London in 1888 was full of murders and there is some disagreement about what the official Jack the Ripper murders are and which are not, so the day of the first one is a matter of dispute.

But also in that post, I mentioned the possibility of tracking down a documentary from the 1980s which I saw as a child and which somewhat haunted me. The above video is that documentary, in full, on youtube, not to be confused with the TV miniseries "Jack the Ripper" also from 1988.

The first surprising thing about it is this: it's actually quite good. I was expecting to post this as an ironic joke but I'm posting it now as a legitimately entertaining video.

A special TV event from 1988 where a group of experts is going to determine who the real Jack the Ripper is sounds like it should have aged poorly and come off as a joke in network tv cliches. That's fully what I was expecting but this isn't that. It is somewhat dated, for sure, but it's actually well-made, compelling and holds up quite well. Yes, some of it is dated - I love the "going live" to London for no real reason as well as the solemn and pointless studio audience. But those are minor details.

One of the points on which I think the documentary is laughable is probably a matter of controversy. I may be in the wrong, and call me an uneducated rube but am I supposed to believe that even though we haven't the slightest clue who Jack the Ripper was, the FBI can tell that he came from a broken home and had a domineering mother, etc., etc? I try to keep an open mind but it sounds like a parody of real investigation. Not buying your Freudian nonsense. Do better, FBI. (Is it "do better" or "be better?")

My second surprise is this: I watched this as a child and can't fathom how. It starts with a viewer discretion warning, there's rape, prostitution, murder, Satanism... a ghastly crime scene photo (fortunately for my child-self it was an 80s television low-resolution version, the modern one is horrific)... syphillis... suicide... and more murders... that I would see anything like this makes no sense at all. NO sense. I was thinking maybe there was an edited version but any info about where and how it aired is hard to come by. The internet can't even agree whether it was for British television or American. I can't explain the circumstances by which I saw this - you solve a mystery you open a new one.

The host of the program is Peter Ustinov who. is having definite. trouble reading his. cue cards. I immediately imagined the Best of the Worst guys laughing that he was drunk or on drugs. He's not slurring and he lived a long while after this so I think he maybe just didn't care. What a coincidence that in the same time of life and in the same location I saw this, I also fell in love with the Disney version of "Robin Hood" in which Ustinov plays Prince John (and King Richard.) I wonder if I recognized the voice as being the same. Doubtful.

JonTron - Titanic II

Note to self: never do an interview with "60 Minutes Australia."