Blue Caprice : How true is this story?

I'm curious how true this story is. Is it based on actual accounts of the people involved? It looks powerful if it's true. But if it's just a fictionalized backstory to what we saw in the news than it's kind of meaningless.

Haven't seen the movie but the story is pretty damn real. So real, in fact, that it actually happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beltway_sniper_attacks

I know the shootings happened. But there's a lot more to the movie then just the shootings. My question was if they based this on actual accounts from the people involved. Is it based on trial testimony and interviews with the two murderers, or is this just a made up story of what someone thinks they might have said, felt, and done.

Just watched it. Then I read up about the Beltway shootings. According to trial testimony the minor was not the sole shooter, but in the film he is perceived as the sole shooter. According to his original interview, he admitted to all of the shootings, but later changed his testimony.

It seems like it's just a fictionalized account of the two criminals meeting, coming to America, and then killing random people for no reason. It's not a graphic shooting film like some that are based on mass shootings, it's more of a personal drama film between a father-figure and his "adopted" son.

Chaos ensues when retards like Jmort1213 are allowed access to the internet.

How about you answer the *beep* question instead of *beep* all over this thread (with a legitimate question) with your illegitimate douchery.

Is OP saying it's a good movie? NO?
Have I seen he movie? NO.
Am I interested in seeing it? YES, if it was actually based on true events (aside from the shooting); which is what OP is asking here.

Why you feel the need to post your *beep* here - I DON'T KNOW. But maybe, you should just *beep* off all together. It's people like you that make the IMDB community the cancer that it is.


aw man, i shot marvin in the face

---

It's so lousy you won't care.
Slow, unintelligent and just an all around failure.

---

Quoted for truth & posterity.


I haven't slept for ten days, because that would be too long

Blue Caprice is slow when you compare it to Die Hard (or any other random action hero flic).

If you do in fact consider it "unintelligent" then I must assume you did expect Blue Caprice to be some action flic, and you were not at all receptive for what was shown to you.

Watching the film, I was captivated. Both the events and the individual's actions and motivations felt believable. The acting seems solid.

What I don't know is the answer to the OP's question:
How true is it? - regarding the events that led up to the murders.

Especially the dynamics between the adult man and the adolescent boy: Is that story based on research into their relationship and their history? What about the boy's domestic situation on Antigua? (is he from really from Antigua?) The adult man's marital and family problems, his ideations concerning his social environment ("evil people, vampires, ") etc. pp.

If I'd learn that the backstory was entirely confabulated, then the movie would appear much less meaningful to me.

Anybody?

Most of the movie is based on either third party accounts or interviews with Malvo and/or transcripts from his testimony and the trial. So it's pretty accurate.

I was a little disappointed, to be honest. The acting is decent but it feels very much like a "paint by the numbers" retelling without really looking too hard into the pathology involved. It's not a bad movie but it's not trying very hard to go beyond the chronological fact spitting, except in a few scenes that end up not as meaningful as they could have.

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

Can anyone explain to me the part about where he had his kids in Antigua but when they get to America they are no longer with him? I understand that he kidnapped the kids, but what happened before he went back to the States?




http://www.youtube.com/user/Morgana0x

Actually it is not that big of a deal for the movie (in real life of course it is). Yes he kidnapped them, then they were taken from him permanently by court, the kids live with the mother, he gets back to the only "kid" he is allowed to see (even though it is not his), and since he is the only parental figure which matters to Lee, he followed him everywhere, ultimatly to the States.

From what I've read about the case, the movie seems fairly accurate in the rough outlines, but does not touch on the strong racial or Muslim components of the real-life pair. But the movie seemed to me more aimed at showing how their relationship developed than providing insight into their motivations.

There's a book called SCARED SILENT about the D.C. sniper John Muhammad written by his ex-wife, which goes more into detail and gives some good insight about what kind of guy he was, and his motivesI read some of the book a couple of years ago, and basically,according to her, he was pretty much a sick, narcissistic abusive sociopath who forced her to hide out and run away with her kids after receiving death threats from him. It didn't really have anything to do with his being Muslimaccording to her, he was messed up long before he converted. Some of her accounts of Muhammad's behavior are very creepy in parts, and worth a look:



http://www.amazon.com/Scared-Silent-Mildred-Muhammad/dp/1593092423


I'll check out the film when I get a chanceit's received virtually no promotion whatsoever,as far as I know.

Ex-wife? I wouldn't believe a word. Guys is so scary and messed up she dated for him for how long, had how many kids with him?

That was exactly what I was thinking.

I haven't seen this movie, but the 2003 TV movie "D.C. Sniper: 23 Days of Fear" was a decent one about the topic. It had its flaws (rushed into production, low budget and production values), but it did capture the tension that people in the D.C. region felt. I was living in Northern Virginia and working in D.C. at the time of the shootings. I remember the early (mistaken) reports that the shooters were using a white van or minivan or box truck. Some said it was a Chevy Astro. Every time I saw a white van on the street that fall, I started to pay close attention to the driver and anything that could be suspicious. In the evenings, I would avoid standing close to office windows, even if none of the shootings occurred inside downtown D.C. office buildings.

The IMDb reviews for D.C. Sniper aren't that great. Admittedly, I haven't seen the movie since it was shown on TV a decade ago, so I don't remember all the details. But I remember how tense that movie made me felt while I watched it. Especially the final scenes when the break in the case came and the police closed in on the blue Caprice. At least emotionally, that part felt exactly like it did when I was following local news reports the night of the arrest.

I saw Blue Caprice at the Stockholm filmfestival yesterday and it doesn't focus on the tension the people in the region. Instead it focused on the relationship between the boy and John. How he became a father figure, expressing his anger towards society through the boy. Although his motives could been clearer in the film it leaves a lot to the viewers own interpretations.
Its aimed towards those who know about the shootings beforehand. But, as a swede, that did not know about the shootings, it was still an engaging movie.

The movie you are talking about seems pretty interesting. But it seems lite it is really a different kind of movie.

---

I was living in Northern Virginia and working in D.C. at the time of the shootings. I remember the early (mistaken) reports that the shooters were using a white van or minivan or box truck. Some said it was a Chevy Astro. Every time I saw a white van on the street that fall, I started to pay close attention to the driver and anything that could be suspicious. In the evenings, I would avoid standing close to office windows, even if none of the shootings occurred inside downtown D.C. office buildings.

---

Oh yeah, I remember those days. I lived in the same county as the first Md shootings. Our HS went on lock down and we were in a code blue the whole time till they were caught (police at our doors, not allowed to do any outdoor activities, etc). Anyway I think anyone who was there at the time can relate to that tension! We all have our own stories, I'm sure. I mean, I would half-joke (but other half, serious) walk in zig zags from the car to the school to make myself a harder target. And yes every white or tan vanespecially without windows, was like oh dang! We went to Delaware for a vaycay during it, and I remember just how nice and refreshing it was to be able to walk around outside and not worry about a random bullet coming from somewhere mysterious. We made sure to get gas there before coming back to MD too. Weird time.

Actually very close to the truth. Of course all movies or books that are based upon real life events need some filler or improvisation, however after following this great story for so many years I could see that the director made a significant effort in keeping this as close to reality as possible.

The "father figure" in the movie you can obviously see that he was disgusted by two major factors in his life: 1.) the removal of his children from his custody, and 2.) the fact that the U.S. government has been destroying the lives of innocent people in countries we have absolutely no right being in (i.e., Iraq, Afghanistan, etc). Last count, over 1.2 million innocent lives lost due to U.S. empiricism just in these two countries alone over the past 20 years.

Thus the later being the main catalyst in his quest for revenge against the U.S. Government for all the innocent children, women and men it has been responsible for slaughtering during the many invasions into these foreign lands.

Of course this is no excuse for their actions on innocent civilians who had nothing to do with these wars. But from the perspective of character development you can see how this horrible situation developed over time and the man's relationship with the boy guiding him into blind obedience towards some of the worst crimes our country has seen in decades.

With that said, no one should condone the horrible actions these two men took against innocent civilians. However one can understand the hatred for this country that has developed amongst many people who are sick and tired of paying our tax dollars and children's lives fighting wars in countries we have absolutely not right being in.

I personally hoped that both of these two people would get the death penalty for what they did. However at the same time I can understand that the state should NOT be in charge of deciding on who lives and dies even with the most horrendous crimes these two committed. In my opinion they both should have been locked up for life and the man should have not received the death penalty. Two wrongs do not make a right and many of the victim's families have come out and stated that the death penalty for the man does not bring back their loved ones.

Anyhow back to the movie, it was great and damn I would love to have the "widow maker" gun that Ray introduced to them in the first part of the movie. This is one of my favorite rifles to shoot for target practice and it is a wonderful weapon for long range shooting practice. Try and figure out who is the company that manufactures this weapon? One hint, it is manufactured by a European company, Not an American company as many people like to demonize the U.S. over its gun culture. In fact I live in Europe and when I get the chance I go to Switzerland where I have the freedom to shoot weapons I could have never dreamed of in the United States.

Lastly, I hope these two individuals rot in the 7th gate of hell (dante's inferno) for all the crimes they committed against the innocent victims they targeted. However do not let this or any other tragedy make the case for taking individuals rights from owning and using guns respectfully. Enjoy the movie :-)

I live in the Washington DC area and while to shootings are true, the movies goes more into the relationship between Muhammad and Malvo than the shootings themselves. What the movie does not tell you is that Muhammad's ultimate plan was to kill his ex-wife who had custody of his children. He planned to kill a number of random people first, then kill his ex-wife, then kill a few more. This would make her murder look like another of the random shootings thereby drawing suspicion away from him.

*English is not my primary language.

Know a lot about the case. Movie is very very accurate.

This movie is LOOSELY based on the true story, I say loosely because even in the synopsis it says that they are taking vengeance against the "moral decay in the society that deemed him to be an unfit parent" shifting the blame onto the white society he lived in when in fact no one wronged these two men, they were not committing an act of vengeance, they were committing acts of hate crime, they specifically targeted white people and white people only, even children. Their plan was multiphased and in their own words, phase one: Kill 6 white people a day(180 per month) Phase two: Killing pregnant white women by shooting them in the stomach. Phase three was to extort millions of dollars from the US government. Society is not responsible, this movie attempts to shift the guilt from their shoulders to that of their victims, the white society which they terrorized. This part of the trial wasn't reported by the anti-white race baiting media, they were too busy covering the dragging death of a single black man in the south to report that the "washington DC" snipers were targeting only white people because of their race and because of the killer's religion(nation of islam) which has always been a militant anti-white organization with members such as Malcolm X(Kill the "white devil") There is a trend in our semitic media where you can make movie after movie glorifying people who killed whites because they were white but not the other way around(not that glorification of racial violence should ever be promoted) In the last 2 years alone there is white guilt movie after white guilt movie(42,mandella walk to freedom, winnie mandela, fruitvale station, the butler, Captain philips, Elysium, machete 2, and so on) First off Mandela and his wife were POS murderers AND communists on top of that, Nelson plead guilty to 140 murder charges(BECAUSE HE WAS GUILTY, He was the leader of the ANC, a terrorist communist organization that killed thousands of people, there are videos of him singing about killing whites with other blacks but of course it's ok because most of his victims were white people who wanted to live with other white people in segregated communities) The cover for Winnie Mandela literally has them both giving the black power salute, apparently black power is fine and blacks should run their own countries but white power is wrong and should never have any sort of power in their own countries(south africa was a white country and blacks had nothing to do with it's prosperity, if they did the rest of black africa would be just as well off but it's not)

South Africa was not a "White" country until colonization, and it was built on the back of the Black South Africans living there. Seek some help for your race issues.

What a racist! Many of their victims were black. Ignorant and uninformed people like you will hopefully die off soon, unfortunately not in my lifetime. You're pitiful and dangerous.

---

they specifically targeted white people and white people only, even children.

---

Tell that to Premkumar Walekar, Sarah Ramos, Pascal Charlot, and Conrad Johnson.

This movie is a fictional account of a real event don't believe anything in this movie, it isnt a documentary.

looks like CCharlie or whatever their name is May very well be inspired by this movie to go on his own rampage It's a movie board. Chill the hell out.

No one on here is nearly as mad or racist as you are.

And I am neither white nor black so this has nothing to do with me being offended about your tirade. The one about how proud you are of being a member of the Aryan Brothethood or the KKK and not having a single kind thing to say about Africans or African Americans or really anyone but whites. Surprising.

This board was created to ask about the authenticity of a movie called blue caprice. That's what the OP wanted to know. Now based on what you said I have to be like you and not even acknowledge or answer the OPs question.

Your response was nothing but race based *beep* Yeah, bad stuff happened in history. That doesn't make it right. That doesn't mean that people today feel the same way and do the same things they did then. Except for you CCharlie.

Your ancestors would be proud to see you still wearing that hood and spouting off ignorant hate speech. At least you have them. *beep*

I see where you are rather quick to engage in a little hate yourself. Many people who engage in a particular activity attempt to either mask or justify their own behavior by accusing others of the exact same thing, ala Alinsky.
Which brings up the point, and I will be brief;this is a movie site but you and a couple others brought this up; that you readily ascribe less than honorable motives, shall we say to those who are membersof the KKK, that famed organization of Senator Robert Byrd, or the Ayrian Brotherhood, a white prison gang basically. Now would you be as quick to ascribe those same exact motives to members of the Nation of Islam, that bunch run by Louis Fahrahkan or perhaps the New Black Panther Party, the group which gained fame for it voter outreach efforts in Philadelphia a couple of years ago?
Why do I care? I don't, really. Then why do I ask? Morbid curiosity I suppose. I am always turning over stones. I am curious if you are an equal opportunity hater or a bigoted one? I suppose there is a third option, a preferable one, you may simply be confused and just jumped the gun and felt that name calling would bridge the gap between the divergent views of you and the other gentleman you were engaged with. Let me offer you a tip. It won't, in fact it is sure to make things worse.
Remember it is OK to disagree with folks, or God forbid, have them disagree with you. I've had it happen to me and I'll tell you, it doesn't even hurt. Nope not one little bit! It's no reason to start hollaring and name calling because that's when the learning stops and the hating begins and then you know what? You are the subject of the sequel to this movie, and no one wants that.
Rich in New Mexico.

Yeah. Disagreement is one thing. Debate is a healthy thing. But this ongoing racial hate is ridiculous. Like I said this is about a movie. Not skin color. Not everything has to be reduced to skin color. That was my point. And yes. The ignorance and arrogance of someone like that is just absolutely infuriating. Look at everything race related that has happened since I put that post up. That is because people think this way. Yeah being okay with someone else's differing views and opinions is essential to one of the things that I believe makes America great. That said. Hate speech is completely different. It's like yelling "BOMB!!" in a crowded theater. It's just meant to cause people to be hurt, angry, and antagonistic.

Once again. Look at what has happened in this country since I wrote the first post. This controversy about race is turning into absolute abhorrent violence. I see it everyday as a trauma surgeon. I just like to see people live and not die after being involved in some incident involving a white man shooting a black man or vice versa.

I guess that's my fault for thinking people should actually give a damn about their fellow man. Maybe because there was no huge Indian American community where I grew up and at times felt different being that I wasn't white nor black nor even Hispanic. I'm also not a bleeding heart liberal or a staunch right wing conservative. I just don't see what the problem is when someone has a different skin color than you. Why does that make them better or worse or make you want to hate them in this day and age? People will give you the most ridiculous answers to that question. And the majority of the answers are absolute *beep*

I remember in 2001 after the towers were hit. There was a moment we're race ALMOST didn't matter and everyone stuck together as an American. It's sad that it took that massive tragedy to unite people and of course obviously it didn't last. I would love for us to realize that our neighbors aren't the enemy because they look different. Sorry if seeing bloodshed at work and seeing violent act after act in the media makes me angry in the ignorance of most of these crimes and the reasons they were perpetrated.

not at all. total work of fiction. they did shoot random people out of a blue caprice. He came to US with his mother. She was deported at some point. No mention of devout "religious beliefs"?

I was about to saywhat happened to the Islamic element? I don't think I'm even going to finish this. Complete waste of time tbh.

I am no expert on the subject, but I have done probably around 100 hours of research on it, and this is what I could glean.

The film is more "inspired" by true events then based. Detailed examples:

John and Lee did meet in Antigua, which is Lee's home country. However, John was friends with Lee's mother. It is true that she often abandoned him, and the exact circumstance depicted early in the film is true (at least, I interpreted it as a particular job she left for in real life), but she did not abandon him to the degree portrayed in the film. John met Lee once before when he was 14, two years before he had escaped Antigua with his kidnapped children, when he then found Lee alone without his mother, which is the circumstance inaccurately depicted in the film.

John did kidnap his children and take them to Antigua. When he came back, they were immediately taken from him. This is not depicted in the film per say, as it is quickly glossed over and presumably happens off-screen, but it is alluded to.

John did not necessarily bring Lee to America, as depicted in the film. Lee moved to America with his mother, to a town called Bellingham first (about 45 minutes from Tacoma). John was already living there, which is why they chose that town to move to. However, shortly after that, she again abandoned Lee, and was eventually deported. They moved there in August of 2001. John and Lee lived together, homeless, in a mission, until approximately March 2002. This is when Lee's "training" by John began. Also, at this point, Lee enrolled at Sehome High School with John claiming to be his father. After that, they then moved to Tacoma.

John had lived in Tacoma with his wife (second) and children (three of four) previous to their divorce. He owned a car repair and upholstery business that he ran from his house (which explains his expertise in modifying the car as depicted in the film). He also at one point started a Karate school with a friend, but eventually abandoned that. None of this is referenced in the film.

During this time in Tacoma, John was arrested for abusing and threatening his wife, and eventually a woman did testify against him (which he explains to Lee while walking through his old neighborhood in the film. That is a neighborhood in Tacoma, though I do not know if it is where he actually lived). John really did force Lee to kill that woman as a test, and he really did mistakenly shoot the woman's niece when she opened the door, as depicted in the film.

In the film, Lee shoots an employee of a bar they frequent and eventually robs him. There is no evidence of this ever happening in Tacoma, or any other bar they frequented, which John and Lee were known to do together, despite Lee being underage. This was not, as far as police know, how they raised money to buy the car. However, this is very similar to real events that took place in Georgia, Maryland, and Rhode Island, in which Lee did shoot and rob two bars and a convenience store in this manner, when they were on their way to D.C.

John was of the Muslim faith, which is why he changed his last name to Muhammad. However, for all accounts and purposes, he did not follow any known or traditional doctrine or sect of Islam, but rather picked and choice what he wanted to make up his own, militant, radical brand, mostly based on his own experiences. None of this is depicted in the film.

John was able to track down the location of his children, and part of his plan was to commit murders as a means to cover the eventual murder of his ex-wife. This, however, was not his ENTIRE plan or motivation, as is often reported. He had delusions of grandeur in that his master plan would create so much chaos he could extort the government for enough money to move to Canada (with his kidnapped children and Lee), to start a training camp for other kids like Lee, and eventual execute plans like in D.C. in every major American city as a means to bring down order and, somehow in his eyes, the government. Though it is shown in the film that he called a former elementary school to learn the whereabouts of his children, no one really knows how he gained this information, as far as I can tell. None of the above motivation, at least the training camp part, is depicted in the film.

The primary contents of the film, living with the Tim Blake Nelson and Joey Lauren Adams characters while they trained, is based on Lee Malvo's personal testimony. However, I have not yet found how to read much of that, so I do not know how accurate any of that is.

The way the police officer caught John and Lee while sleeping in their car is almost entirely fabricated. This did not happen by accident whatsoever. Also not depicted in the film is the degree of which they had attempted to get ahold of the authorities to extort them for money. Though there is voice over of a phone call made by Lee in the sniping montage, this happened at least 4 times, according to Lee. The first several calls were thought to be jokes. They left at least two notes, one of which contained a Tarot card of Death, and also referred to themselves as only "God" in these interactions (as in "I am God" or "Call me God".) None of that is depicted in the film. Because of these notes, which were often found after the deadline they had given the police to give into their demands, they were able to find DNA belonging to Lee. This DNA matched DNA that had found in a convenience store in Georgia, as did the ballistics belonging to the gun used in that murder/robbery and the D.C. shootings. They were able to match this DNA to Lee's immigration file. Tracing Lee, they were able to find that John had enrolled him in a school claiming to be his father, as well as several other circumstances, and because of John's military record (several accounts of misconduct, but also an Expert Marksman Certification), he became the primary suspect. The blue Caprice (which is truly the car they used) was registered under John's name, and records of him buying plates in New Jersey were then traced. While all of that was happening, and while in D.C. during the 23 day-long killing spree, John at one point was pulled over for running two stop signs, but was let off with a warning, and then was later questioned in a parking lot immediately after a shooting, but was again let go. Eventually, a state trooper saw the car in a rest stop, as depicted in the film, but obviously called in backup. In real life, John and Lee woke up to their car completely surrounded by authorities. So, the way it is depicted in the film detracts from any of the police's failure or success in the situation, as well as in insane amount of in-depth, multi-state investigative work, to instead show their incarceration to be a product of luck, coincidence, and/or synchronicity.

Though Lee was distant and intense at first, he is by no means the irreparably brainwashed monster in prison, as depicted in the film. After a long, long amount of psychology re-conditioning to overcome the brainwashing and (alleged) sexual abuse (something also not depicted) by John, he has since become very openly communicative about the ordeal, giving extensive testimony to both police and media, and feeling a great deal of remorse for his actions.

I apologize for the lengthy post, and honestly, this is just some of the big, glaring stuff; there are a lot more tiny details that were either changed or entirely made up, from what I could tell. However, I had seen that very few people on this thread had actually responded to your initial question. I hope this answers that for you, and perhaps some other questions people may have.

---

I am no expert on the subject, but I have done probably around 100 hours of research on it, and this is what I could glean.

The film is more "inspired" by true events then based. Detailed examples:

John and Lee did meet in Antigua, which is Lee's home country.

---

No. His home country was Jamaica, which is reflected with varying degrees of success by Tequan Richmond's initial accent. When the story originally unfolded, his nationality sparked my interest because that was my parents home country and the tragedy increased ten fold that someone so young had gone abroad to another country and ended up in a such a situation, from which he will die in a prison cell.

Malvo's mother went to live in Antigua and took him with her. See below for details on his childhood memories in Jamaica.

http://www.18degreesnorth.tv/zahra-burton-interviews-dc-sniper-lee-boyd-malvo/