Comments by "AH Kaufman" (@ak203) on "WBIR Channel 10" channel.

I watched the show and am now reading William's book. Sadly, the idiots who think TV shows are real think that Rachel is the bad one. The Rachel in the move has zero resemblance, was a terrible actress, and Williams' book remarkably well written - shows why the move is a movie. To say it is "based on" and a gross misrepresentation as related to Williams.
17
Read the book. Spoiler: movies are always false when "based on" something. IF you judge people based on movies, go back to college, or high school, whichever is the case.
14
@Nda54Gem I've traveled abroad on business over 150 times and have been to Morocco 6 times, and stayed at the same hotel. The movie left out one detail. If Rachel hadn't given her card, Sorokin would have been arrested on the spot. Moroccan justice is slow. Rachel could have said no and gone home on her card and left Anna where she belonged -- in jail. The movie, failing to point out that little detail, failed to show how Rachel saved her skin. And remember -- the first arrest of Sorokin was for failing to pay a hotel bill and for a lunch.
9
Hey' let's go to the Maldives! Can you make reservations? I'll pay you back. Promise.
7
@Nda54Gem The book is, frankly, impressive. She writes unusually well for someone who's just a photo editor. Very well. Anna made the reservation so she'd be arrested. That's why they kept pulling her aside (in reality and in the book);. So Rachel really bailed her out of an awful situation. The movie was fun. I thought the woman playing Anna was excellent. The rest were dreadful. Just dreadful. I've worked with scads of lawyers, prosecutors, finance guys, journalists and as I mentioned, travel a lot. Other than the Anna character, the rest were a joke. The portrayal of the Rachel character was, as you put it, meek and deer-in-deadlights silly. The journalist was pathetic. The boyfriend was awful. The prosecutor was a parody of a prosecutor. The other thing -- I get it they wanted the story told through the journalist. But it is beyond unethical and corrupt for a journalist to do what she did with the lawyer. And the lawyer could be disbarred for sharing info as he did. A dumb dumb move. But fun after all.
6
@Johnny.Angelico I'll send you my social security number and bank account.
4
@kavitaa8523 Anna Sorokin was and remains a thief and an imposter. devoid of any serious skill or talent. Rachel was a nice girl and lost what was for her a fortune. She has talent. I read her book, which was remarkably well written.
3
@imstillsinging6557 It was really well written and Im very well read and have context. She has talent. And the detail is clear and I believe her. It's very plausible and the poor kid has been criticzsed based on a dumb movie.
3
@Nda54Gem Still don't have the money but I'll take your word for it:)
3
Do you know Rachel? Do you think that what you see in movies is true?
2
@kavitaa8523 I don't view movies as facts. And Rachel seem to have weathered the storm but she'll never overcome the fools who believe what they see in movies. I was stunned at how well written her book was.
2
Nice guy you are. She waited five months for the credit card fix and they only covered the hotel. She got stuck with the flights and all the other expenses. She lost her credit for late payments, missed her rents, got in trouble at work. Just a hunch-- but you look like the kind of guy who just might knock out someone's teeth if they did that to you.
2
@Nda54Gem Have your German family money manager contact me. I'm losing my patience.
2
@Nda54Gem Ok ok. Yeah. Bitcoin?
2
@Nda54Gem Travel arrangements does not mean payments. I read the Rachel book which is highly detailed, thoroughly plausible. Sorokin was a sleazy crook -- forged bank documents, created fake names, lied to everyone. This Rachel is a decent young woman who got taken. The movie is cruel in using her first name, which has led to all sorts of vicious comments by people too ignorant to know what is real and what is greedy fiction by the producers.
1
@EughhBrothereughh How thoughtful of you! And fi you believe movies over books, I suspect you don't make much money.
1
@baldeagle4710 I guess when you know nothing, you can believe anything. Read Rachel's (very well written) book; read more than what a fiction movie tells you. You seem awfully angry for someone who, well, was never cheated out of a year's salary by someone.
1
@reflectinglight5756 And the publicity was becasue of what Sorokin did, which was hardly Williams' fault
1
@Lali218 What Anna did: multiple forgeries of documents to obtain bank loans; use of fraudulent wire phone calls imitating a nonexistent person, to get bank loans; obtaining free hotel and meals after fraudulently claiming she would pay. What Rachel did: tried to help a friend who would otherwise be put into a Moroccan prison (remember, Rachel had enough credit to get home on her own); write a book that is surprisingly well written and was paid for it; is paid modest sums for TV appearances, as is the custom. What Rhimes did: created a totally false movie that is a lot of fun, with one great actress and a whole team of awful actors and actresses, and made millions off of it. So, your gripe again?
1
@galacticarchitech When you start believing movies you're heading down a dark path
1