I'm troubled about the revisionism regarding Marx, about what he did or didn't understand. He seems to have been mostly ignored by academic economists (not all)

I'm troubled about the revisionism regarding Marx, about what he did or didn't understand. He seems to have been mostly ignored by academic economists (not all) after a single attack by Böhm-Bawerk and everyone just concludes now that the law of value is false in a trivial way while ignoring some very obvious fixes to its logic which were very much present in Vol 3 (e.g. constant capital also adds value). Neo-Ricardians took him seriously and the vast majority of people who dismiss him with snark today can't even reproduce what the initial debate regarding the LTV was and seem to have such a twisted idea of who Marx was that it never occurs to them that he was himself perfectly aware of the problems.