Ryan Murphy’s Monsters: Art or Explotation?
For a new generation, the Menendez Brothers case is not as well-known as it was to those who witnessed the trials unfold first-hand. Netflix’s Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story has served up the tale for a brand-new audience to prompt fresh conversation about the sons who shot their parents. At least, that’s what director Ryan Murphy has claimed…
Murphy’s true crime series began with Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story in 2022, which faced intense criticism from audiences due to the sensational portrayal of the real-life murders. But that didn’t deter Murphy from producing a second season centred on the murder of Jose and Kitty Menendez by their sons, Lyle and Erik, in 1989. It was a case that caught global attention and polarised an entire nation, even after the brothers got sentenced to life in prison. In its first week of release on Netflix in late September, the show was viewed by 19.5 million people – and still, it received more backlash than Murphy has ever endured.
The show focuses on Lyle and Erik’s relationship and their motives for the murders but often plays with the rumours of incest between them. The Menendez family have spearheaded the criticismof Murphy’s direction, with a statement released on behalf of Erik through his wife’s social media reading: “I believe Ryan Murphy cannot be this naive and inaccurate about the facts of our lives to do this without bad intent.”
Murphy responded to the negative opinions in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter saying “I was never interested in the Menendez brothers. What I was interested in was the sexual abuse angle.” Adding, “I have no interest in meeting them… I wasn’t doing a biography of them. I was telling a story about a certain place and time.”
I know that Ryan Murphy is not a documentary maker or a legal historian, but a storyteller with a knack for dramatization (Murphy himself insists that his only intent is to showcase a viewpoint). And I even agree that audiences should expect some exaggeration from a show of this nature. But, to deal with such a controversial story, of whom the people affected are still living and subjected to it, there should be a degree of sensitivity. It’s also not that I expect Murphy to advocate for either the defence or the prosecution – that isn’t his job. Nevertheless, when he claims to be so interested in telling a story of sexual abuse, there should inevitably be a measure of sympathy given to the alleged victims, no?
Instead, Murphy says that “The Menendez Brothers should be sending me flowers” for the revived interest in their case.
Murphy’s arrogance in his response has only fuelled the negative conversation around his direction. It seems he cannot decide what angle he wants to convey. One moment he claims to want to showcase all views, and the next he refuses to talk to the brothers. He tells the story of sexual abuse but argues that the Menendez brothers are not victims. To say that he was never interested in Lyle and Erik but then continues to praise the show’s success feels hypocritical and cold. This is not about the brothers’ guilt or innocence, nor their sentence—that is a different conversation. This is a conversation about toeing the line between entertainment and consideration. Whether or not you think the Menendez brothers deserve life behind bars, or if they were telling the truth about their experiences, one must question the morality of benefiting from another’s sexual abuse trauma (proven or not).
No matter your opinion, no one can deny that a dramatic adaptation of any story will always sell—exploited or not. The success of Monsters proves that. Perhaps Murphy is only as guilty of profiting from the Menendez brother’s story as the media in the 1990s were and we, as a modern audience, are just as guilty of submitting to the entertainment of such exploitation.
Words by Rebecca Mcgeehan
