‘American Crime Story: Versace’ recap: ‘Descent’ – TheCelebrityCafe.com

Versace…! Head is officially starting to hurt trying to keep this timeline straight.

Versace is back from its week hiatus, the new episode of American Crime Story: Versace goes back even FURTHER in the timeline of Andrew Cunanan. Granted, not all the way back to his first interactions with Versace, but a year before he started his killing spree.

In 1996, Andrew is doing alright for himself, as he’s living the glamorous life. That is, he’s crashing at a mansion with a luxurious swimming pool (in which Andrew swims in naked during the opening scene), which is technically owned by an older man named Norman (Michael Nouri).

Andrew and Norman aren’t dating, per-say, despite having had sexual relations in the past. Rather, and this is where the tale turns sad, Norman pities Andrew. He sees that he’s become accustomed to his lifestyle, and doesn’t want to throw him out on the street.

But all good things must come to an end. This relationship does end up crashing and burning eventually, shortly after Andrew’s birthday party.

Most noticeably amongst the guest that Andrew invites is David, whom he killed two episodes ago, and Jeffrey, who met his fate in the previous episode.

Andrew loves David (lol some things never change). Like, head-over-heels in love, despite the fact that David clearly doesn’t feel the same way. Jeffrey, at this point, is no more than just a close friend to Andrew— a close friend that he plans to use to get closer to David.

After trying forcing Jeffrey to put on his old navy uniform for a conversation starter (clearly Andrew was manipulating people long before he started killing them), David arrives and is almost immediately impressed.

Impressed with Jeffrey, that is. The two hit it off right away, leaving Andrew running to the bathroom to do lines of coke and wonder what’s happening and where he went wrong.

The party doesn’t improve when he’s interrupted by Lee, the guy who Andrew killed THREE episodes ago (are you starting to see where the headache comes from?). Andrew, evidently, is embarrassed of Lee and doesn’t want David knowing about his relationship with him.

After gathering together everyone who he eventually ends up killing for a group photo, Andrew has his confrontation with Norman. Norman catches Andrew in a web of lies and then gives him a pretty solid ultimatum: either tell the truth or get out.

Andrew being Andrew choses to leave. The problem is he really doesn’t have anywhere to go — his apartment is literally falling apart.

That’s not going to stop him, though. Oh no. As we heard referenced in previous episodes, Andrew then saids the letter to Jeffrey’s dad — hoping to out him as gay before he’s ready and sabotage the relationship between Jeffrey and David.

The plan has the exact opposite effect. Jeffrey confronts Andrew, telling him he’s moving to Minneapolis — where David lives.

Panicking, Andrew comes up with another brilliant plan (since he’s so full of those): he’s going to invite him to a fully funded trip to Los Angeles and try to win him back. Sorry, did I say invite? David really didn’t have much say in the matter, as Andrew refused to take no for an answer.

Of course, Andrew doesn’t have the money to pay for any of this, but that’s not really his concern at the moment. He just wants David to see how much he means to him.

And, to his credit, David realizes that feeling pretty quickly. Problem is, it’s not a mutual feeling. He eventually tells Andrew that they can’t be together and he’s not the one. Even when David gives him the slightest chance, Andrew reverts back to his lies and the whole thing falls apart.

A couple of days letter, Andrew is hitting a new low. After stumbling into a bar and making up a lie about his new fiancé to the bartender, he comes across a shady guy sitting in the corner who offers him meth. He takes it and winds up having a trippy dream that involves Versace, love and a measuring tape.

Now, with a new drug addiction to support and an exponentially growing credit-card bill, Andrew is officially out of money.

He returns to Norman’s house, pleading to be let back in, but Norman opts to call the police instead (can you blame him?), He gets bailed out by his mother, who takes him back to her apartment — a housing situation that somehow looks even worse than Andrew’s.

His mother, though, seems to think Andrew is destined to great things. Even when Andrew straight-up tells her that he’s unhappy, his mother won’t let him stay in that frame of mind — he’s a born star.

A born star who ends the episode declaring he’s on his way to Minneapolis. And the rest is history.

There’s only three more episodes of Versace left, what do you think is going to happen next? Check out the new episode on Wednesday nights at FX and read our other Versace recaps by clicking here.

‘American Crime Story: Versace’ recap: ‘Descent’ – TheCelebrityCafe.com

Gianni Versace and The Looming Tower: does truth matter in ‘true-life’ dramas?

“This TV series should only be considered as a work of fiction.” That was the view of the Versace family before The Assassination of Gianni Versace aired. The FX series, showing in the UK on BBC2, is one of a recent run of shows to dramatise recent history. It focuses on the designer’s murder, on the steps of his Miami mansion in 1997, taking it as the starting point for a nine-part drama that admits to some storytelling licence. Meanwhile, The Looming Tower, which began on Amazon Prime last week and is based on Lawrence Wright’s book, has reopened controversy about 9/11, and in the US, critics are discussing whether Paramount Network’s drama Waco has too much love for cult leader David Koresh.

So, should we view these shows only as works of fiction? The debate boils down to whether the point of fact-based dramas is to reveal what really happened, or if it is to tell a wider dramatic truth. That’s tricky, because the answer is almost always: both. This means that, callous or unethical as it might seem, it’s sometimes OK for such programmes to ignore complaints about events being reshaped for artistic purposes.

A stark and difficult example was The Secret, ITV’s grim 2016 dramatisation of the murder of Trevor Buchanan and Lesley Howell by their adulterous spouses. The complaints from Lesley Howell’s daughter that her mother had not been portrayed correctly deserved, of course, to be heard – but they didn’t deeply affect the validity of the series. That was all about telling the story of Colin Howell (James Nesbitt), a predatory egotist for whom religion offered justification for pursuing his sexual urges at all costs. Dramatically speaking, it didn’t matter if his victims, who didn’t feature heavily, were not presented with precise accuracy.

In contrast, it did matter that The Curse of Steptoe, a BBC4 biodrama aired in 2008 but then withdrawn from circulation in 2010 after a damning BBC Trust investigation, drew flak from relatives and colleagues of Harry H Corbett and Wilfrid Brambell: among their assertions was that the central point about Brambell and Corbett hating each other and subsequently feeling cursed by Steptoe and Son was false.

The Assassination of Gianni Versace’s showrunner, Ryan Murphy, is acutely aware of the dangers. His series from last year, Feud: Bette and Joan, was a fabulously gossipy take on a bygone Hollywood era, only slightly marred by the fact that one of the supporting characters, Olivia de Havilland, is still alive and is now suing. That’s annoying for Murphy, but for us, Feud’s smart take on the lonely, bitter showbiz world isn’t diminished. Murphy is brilliant at finding the story beneath the story; the moral that renders exact truth irrelevant.

The Versace story is the second series under Murphy’s American Crime Story banner. The dramatic truth of the first, the Emmy-winning The People vs OJ Simpson, was that the Simpson trial illustrates how modern America’s ravenous 24-hour media and ingrained racism interlocked in the 1990s and are still a twin menace today. The Assassination of Gianni Versace doesn’t make as profound a point about society, although a theme develops about how the celebrated designer had a different experience of being gay in the homophobic 20th century US to lonely dropout Andrew Cunanan. It is primarily a chillingly authentic portrait of Cunanan, a fantasist who became a serial killer.

In that sense, the show is roughly in the same category as The Secret. The Versaces’ complaints also feel akin to those made by the Matthews family about The Moorside, BBC1’s 2017 dramatisation of the fake “disappearance” of Yorkshire nine-year-old Shannon Matthews. Her relatives didn’t want the story to be examined afresh and thought they ought to have been consulted, but for viewers there wasn’t a compelling reason to heed them. Similarly, to the extent that The Assassination of Gianni Versace is even about the Versaces, it’s about analysing their effort to maintain and control their public image. Seeking their approval would undermine that.

In any case, New York Magazine’s online culture site Vulture has been fact-checking each episode, with help from a reporter who covered the Cunanan story at the time. The embellishments and elisions they’ve turned up have been no more than an intelligent viewer would expect from a fact-based drama. The genre creates its own unique suspension of disbelief, where what we see is both real, in the sense of being plausible or instructive, and not, because we know that some of it has been invented.

Amazon/Hulu’s political expose The Looming Tower, starring Jeff Daniels as John O’Neill, the FBI agent who tried to bring down Osama bin Laden before he committed a major atrocity, illustrates the point in a different way. Daniels plays a whisky-downing, ursine veteran who is juggling two mistresses and rubs the stuffed shirts in the CIA up the wrong way. He’s too much of a boilerplate flawed/ambiguous hero, in other words. Even if O’Neill really was like that, it doesn’t feel true. The plotting of Bin Laden and his associates, and the field work by US law enforcers trying to break these terror networks, is also too laden with familiar spy-thriller devices to be convincing. Lots of what we see might well have happened, but since The Looming Tower all has the air of contrived fiction, it doesn’t matter, because we don’t feel as if we’re witnessing reality. That’s a very delicate balance, but it’s the one Ryan Murphy has mastered.

Gianni Versace and The Looming Tower: does truth matter in ‘true-life’ dramas?

Why Was Gianni Versace’s Queerness More Important To Ryan Murphy Than Joan Crawford’s?

American Crime Story: The Assassination of Gianni Versace easily peaked with its fifth episode, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which throws back the curtain on Versace’s controversial decision to come out in an interview with The Advocate. His struggle is brilliantly juxtaposed against the outing of U.S. Navy Lieutenant Jeff Trail, another eventual victim of Andrew Cunanan, which effectively ended his military career. The result, under the direction of Daniel Minahan, is complex, sinister, heartbreaking, and an important historical look back at mid-’90s queer culture.

It’s worth noting that show creator Ryan Murphy didn’t give his last unauthorized biographical star vehicle the same treatment. As Feud wrapped up its first season, dedicated to the rivalry between Joan Crawford and Bette Davis during the filming of Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?, queer women caught the punch they’d been bracing themselves for: Crawford’s queerness wasn’t going to be addressed, or explored, or even obliquely referenced in the miniseries, despite its relevance to her toxic relationship with Davis and despite the show aiming itself at “LGBTQ” (ie., cis gay male) audiences. Murphy was perfectly capable of telling a compelling queer narrative when it came to Versace and the other characters in his story, so why didn’t Crawford’s queerness merit the same attention?

In the months leading up to its release, Feud: Bette and Joan was lavished with praise as a triumph of queer representation. Esquire called Crawford and Davis “perhaps the gayest on-set rivalry in Hollywood history” and congratulated Murphy on his “successful packaging of gay content in ways both overt and covert for mainstream audiences.” Bustle unpacked the significance of depicting Victor Buono’s struggle as a closeted gay man in studio-era Hollywood. But there was an opportunity for queer storytelling at the very heart of Feud: Bette and Joan and Ryan Murphy missed it.

Joan Crawford was an OG celesbian. Of course, she wasn’t exclusively attracted to women, and her daughter surmised that she was likely bisexual in a 2010 interview with Joy Behar. She was well-known for having multiple affairs with women nonetheless. In her prime, Crawford was romantically linked to Alice Delamar, Barbara Stanwyck, Martha Raye, Dorothy Arzner, and Claudette Colbert. There’s even a rumored anecdote about how she propositioned Marilyn Monroe for sex at a party, Monroe accepted, and then politely confessed afterwards that she wasn’t that into it after all.

And while mainstream acceptance of queer identity in America during the golden age of filmmaking obviously didn’t exist, it was prevalent enough in Hollywood that the film community was largely supportive of queer talent. As long as they maintained an image of plausible deniability, studios covered for them and Hollywood could be a playground for queer debauchery. In Crawford’s case, MGM reportedly shelled out $100 million to prevent the leak of a lesbian pornographic film she’d made as a teenager. Said costume designer Miles White in the introduction of William J. Mann’s book Behind the Screen: How Gays And Lesbians Shaped Hollywood 1910-1969, “It was the best and worst of times. On the one hand, [studios] didn’t care and you had extraordinary freedom, but on the other, of course they did, and you weren’t free at all.”

For Crawford, an ex-showgirl whose film career enjoyed a resurgence in the 1940s, coming up during what Mann called a “wartime revival of gay subculture” undoubtedly played a part in her comfort with exploring her own queerness—this, in spite of being depicted as something of a prude on Feud. The arrival of other visible queer actresses at the time, like Marlene Dietrich who hailed from queer-positive post-war Berlin, meant that Crawford was in good company and had plenty of access to queer community when she wanted it.

It could be argued that Crawford’s sexuality didn’t come up in Feud because of the time period on which the story focuses. It’s late in both Crawford and Davis’ careers, and the same-sex flings of Crawford’s youth had passed her by. But Murphy found plenty of ways to reference both actresses’ pasts and Crawford’s sexuality was such a relevant factor in the actual tension between the two, so much of which was otherwise manufactured for publicity. When Crawford “stole” away Davis’ crush and Dangerous co-star Franchot Tone, marrying him herself in 1935, Crawford reportedly quipped, “Franchot isn’t interested in Bette, but I wouldn’t mind giving her a poke if I was in the right mood.”

After that, all of Crawford’s attempts to ingratiate herself with Davis, who courted the critical acclaim for which Crawford was so desperate, were dismissed by Davis as “lesbian overtures.” Crawford was obsessed with maintaining a modest image—likely an after-effect of studio training to stay closeted—which comes across on Feud as prissy uptightness. Meanwhile, Davis gets to play the cool girl, carousing with the crew after long shoot days and having sex with the director. But in truth, it was Crawford who enjoyed more sexual fluidity and Davis who responded with vaguely homophobic disgust.

The other glaring possibility for why this dynamic was excluded from the narrative is Ryan Murphy’s relationship with Bette Davis. The pair were close and had maintained a long penpalship leading up to an hours-long in-person interview a month before her death in 1989. She reminded Murphy of his grandmother, he said, and his admiration for her is obvious in headlines like “’Feud’ Ryan Murphy: How Bette Davis Changed My Career.”

In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Murphy claims he never struggled with staying objective during the making of Feud, saying, “I went into it knowing a lot about Davis and not about Joan Crawford but I left it knowing a lot about both of them and finding them both to be fascinating and sympathetic.” It’s possible that he simply didn’t want to face or disclose his idol’s latent homophobia.

But the real problem here isn’t where Murphy’s loyalties lie or even that we were robbed of a precious opportunity to see female queerness depicted on-screen. (In fact, given Murphy’s track record with delivering nuanced portrayals of queer women, it’s probably for the best that he didn’t try to delve into one of Crawford’s same-sex relationships.) The problem is that, in his execution, he reinforces the same problem he claims he wanted to expose with the making of Feud: the commodification of female conflict for male consumption and male gain.

Feud: Bette and Joan was touted as a victory for queer representation because it affirmed the pinnacle of gay male camp. But exploiting female conflict for the pleasure of gay men at the expense of representing Crawford’s own queerness is hardly a queer victory. And frankly, it’s this kind of disregard for and degradation of women on behalf of cis gay men which alienates them from more intersectional queer rights movements in the first place.

For better or worse, Murphy has dedicated most of his projects to queer visibility through the lens of camp. Even The Assassination of Gianni Versace, serious and dramatic though it may be, delivers moments of camp in its sheer sumptuousness. And that’s not to take away from the success of projects like it or his 2014 HBO adaptation of The Normal Heart, both of which capably depict queer identity in ways that are earnest and affecting. But the least we can do is stop praising Feud: Bette and Joan as some big favor to queer culture. For Crawford’s sake, if nothing else.

Why Was Gianni Versace’s Queerness More Important To Ryan Murphy Than Joan Crawford’s?

What’s on TV tonight

The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story
BBC Two, 9pm

Two episodes in for this “true crime” drama about the 1997 shooting of Gianni Versace, and the show is definitely being stolen by Darren Criss’s portrayal of his killer, Andrew Cunanan. As we follow Cunanan round Miami — bizarrely gaffer-taping his face and carrying out disposable-camera reconnaissance on Versace’s mansion — Criss switches seamlessly between self-deluded mania, terrifyingly emotionless psychopathy and moments of gleeful camp abandon. The showrunner Ryan Murphy is successfully treading the line between considered drama and the soapy froth that it could otherwise have been — overhung by only the slightest waft of spuriousness.

What’s on TV tonight

dcriss-archive:

camillabelle: So… most of you know about my deep love for @ricky_martin . This happened over the weekend . My smile is far too big, and I felt like I was about to burst of happiness. And then there is @darrencriss , who has been giving me constant nightmares due to his fantastic performance in #theassasinationofgianniversace 🙈 What a night! ( Thank you @barryfrediani ! 😜) #latergram #takemeback

The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story episode 7, Ascent, advanced preview

Last week, American Crime Story invited us to Andrew Cunanan’s birthday bash aka the beginning of the end. Everything began to fall apart on the day of his birthday, and the latest episode “Ascent,” introduces Norman and how the two met.

So what can you expect to see this Wednesday? We’ve screened the first eight episodes of the season to bring you an advanced preview each week of what you’ll see! Avoiding all spoilers? This is your last chance to turn away now!

Here’s the official synopsis for episode seven, “Ascent,” from FX:

Andrew Cunanan leaves behind a troubled family life as Donatella Versace struggles to find her role within the Versace empire.

We’ll finally see more of Donatella and Gianni Versace in this episode for more than a couple of minutes. Antonio D’Amico is in this episode, too, but he unfairly only gets 2-3 lines. Donatella is dealing with finding herself. Gianni is at the beginning of an illness and preparing to leave Donatella in charge, but she severely lacks confidence. This causes a fight between the two.

Not only will we see the beginning of Norman and Andrew’s relationship, but we get a few scenes of Jeff Trail and Andrew from back in the day. Fans will also learn why Andrew Cunanan pursued Norman in the first place, as well as the first time he sees David Madson.

Lines to look out for. Can you guess who delivers them?

  • “I believe, for a woman, a dress is a weapon. To get what she wants.”
  • “You have the opportunity to be great. And you choose to assist.”
  • “Can’t sell a clever Filipino, even one with a big d*ck.”
  • “It doesn’t matter really. They talk about us. They love it, they hate it, but they talk about us.”
  • “My brother is stubborn. Don’t forget that. He is stubborn about life and he will beat this sickness.”

The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story episode 7, Ascent, advanced preview