The devastating terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were such a monumental moment in recent U.S. history that it’s tempting sometimes to divide American popular culture into “pre-9/11” and “post-9/11.” Tempting, yes — but not so easily done. Looking back, it’s surprising just how many TV shows that we tend to identify with the ‘90s actually aired a sizable chunk of their episodes after the World Trade Center towers fell. Friends, Frasier, ER, Law & Order, NYPD Blue … They all carried on the spirit of the decade in which they were born, in an era when the world behind the television screen suddenly felt very different.
That schism between the seemingly benign atmosphere of America in the ’90s and the “we can die at any moment” anxiety of the ’00s is the subject of The Looming Tower, Hulu’s miniseries adaptation of Lawrence Wright’s book about the U.S. intelligence-gathering errors — and the stealthy forces of international malevolence — that led to 9/11. The differences between the ’90s and now also serve as subtext to both series so far of American Crime Story (both the multi-Emmy-winning hit The People v. O.J. Simpson, and the more under-the-radar The Assassination of Gianni Versace), as well as Law & Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders, Manhunt: Unabomber, Unsolved: The Murders of Tupac & the Notorious B.I.G., and Waco.
During the past few years, we’ve been living through a boom-time for true-crime stories, with the podcast Serial and the TV docu-series Making a Murderer and The Jinx fueling the phenomenon. And thanks to the huge success of The People v. O.J. Simpson (and the Oscar-winning documentary O.J.: Made in America, which aired in five parts on ESPN around the same time), trend-chasing TV producers have been on the lookout for more tales of murder and scandal, drawn from an era that its target audience might remember.
There’s undeniably something cynically opportunistic about this sudden boom. It’s not like Law & Order creator Dick Wolf backed an L&O-branded miniseries about Erik and Lyle Menendez because his writing team (led by René Balcer) had something profound to say about American life in the mid-’90s. The calculation for pretty much of all of these shows has likely been something like, “Boy, people really tuned in for those O.J. things … how can we get in on that?”
But here’s what’s surprising: Pretty much all of these series have been good.
[…] The Assassination of Gianni Versace has been even bolder. To tell the story of how serial killer Andrew Cunanan (played with impressive oiliness by Glee star Darren Criss) murdered five men in four months, the show begins with him shooting the famed fashion designer Versace (Édgar Ramirez), and then moves roughly backwards in time episode by episode, amplifying the tragedy by showing Cunanan getting less desperate and more hopeful. More to the point, The Assassination of Gianni Versace very purposefully portrays the more underground nature of gay culture in the ’90s — when AIDS was more of a danger, “outing” could kill a career, and marriage was out of the question.
Tag: the week
The biggest liar of The Assassination of Gianni Versace
Without its clarifying finale, the aims of American Crime Story: The Assassination of Gianni Versace were almost as hard to unpack as the lies of its protagonist, serial killer and pathological fabulist Andrew Cunanan. That might, in fact, be exactly the point. The series I once criticized for its roaming point of view ended by lying as freely and charmingly as its dancing villain. In so doing, it forged an unlikely and uncomfortable alliance with Cunanan himself.
It’s no secret that, as a series, Versace mixed truth with half-truths and lies almost as much as Cunanan did. Vulture has run a great fact-checking column for each episode that itemizes the liberties the show takes with the truth. The question, to my mind, was how to interpret those departures. When showrunner Tom Rob Smith swapped in an entire ham (with a knife sticking out of it) for the famous ham sandwich Cunanan left behind at the Miglin residence (after having brutally murdering the owner), it seemed clear to me that once we understood that substitution — that blindingly literal instance of the show “hamming it up” — we’d understand a lot of what the series was doing.
What it’s doing, it turns out, is experimenting with narrative identification. And identification is a lot of what this show was actually about: not gender identification, not sexual identification, but empathic identification: who gets it and who doesn’t. Back in 1997, while gauging local reaction to the murders in the area where Cunanan lived and studied, Matthew Lickona reported the following exchange between his wife — who asked about the response in La Jolla — and a La Jolla resident:
“No, he’s from Hillcrest,” he corrected her. “That’s where all the gays are. Nobody in this town is concerned about him at all, because we don’t identify with him.” [The San Diego Reader]
Versace makes you identify with him. It dispenses with that craven, manufactured distinction. It condemns the American indifference to gay deaths around which much of the series is structured. And, however much it sympathizes with his victims (and it does), the series also insists on respecting Cunanan’s fervid need for attention even as it ostensibly disciplines it. One of the facts Versace quotes most about Cunanan was that he was voted (depending on the source) “Most Likely to be Remembered” or “Least Likely to be Forgotten” in high school. The series ends by focusing in on a plaque bearing Cunanan’s name. It turns out to be on a vault in a mausoleum — this feels, then, explicitly like an act of remembrance. But as the camera slowly pans out to show more and more other vaults, the effect becomes punitive: The series seems to focus on the stern, equalizing near-anonymity death finally confers.
If that feels like a finger-wagging lesson, the show inverts that once again. The moral should be “Cunanan, who wanted only to be remembered, failed.” Except, of course, that he didn’t fail: The series itself amounts to a massive act of remembrance. The show explicitly named for Versace was actually about Cunanan. If fame was his goal, he lives on, unchastened.
That lesson about mortality, in other words, feels like exactly the kind of empty wisdom Cunanan (or his abusive, charismatic father, Modesto) might impart.
I’ve made no secret of the ethical questions I’ve had about this series, which has presented as fact things that aren’t even remotely confirmed, including the claim that Cunanan and Lee Miglin were sexually involved and the suggestion that Cunanan was molested by his father, Modesto. These are big truths to bend for dramatic effect, and the series did so without a wink or a tremor — just as Cunanan did.
But if the point was to replicate rather than condemn Cunanan’s curious modus operandi, it was a singular success. Paste Magazine’s Matt Brennan was the first to pick up on the show’s investment in forcing this connection to the villain.
It confronts us — scratch that, it confronted me — with a startling implication: That in the suburban upbringing, the shame, the dissembling, the desperate desire not to be a faggot, I might resemble the murderer more than I do the object of his obsession. [Paste Magazine]
Seen this way, the finale parallels Cunanan’s frenzied effort to escape with the show’s own struggle to escape Cunanan’s stranglehold on its narrative sympathies. We watch Cunanan panicking, calling his father, reduced to eating dog food, just as we see the series roving wildly back to its ostensible protagonists: Versace’s sister Donatella (Penelope Cruz) and his lover Antonio (Ricky Martin). But instead of resting with those characters (or giving them the final say), it invents wildly and well. Donatella and Antonio have an extremely painful conversation, we suffer with Antonio as he’s marginalized at Versace’s funeral, and we witness his tragic suicide attempt. None of these details seem to be particularly well-supported — they are Cunanan-isms — and the show can’t help but revert to its charismatic antihero at the end. Even in death, he remains the show’s most compelling character.
This is not a true-crime story at all, then. It’s creative nonfiction in its most creative sense: a portrait of a serial liar that chooses, in the end, to lie with him.
The Assassination of Gianni Versace has main character confusion
The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story is a riveting experiment that falsifies its results. The show — which succeeds Ryan Murphy’s exceptional The People vs. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story — ostensibly addresses the assassination of its subject, the Italian designer (played by the excellent Edgar Ramirez) shot to death on the steps of his Miami villa. It is, alas, misleadingly named. The show’s focus quickly turns to Versace’s serial killer, Andrew Cunanan, a shape-shifting con artist played with sinister elan by Darren Criss, and his various victims.
That slippage is deliberate: Like Murphy’s other projects — O.J. Simpson, Feud — the series uses a specific case to build out a larger social history. Where The People vs. O.J. illuminated the fraught context in which the trial took place, where Feud mined a scandalous rivalry for a bigger story about ambient misogyny, Versace attempts a fascinating anthropology of ‘90s-era homosexuality and attendant homophobia, the social ramifications of which allowed a serial killer to keep killing. It’s an ambitious undertaking that aggressively short-changes its nominal celebrity. The results — some of which are quite moving — are fascinating but mixed.
The trouble is that some of the show’s most interesting moves don’t track. Versace is so formally adventurous that it sometimes loses control of its own effects. The season lurches backwards in fits and starts, rewinding from Versace’s assassination to Cunanan’s encounters with his other four (known) victims. Sometimes the story moves forward, sometimes backwards. It works for awhile: I was rapt until I realized I’d lost track — things I’d assumed came after happened before, and vice-versa, and it wasn’t clear why the facts were presented in that particular order because they weren’t just failing to build; they seemed to collapse.
Take Cunanan. This should be one of television’s great villains, and he almost is (thanks to Criss’ cunning, smart-muppet charm). But he’d be a marvelous character if he made any real sense. The difficulty is that the real Andrew Cunanan shot himself a few days after killing Versace and left no note; his motivations are a mystery, and he remains a cipher. Murphy, who usually has too much source material, in this case has too little. The show can’t quite decide how to deal with this. It vacillates between truthful ambiguity and irresponsibly doubling down on rumor. (There’s no proof, for instance, that Cunanan and Versace ever met prior to the shooting, but in Versace they certainly did. Cunanan’s reasons for murdering a Chicago tycoon were unknown; it was rumored at the time that his son was an associate of Cunanan’s. The story was retracted and became a kind of example of reckless journalism. In lieu of exploring the work of those ugly rumors and others, like the theory that Cunanan had AIDS and was killing the men who gave it to him, Versace doubles down: Cunanan definitely had a sexual relationship with the tycoon, it says! And, as if to amplify the thing further, upgrades a famous ham sandwich left at a crime scene into an even more sinister ham).
This divided approach to filling in the historical record produces a character who doesn’t quite rhyme with himself. What does it mean that Cunanan, a self-aggrandizing liar whose dishonesty (it’s repeatedly suggested) is calibrated to compensate for the fact that he wasn’t loved, turns out to have been loved? And not just loved, but obsessed over and badly spoiled? Scandal and murder shows are always most interesting when they take up the question of how we told the story as it was happening, and that twist — if it qualifies as one — could be an opportunity to send up ’90s pop psychology. The show could have spun that earlier theory of Cunanan as society’s too-charitable reading of a monster, or pilloried its easy assumptions about the home lives that “produce” gay men. But instead of corralling that range of possibilities into a consistent account of Cunanan, or some interesting point about how foolishly we theorize serial killers (or homosexuality), the show goes limp. Oddly inert, it just sort of lets every version of Cunanan exist. Sometimes he’s awkward, stilted, and so obvious that his stories fool no one. Other times he’s gifted and manipulative. A brilliant and glamorous shapeshifter. A sad con man.
The pilot is stunning, both in its own right and for how well it captures this slight incoherence. It begins with camerawork that’s pleasingly lush and limited in its omniscience. Directed by Murphy, the opening sequence is every bit as excessive and ornate as its putative subject’s Greek-inspired designs. It looms through and over Versace’s gorgeous villa and whizzes in and out and around, sometimes rising up to look down at the magnificent architectural symmetry of the environment Versace created for himself, and his own elegant asymmetry within it. It’s dazzling, and the contrast between Versace’s gilded aesthetic and his antagonist couldn’t be clearer: We first encounter Cunanan looking grubby and nervous. His backpack is sad. He screams into the ocean. He runs to a filthy toilet and vomits.
But that spectacular aesthetic contrast between Versace and his killer really only serves that specific moment; it sputters out. As we get to know him better, it seems less and less likely that Cunanan would be that hysterically nervous; he’s shown killing other times with total sangfroid.
The vertiginous effect of Versace’s erratic chronology is compounded by the series’ equally experimental approach to point of view. Versace starts off as a kind of equal participant in the story of his demise, with Ricky Martin playing Antonio D’Amico, his lover of 15 years. (This is brilliant casting, and the story of Martin’s own celebrity journey out of the closet — which in some ways parallels Versace’s — elevates this subplot into really exceptional metacommentary. I wish he’d been given more to do.) The show treats Versace, his vision, his artistry, and his company with great tenderness. Penelope Cruz does a creditable Donatella. But a few episodes in, it’s not only abandoned Versace’s point of view — and Donatella’s, and Antonio’s — it’s followed an entirely different character into the afterlife.
These are puzzling choices, but Versace makes up for an overall lack of discipline with real virtuosity at the level of the individual scene, and great performances to boot. Cody Fern and Finn Wittrock are terrific as David Madson and Jeff Trail, a couple of Cunanan’s victims whose stories are so engaging they end up irrevocably distorting the show’s frame. Judith Light’s Marilyn Miglin is a triumph, and I can’t say enough about Ramirez’ Versace. Criss lends a very oddly-written character so much malice, bravado, and pathos that you wink easily at the discrepancies. Only when they stack up do you start to mind.
Ultimately, I think Versace suffers a little from the fact that its real protagonist isn’t famous. Infamy isn’t quite the same thing, and fame, not its opposite, is really what anchors these double-edged Murphy projects: O.J. Simpson’s status as an American hero authorized his function as symbol as well as character in The People vs. O.J. Simpson, just as Bette Davis and Joan Crawford’s fame elevated them so that — in Feud — their story accrued larger, more resonant layers. That Versace isn’t quite as interested in the celebrity at its ostensible center means the story toggles between the awful, violent specificity of its murderer’s pathology and the homophobic history it’s trying to wrap that story in. It’s a fascinating effort, even if it doesn’t quite live up (or down) to its name.
The Assassination of Gianni Versace has main character confusion
26 TV shows to watch in 2018
American Crime Story: The Assassination of Gianni Versace, FX, Jan. 16
Let’s be honest: The triumph of American Crime Story: The People vs. O.J. Simpson is hard to top. For its second installment, creator Ryan Murphy took on the story of Andrew Cunanan, the 27-year-old serial killer whose sadistic months-long murder spree culminated in the shooting death of designer Gianni Versace outside his mansion in Miami. Darren Criss steals the show as Cunanan, and there are star turns from Penelope Cruz (as Donatella Versace) and — most intriguingly — Ricky Martin, whose rich performance as Versace’s lover has painful resonances with his own history as a closeted star until he came out in 2010. The show’s pilot is gorgeous and lives up to its name, but by the fourth or fifth episode, it’s drifted so far from Versace that it’s unclear why it’s named for him at all. If you’re hoping for insight into Versace as a person or a brand, you’ll likely come away disappointed. But if you overlook the title, this is a fascinating show about a serial killer and how homophobia structured everything from fashion to business to criminal investigations in the ‘90s.