S02.E04: House By The Lake

[bosawks]

Wow, that was bleak, well done but bleak.

[LennieBriscoe]

On 2/9/2018 at 9:32 AM, CofCinci said:

there is the possibility that David did not know Andrew planned to murder Jeff.

I thought this was a self-evident bit of reality.

truthaboutluv, GMTA, as I posted elsewhere:

"This series ought not be compared to the OJ one, for one major reason: "The People vs. O. J. Simpson" focused on the lawyers. Yes, yes, there was no trial for Cunanan, but still, the current production presents a more...human story.

The title, "The Assassination of Gianni Versace," .....tells us right away that the murdered (for "Gianni Versace" represents all victims of Cunanan) will be a focus of the telling, and the use of "Assassination" to elevate the victims is subtle."

And now from the "Schoolmarm Dept":

To those who are saying how unwatchable some "bleak" episodes and scenes are, Hello, the televised "Helter-Skelter"? The movie "Schindler's List"? Or the powerful "Judgment at Nuremburg," with its REAL video of the death camps? "ACS: TAoGV" will have to get in line!

Finally, as an erstwhile subscriber to "Vanity Fair," I am one who is familiar with the alleged facts, but in the spirit of and respect to this series and the post in yellow at the bottom of every page, I'm good with suspending my disbelief a tad.

Edited February 11, 2018 by LennieBriscoe

[VLASquared]

On 2/9/2018 at 3:05 PM, Rubyslippahz said:

You make a good point.   I believe in the Orth book and other places it is suggested that David could have actually not been in the apartment when Andrew murdered Jeff. 

This is a really good article from the Minneapolis Star Tribune a few months after the murders.  It includes info from a medical examiner involved that David was killed the same day that he and Andrew left the apartment, and then his body was not found for a few days.  Also suggests the reports that they were seen eating in a restaurant together might have been mistaken.

http://www.startribune.com/jan-4-1998-the-cunanan-killings/468676083/

 

A sad point in the article is at the point of the murders David had nursed his dog Prints back to health after Prints was somehow shot in the face :(

That article does help explain some of the inconsistencies.  I hadn’t heard that Andrew left behind vials of testosterone at David’s apartment.  Steroid use could have been a trigger for his rage and explosive violence.  

[Starchild]

It's interesting that the recapper thinks Cody Fern looks like a combination of Dax Shepard and Andrew McCarthy. I was thinking he looked like a young Michael McKean. Even sounded like him a bit in that last diner scene.

[Jeopardy15]

On 2/8/2018 at 1:04 AM, AttackTurtle said:

 

The actor playing David reminded me of a young Andrew McCarthy and I thought he was fabulous.

Thank you! I couldn’t figure out why that actor looked familiar. 

[heatherchandler]

2 hours ago, Starchild said:

It's interesting that the recapper thinks Cody Fern looks like a combination of Dax Shepard and Andrew McCarthy. I was thinking he looked like a young Michael McKean. Even sounded like him a bit in that last diner scene.

When he was Lenny!

[Spike]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stereogum.com/1982504/aimee-mann-drive-the-cars-cover/music%3famp=1

[CeeBeeGee]

19 hours ago, Anela said:

 

I'm watching it right now, and came here to see if anyone else thought he looked like Andew McCarthy. Glad I'm not the only one. 

I'm also gla nothing happened to the dog. It was horrifying enough what he did to Jeffrey. 

I guess Finn will be back next week? Since they're going backwards.

The next episode is called "Don't Ask Don't Tell"

Spoiler

and since Jeffrey was in the Navy (and, I believe, left it), I'm sure we will see more of him. 

[TheGourmez]

On 2/10/2018 at 4:26 PM, truthaboutluv said:

So while yes, some feel like it's Andrew's story because we see so much of him, having the victims stories be told is actually ensuring that you're not sympathetic with Andrew and never lose sight of what a monster he was. 

Very well put. I think this series would be more aptly named ACS: The Victims of Andrew Cunanan rather than ACS: The Andrew Cunanan Story thus far, and that's because we aren't getting his story, at least yet. We are getting the stories of his victims, and I think that's an honorable intention, even if the main character remains little more than sociopath thus far. I enjoyed seeing Cunanan try to handle, quantify emotion in this episode, but I think we will ultimately learn that Andrew Cunanan is a victim of himself as well, how he gets to the point that he decides there's no going back to normal human life for him if he can't get the desperate acceptance he craves and used to have from those he felt the most affection toward. That last episode was just wonderful, which is so hard to say of the gruesome reality it stems from.

Edited February 12, 2018 by TheGourmez

[SmithW6079]

Although Cunanan's killing of Versace was the "hook" to get viewers, I've actually found the past two episodes to be more compelling, especially this one. It was just so sad to witness the genesis of Cunanan-as-killer. I'm not expressing sympathy for him, but for his victims. 

I think Darren Criss is doing a fabulous job as Cunanan. He was especially creepy here -- there was no evidence of the supposed charmer he was.

And after every episode, I get caught up in reading 20-year-old news stories from the Chicago Tribune.

Edited February 12, 2018 by SmithW6079

[ElectricBoogaloo]

5 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

And after every episode, I get caught up in reading 20-year-old news stories from the Chicago Tribune.

Same here! Every week I end up googling something from the episode and end up falling down a rabbit hole of old articles from 1997.

[vixenbynight]

9 hours ago, TheGourmez said:

Very well put. I think this series would be more aptly named ACS: The Victims of Andrew Cunanan rather than ACS: The Andrew Cunanan Story thus far, and that's because we aren't getting his story, at least yet. We are getting the stories of his victims, and I think that's an honorable intention, even if the main character remains little more than sociopath thus far.

 

9 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

Although Cunanan's killing of Versace was the "hook" to get viewers, I've actually found the past two episodes to be more compelling, especially this one. 

Not just viewers. Murphy knew that he had to create a series title that would mainly "hook" a network that would be interested in putting the series on air. 

[WearyTraveler]

On 2/10/2018 at 4:18 AM, SuzieQ said:

More of a general comment but this should be titled The Story of Andrew Cunanan.  It's all about him and Versace is just another of his victims.

I read a review that mentioned viewers might feel exactly as you do, given the shift in focus from Versace to other victims.  The reviewer said two things regarding this (no spoilers below, just general comments about the overall direction of the next episodes, like when someone said before the series started that the story would be told in reverse):

1) That although the choice was odd and could seem confusing to viewers, it was well worth the time spent on it because what the show does, honors the victims by portraying them as real human beings and not as mere statistical bleeps in a big, flashy story about the Gianni Versace Assassination .

2) That the story will loop back around to GV and that when it does, everything will click for the viewers who felt a bit disoriented by the change in focus

[Florinaldo]

12 hours ago, vixenbynight said:

Not just viewers. Murphy knew that he had to create a series title that would mainly "hook" a network that would be interested in putting the series on air. 

As I posted earlier this was indeed the marketing hook: the glamour and name recognition is what pulled in most viewers and the financing (the network did have to greenlight the project before production even started). Now viewers find out that that the previous victims' stories are at least as compelling as GV's and their murders much more brutal or cruel. It's bound to generate conflicting emotions in some viewers: here we are exepcting a story about the murder of a celebrity designer, and instead we see how some ordinary people were also undeservingly victimized, but were just about forgotten in the shadow of the more famous victim.

Not having AC's name in the title also prevents glamourising him, which the series has seemed intent to avoid up to this point.

[mojoween]

On 2/9/2018 at 8:17 PM, CofCinci said:

He is doing such an amazing job with this role that it’s going to be hard for me to see him as someone other than Andrew Cunanan. Or, to not be scared of him. 

Darren tweeted just tonight a display that features him in a windowfront in NY? I’m assuming and I swear all I could see was that it was a video commemoration of Andrew Cunanan.  Poor Darren.

I agree with so many of you that this was more like a horror movie, than an episode of a TV show, and since I hate horror movies because I’m timid as all fuck, I watched most of the hour through my fingers.  I knew what was coming, but not how, so it was like “oh my god this is is oh wait no now oh no is he going to kill him in the bar? ohh he’s going to kill him in the forest”.  Unfortunately, all that worrying didn’t make the end of the episode any easier to deal with, how awful for David.

Darren also tweeted on premiere night to remember that these are all real people and seriously, their poor families.  Like someone else said, I’m sure they aren’t watching, but it’s been all over the media so if you watch any entertainment news, you’ve seen something about it.  I wonder if Ryan sat down with each of them beforehand.

[SuzieQ]

1 hour ago, WearyTraveler said:

I read a review that mentioned viewers might feel exactly as you do, given the shift in focus from Versace to other victims.  The reviewer said two things regarding this (no spoilers below, just general comments about the overall direction of the next episodes, like when someone said before the series started that the story would be told in reverse):

1) That although the choice was odd and could seem confusing to viewers, it was well worth the time spent on it because what the show does, honors the victims by portraying them as real human beings and not as mere statistical bleeps in a big, flashy story about the Gianni Versace Assassination .

2) That the story will loop back around to GV and that when it does, everything will click for the viewers who felt a bit disoriented by the change in focus

Thanks for posting this!  I haven't read every post on every episode so I wasn't sure it it had already been discussed ad nauseum, :).  That said, I am still really enjoying the series, albeit Cunanan-centric, at least for now.  I'm from Chicago so found the back story on Lee Miglin fascinating.  While it was big news here, the details were either pretty hushed up or I just wasn't paying attention.  

[dubbel zout]

Getting the story of the other murders Cunanan committed gives some background to Versace's. That one didn't happen in a vacuum.

[Duke2801]

On 2/8/2018 at 9:31 AM, Chaos Theory said:

Oh come on the dog was never going to die. Not on a network show.  A pregnant woman having triplets has a better chance of getting axe murdered then a pet on a network show.

Well, FX is basic cable - not exactly the same as a network show.  And I can certainly think of dogs who were killed both on network shows and basic cable shows.  

[LennieBriscoe]

Darren Criss doesn't wear glasses. He has a different hairstyle. And he has actual facial expressions beyond a stone-faced affectless one.

I think Criss will be good for future acting endeavors (See: Vance, Courtney B.).

[iggysaurus]

From the article linked above, I learned that the dog was named "Prints" not Prince. 

Quote

And Prints is there. The dog, almost like a child to Madson, was once shot in the face. Madson carried the bleeding dog to the veterinarian. He wouldn't put Prints in danger.

Reading that about Madson's devotion to the dog makes me even more sad about the whole thing! 

[SuzieQ]

On 2/10/2018 at 6:26 PM, truthaboutluv said:

 

So while yes, some feel like it's Andrew's story because we see so much of him, having the victims stories be told is actually ensuring that you're not sympathetic with Andrew and never lose sight of what a monster he was.

Is there anyone who is sympathetic towards him?  Can't imagine!

[truthaboutluv]

41 minutes ago, SuzieQ said:

Is there anyone who is sympathetic towards him?  Can't imagine!

Not so much sympathetic but I have read complaints at other places by people who think the season is taking the cliche "murderer who was really so tortured and complex" route, because so much of the series focuses on him. I personally haven't seen that and disagree with the criticism. And I definitely think these last two episodes especially show the focus is really on his victims. 

[SuzieQ]

14 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

Not so much sympathetic but I have read complaints at other places by people who think the season is taking the cliche "murderer who was really so tortured and complex" route, because so much of the series focuses on him. I personally haven't seen that and disagree with the criticism. And I definitely think these last two episodes especially show the focus is really on his victims. 

Wow!  I disagree as well.  While he may be "tortured and complex", he is a twisted, brutal killer who showed zero remorse for his actions or mercy for his victims.  I'm really glad they aren't trying to soften him and are showing him for what he really is.  DC is doing an outstanding job portraying him.

Edited February 15, 2018 by SuzieQ

[truthaboutluv]

1 minute ago, SuzieQ said:

Wow!  I disagree as well.  While he may be "tortured and complex", he is a twisted, brutal killer who showed zero remorse for his actions. or mercy for his victims.  I'm really glad they aren't trying to soften him and are showing him for what he really is.  DC is doing an outstanding job portraying him.

Completely agree with you but well some will always see things differently and find a reason to criticize so to each his own I guess.

[smiley13]

After seeing these two episodes about the earlier murders, you have to wonder what snapped in him?   And as has been stated, no one really knows what happened when he made David leave with him.  How horrible to be afraid for your life being with a psycho who had just beaten someone dead with a hammer.

[Florinaldo]

On 13/02/2018 at 10:30 PM, LennieBriscoe said:

Darren Criss doesn't wear glasses. He has a different hairstyle. And he has actual facial expressions beyond a stone-faced affectless one.

In the show, AC also displays more expressions than his stoneface look: he has smiles, smirks, sad faces, looks of enjoyment, but they all seem transitory and faked emotions. He quickly reverts to what you aptly described as affectless, as if this is his "at rest" expression, the one that reveals him most truthfully.

[Blakeston]

On 2/9/2018 at 11:19 AM, Glade said:

I disagree--it looked to me like he realized at the last minute that he had no actual way to escape--the window was too small, covered by broken glass, and it would be really difficult to maneuver himself through it.  That's certainly how I would have responded.  He was paralyzed by fear and anxiety, constantly going back and forth, believing AC's blackmail, experiencing shame about what his parents would think, fearing jail, fearing Andrew, freezing and then trying to run and then freezing again.  He was heavily traumatized and not thinking rationally, so no, I don't think he made a conscious choice to stick with Andrew.  It is victim blaming to try to claim he could have escaped.  How each of us reacts to trauma is individual and based on so many factors in our temperament and brain chemistry and personal history, so there is no "you could have." 

 

If the window was too small for him to escape, that would have defeated the point the writer said he was going for - that the world outside was just as scary as the life with Andrew.

If he had no real shot at escaping, then the scene loses its power. It's just another failed attempt at escape. If he has the chance to escape and doesn't take it, then it really makes you think about the outside world.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Blakeston

[candle96]

On 2/12/2018 at 6:51 PM, mojoween said:

Darren tweeted just tonight a display that features him in a windowfront in NY? I’m assuming and I swear all I could see was that it was a video commemoration of Andrew Cunanan.  Poor Darren.

I agree with so many of you that this was more like a horror movie, than an episode of a TV show, and since I hate horror movies because I’m timid as all fuck, I watched most of the hour through my fingers.  I knew what was coming, but not how, so it was like “oh my god this is is oh wait no now oh no is he going to kill him in the bar? ohh he’s going to kill him in the forest”.  Unfortunately, all that worrying didn’t make the end of the episode any easier to deal with, how awful for David.

Darren also tweeted on premiere night to remember that these are all real people and seriously, their poor families.  Like someone else said, I’m sure they aren’t watching, but it’s been all over the media so if you watch any entertainment news, you’ve seen something about it.  I wonder if Ryan sat down with each of them beforehand.

Last night my friend and I had to watch some Glee videos on Youtube following the show to remind us of how *legitimately* charming he can be, and to take us back to a kinder, gentler Darren Criss. :) But I'm sure he'll be fine. As you noted, he's been very respectful and insightful in his interviews. 

As much as I'm liking this, I do have very mixed feelings about true crime. People get so invested in the stories, but I wonder what it would feel like if my dead loved one became something that total strangers were obsessed it. It has to feel like torture, I'd imagine. This really hit me with the popularity of "Serial." People were so excited about it, but it was like the fact that an actual person was dead got lost in that. Of course the same goes for the OJ hoopla. 

[helenamonster]

1 hour ago, candle96 said:

As much as I'm liking this, I do have very mixed feelings about true crime. People get so invested in the stories, but I wonder what it would feel like if my dead loved one became something that total strangers were obsessed it. It has to feel like torture, I'd imagine. This really hit me with the popularity of "Serial." People were so excited about it, but it was like the fact that an actual person was dead got lost in that. Of course the same goes for the OJ hoopla. 

I'm this way too. I became interested in true crime at a pretty young age (probably too young) and have always enjoyed learning about the psychology and sociology surrounding some of the most notorious true crime properties. In recent years I've begun to realize how ghoulish it is but I can't stop myself from being interested. That's why I really like that this show is putting so much focus on the non-Versace victims. They're not just footnotes to his and Cunanan's stories, they were real people who were much more than how they died.

[stonehaven]

I am coming to this series late..and my main reason for watching was AC...as the murders began in Minneapolis. I was in college at the time..and Madson and Trail were all over our local media for about a month...I barely made it through the last episode and could only make it about ten minutes in for this one....and I don't think I can watch anymore...even though I bought it on Amazon....

I'm sure it's fine as far as artwork goes but it just seems so damn bleak. The People VS OJ was different..I get that....but that was only ONE murder and that wasn't shown...this was five murders..all shown...plain as day....Maybe my brain and heart just can't take stuff like this anymore....or at least right now....

I may come back to it in a few months.

[DangerousMinds]

20 hours ago, stonehaven said:

I am coming to this series late..and my main reason for watching was AC...as the murders began in Minneapolis. I was in college at the time..and Madson and Trail were all over our local media for about a month...I barely made it through the last episode and could only make it about ten minutes in for this one....and I don't think I can watch anymore...even though I bought it on Amazon....

I'm sure it's fine as far as artwork goes but it just seems so damn bleak. The People VS OJ was different..I get that....but that was only ONE murder and that wasn't shown...this was five murders..all shown...plain as day....Maybe my brain and heart just can't take stuff like this anymore....or at least right now....

I may come back to it in a few months.

oJ had 2 murders.

[stonehaven]

Fair point but the murders were shown in the opening...and the rest was on a different aspect...that's what I meant.

 

ETA:I just finished this episode and it was bleak and sad...but I thought David did a brave thing by telling AC what he thought...he probably  knew he was going to die either way..and figured, it would be by being honest...although that doesn't jibe with him lying to AC in the end...still, all of this episode was conjecture anyway...but I do recall being shocked at them finding Madson's body when they did.

Edited April 18, 2018 by stonehaven

[aradia22]

This felt like filler. I appreciated that they wanted to give us a morally good character. No shades of gray. No living in the closet. Nothing disreputable. This is as close as I think this show has come to a completely virtuous person. And Andrew even says as much when David gets uncomfortable about the woman looking at him and Andrew calls him the nicest, kindest person he knows or something like that. I just feel like the show... didn't care that much about him.

Episodes 4 and 5 had a different director and I could tell. I did not like his style. It exposed the weaknesses of the acting and writing. And there were weird choices. Like, when they're moving the body in the rug, he pulls out to voyeuristic exterior shot where you're looking through the window. Why!?! It doesn't communicate anything and it just breaks up the suspension of disbelief when you go back to the scene moments later. Nothing felt real or authentic.

I did like David but only because there was nothing to dislike. The show didn't give me enough of his performance or a build up for me to get attached to him. We just met him and there are too many flashbacks. I don't want to put it all on the actor to suddenly make me care about this character.

Also, I continue to feel that Darren is not doing so much with his performance as much as the show is making him do things that make him seem crazy. Like, obviously it's unsettling with all the blood around during/after the murder. But that's not a performance thing. I'm also understanding what people were saying in early episodes. It is becoming more tedious to live with this Andrew post-breakdown without having seen enough of him being genuinely charming. The closest we got here was David in the cafe/diner remembering when he was charming. That would have been a useful flashback. 

The one thing I really liked about this episode was that they didn't hurt Prints. Yes, I was most concerned about the dog. 

[aradia22]

Quote

  ON 2/8/2018 AT 4:41 AM, SWLINPHX SAID:

It's so hard to sympathize with Cunanan, although we are supposed to see his side as well.  I have tried but with each episode I find him too egotistical, pretentious and phony.

I disagree with the premise. AC is being depicted (accurately, IMO) as the psychopath he was. We have not been shown scenes of, say, introspection as he is driving, or regret post-murders, or flashbacks to any childhood trauma; we are fed no "He's depraved on accounta he's deprived" ("West Side Story") rationalizations. (Unless I've forgotten them already! Then, mea culpa!)

There have been no scenes of any of Andrew's victims mistreating, misleading, betraying, or threatening him. Versace was shown as affable and approachable, Miglin as affectionate and pathetic, caretaker Reese as humble and family-oriented, Trail as friendly and normal, and Madson as hard-working and meek. Andrew murders, even sadistically tortures, and moves on, a human shark.

I appreciated that this show is not about humanizing a monster or justifying his actions. But I feel like a better written show would be commenting on something else. Reputation, masculinity, homophobia, violence, etc. Not any of those things in particular... just some big ideas, you know? I just don't see that ambition though the script drops little things about Andrew wanting to be remembered. That's not enough. There's not enough of that high drama big idea thinking and so if you don't love Darren's performance, that's all you're left with. There's nothing intellectually stimulating to chew on. 

Quote

It's certainly not the fault of any of the victims.

But the purpose of the scene in the bathroom with the broken window was to show us that David had a good shot at escape, and chose not to take it. Not because he was terrified of Cunanan, but because he decided he'd rather take his chances with Andrew than be on his own.

I thought it was because he realized he clearly couldn't fit through that tiny window. At best he would have gotten stuck. 

[Scarlett45]

Andrew tied up the dog because he dog would’ve instinctively protected Jeff being attacked (that’s my theory). I’m so glad the dog is okay!! 

I can believe David was afraid of Andrew, and paralyzed by fear. He saw him bullgeon their friend TO DEATH. 

[Kel Varnsen]

Season 2 showed up on Disney+ in Canada and I am really liking it. Not sure I have ever seen this kind of psycho/serial killer on TV before. Most of the time serial killers are like Batman villains who taunt police with intracate crime scenes.

One thing I was confused about though was why was Andrew crying when listening to that great cover of Drive in the bar. I don't know much about this kind of thing but I would have thought he was the type of person not to feel bad about anything. And since David was in the washroom I don't think he was taking for show.