S02.E08: Creator/Destroyer

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Quote

A young Andrew Cunanan struggles with his oppressive father as a young Gianni Versace becomes a designer.

[Spartan Girl]

Geez. Andrew's dad was a real piece of shit. And the second he gave Andrew the biggest room that he happened to share for a closet, I knew something worse was going on.

Dont get me wrong: cool motive, still murder. Still, mini Andrew didn't come off so loathsome (yet). Compare his dad's drilling all that shallow entitlement into him to that brief glimpse of Versace's childhood, where his mother encouraged his dreams but taught him the value of hard work.

Despite all that, I did manage to feel some sympathy for Andrew when he confronted his dad over all the lies. I actually found myself hoping he would stab his dad. He'd deserve it.

All that talk of how he would never become his dad only to start his web of lies at the pharmacy...it's tragic.

On a shallow note, Darren was totally rocking the Michael Jackson red suit and the Whip It dance moves. God bless the 80s.

Next week is the end! I'll be glad to get back to the actual murder.

Edited March 15, 2018 by Spartan Girl

[TheOtherOne]

Vanity Fair: How Andrew Cunanan’s Father Figured Into the Murderer’s “Breaking Point”

The Assassination of Gianni Versace: Fact-checking Episode 8

We have uncovered nothing to support the implication that Andrew was sexually abused by his father, though shortly after his death, the Washington Post did repeat an unconfirmed report that Andrew — using his DeSilva pseudonym — may have called into a hotline for victims of abuse by Catholic priests. Nor were we able to find anything outside of accusations by Mary Ann Cunanan and Andrew’s godfather, Delfin Labao, in Orth’s book corroborating that Modesto was physically abusive with her (ditto recollections from Pete and Delfin that Mary Ann was hospitalized with postpartum depression).

Edited March 15, 2018 by TheOtherOne

[CeeBeeGee]

No, Modesto, in that family I think Andrew's going to need that closet more than you!

Loved Mary Anne's 1981 ruffled Lady Di blouse in the scene where Andrew is interviewing at Bishop's.

Great casting of the young Andrew. He's really nailed Andrew's precocious poise.

What a fucking sadistic prick Modesto is. "I pranked you really well but now I'm going to judge you for believing me." Fucking abusive POS. Although interesting he describes his (obsessive, spoiling, preferential and divisive) love for Andrew in exactly the same terms as David's dad does ("I love you more than I love my own life").

Interesting to see Mary Anne tried to instill a work ethic into Andrew, and stick up for what's fair (giving Andrew a car over his older siblings). Modesto really did a number on her.

Mary Anne is non-delusional, the voice of reason when she's begging Andrew not to go to the Philippines. in contrast to her later utter inability to face reality.

Andrew's nighttime visit to his father in the PI was almost as disturbing as Modesto's nighttime visit ("you never made a sound") to hsi son was. The one scene in the entire series, IIRC, where Andrew is completely truthful. "You think you can come here and judge me..."--yes, Modesto, he can. You are shit. You are garbage. You are a destroyer, a nothing, a nihilist.

Mr. Thrifty wasn't buying Andrew's pineapple plantation fantasy for a hot second.

[Primetimer]

And that one is lying, as 'Creator/Destroyer' paints a portrait of the (bullshit) artist as a young man in our Epic Old-School Recap.

View the full article

[sashayshante]

This episode really lost me. The parallel (if you can call it that) between AC and GV is now really contrived. They're trying really hard to make it out like Andrew had a lifelong obsession with Versace when there's never been any proof that's the case. And speaking of completely manufactured storylines, WTF was this episode even? Sexual abuse? Was there ever any proof or whisper of that or is it conjecture? That's some pretty bold liberties they took with that suggestion.

It's obvious now they didn't have enough meat for this season and Versace is involved strictly to fill in the gaps. Meh, this series simply isn't interesting when the focus is solely on Andrew. It's his relationships that made this season compelling, not him. I just feel like they're trying to make this deeper than it is. He was a narcissist who snapped because of his abandonment issues. Pretty boring on its face.

[Robert Lynch]

Can they release the soundtrack after this season ends? I love the use of the songs in this season so far. 

[TobinAlbers]

Real life events aside, this episode definitely gave more context into the way Andrew used fathers as a hot button with Jeff and David. He knew/assumed/assessed how big an influence and issue fatherly acceptance and pride was for each of them due to his own issues with Modesto. Trolling Jeff's dad with the postcard was to alternately lash out at Jeff but in some weird way tweak his father Modesto which every father would represent to him.

Then later with David , Andrew leans hard on the shame David's father would feel as a way to keep him off balance and under his control.

Then there is the whole working older men in exchange for gifts and attention in exchange for sex because that's the dynamic his own father set up. I mean holy smokes what an awful 'lesson' to incorporate so that you're actively pimping yourself in high school. 

Really can't blame Andrew's siblings for disappearing once they were of age and could get out. Modesto's dismissal of them was abuse but we saw that his devoted attention was worse.

What I don't get is why (in this telling) did Modesto zero in on Andrew as the focus of his unhealthy devotion? Was he a predator sensing the vulnerability of his prey ( a child and a 'sissy') and knew he could take advantage or did he assume 'sole ownership' of Andrew since his mother was MIA dealing with her own issues and Modesto viewed him as solely his creation and extension of him?

Asshole parents who build up their kids, train them to live off their praise, try to live through them while also hating them and then viciously turn on those favored children because they 'disappointed' them or were 'ungrateful' or really the parent's true colors are showing really steam me. It's a really sadistic form of child abuse.

Edited March 16, 2018 by TobinAlbers
Grammar and spelling tweaks

[CeeBeeGee]

55 minutes ago, sashayshante said:

And speaking of completely manufactured storylines, WTF was this episode even? Sexual abuse? Was there ever any proof or whisper of that or is it conjecture? That's some pretty bold liberties they took with that suggestion.

Orth's book addresses this. Apparently on several occasions Andrew alleged that Modesto had done something. So no, it is not completely out of left field, although I thought the show handled it pretty circumspectly.

[voiceover]

Sigh.  They're trying to get me to feel bad for this guy.  I can't.  As @sashayshante noted, it's his relationships that provide the interest here.

However, since I'm among friends (okay...not friends; other total strangers who are watching this too), I confess: Andrew's tantrum-y throwing of those books in his empty room?  Man, finally something I can relate to.  Of course, I'd never do that to a book!  My mother's collection of Lenox china flowers, sure.

I haven't!  But I've fantasized about it once or twice.

[tennisgurl]

So, it wasn't Andrews mom that screwed him up, it was his piece of shit dad! I mean, it doesn't excuse everything that Andrew did, and he more than likely would have had serious issues even with perfectly nice parents, but it certainly adds a lot of context as to why he ended up the way he did. I actually felt a little bad for Andrew here, and did, for a second, feel sad for the messed up kid that I was watchting. For a second. Didnt take long to be reminded of the fact that Andrew is a bugfuck crazy hyper self obsorbed serial killer, but this does at least explain a bit more about him. It can add some tradgdy to his story, even while showing that he became a monster. 

Interesting that his mom used to try to stand up to Modesto and seemed much more aware of what was going on than the woman we met in the "current" timeline. Guy really did a number on her, poor Mary Anne. If only she had kicked that asshole to the curb, things could have been different. Yeah I know, easier said than done, but thats what makes it so tragic. Modesto really was just a mega super asshole, especially in the "you belied I didn't get the job you after I said I didn't get the job you BITCH!" scene, when he got the car for Andrew and not for his older kids who actually could drive, and, of course, the last scene with Andrew. Of course, this is the one guy that Andrew doesn't murder. 

With the strongly implied sexual abuse on top of his dad being such a dominant presence in his life, it certainly makes his hooking with older men (even in high school!), then seeking them out to date, and then later escalating to murdering and humiliating these older men, look a lot different than it has in the past. No wonder the guy has issues with older men who he seeks to please, and then destroy. I mean, thats not totally his pattern, as he kills younger guys he got with too as well as random bystanders, but its not nothing. 

I dont think its a coincidence that Modesto became totally focused on his kid that looked the most Caucasian, and ignored his other kids who looked more Asian. At least, from the brief time we saw them being older. No wonder they apparently got the hell out of that house of horrors ASAP. 

[ElectricBoogaloo]

I know I say this every week, but A+ for the music choices. Samantha Fox!

One thing I always remember about acting is that actors are encouraged to "be private in public." That's why I appreciate the difference between the show off dancing Darren did at the party versus the very different "dance like no one's watching" dance in the privacy of his bedroom before the party.

Minor timeline nitpick: on the show, Andrew was still in high school when his dad fled to Manila. In reality, Andrew graduated from high school in 1987 and it wasn't until his freshman year of college at UCSD that his father went back to the Philippines.

Also funny: his dad saying that he moved the entire family to Rancho Bernardo so Andrew could be closer to Bishop's. RB is almost the exact same distance to Bishop's as Chula Vista is (where the family lived before moving to RB) - 22 miles versus 23 miles. RB is a much more suburban area so I understand moving there, especially in the 80s when it was a relatively new area and the houses were very affordable.

16 hours ago, TobinAlbers said:

What I don't get is why (in this telling) did Modesto zero in on Andrew as the foucus of his unhealthy devotion?

Andrew's had a very high IQ when he was a kid which is why he was the only one of his siblings sent to an expensive private school. I'm guessing that factored into his father's favoritism.

ETA: This link mentions his IQ as the reason for his parents' favoritism:

Quote

In the third grade, at Sunnyside Elementary in Bonita, his IQ tested at 147. He didn’t just read the encyclopedia; he memorized it. Convinced he was destined for great things, his parents lavished their attention on him, and when it was time for high school, they went the private route: Bishop’s in La Jolla.

Edited March 15, 2018 by ElectricBoogaloo

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Firsthand account by someone whose mother knew Andrew's mother

I know it sounds barely tangential but it's a short, interesting description of her knowledge of Andrew's life via their mothers (Andrew's mother babysat the author's nieces at the condo she shared with Andrew in Rancho Bernardo).

Bonus: the author's mother witnessed the Häagen-Dazs incident we saw in the previous episode!

Edited March 15, 2018 by ElectricBoogaloo

[vixenbynight]

6 hours ago, CeeBeeGee said:

The one scene in the entire series, IIRC, where Andrew is completely truthful. "You think you can come here and judge me..."--yes, Modesto, he can. You are shit. You are garbage. You are a destroyer, a nothing, a nihilist.

Mr. Thrifty wasn't buying Andrew's pineapple plantation fantasy for a hot second.

His older kids knowing that he really did not give a shit about them, was basically a blessing for them. They were able to get out, get away and move on from the utter craziness of their upbringing with their parents. From Modesto kissing Andrew's feet in praise of him getting into Bishop to the way that he continued to berate, belittle AND beat down Mary Ann in front of his son, to the point of him saying that Andrew "was not a man", because he wouldn't attack him.

 

Mr. Thrifty probably thought, "If your daddy owns a plantation, why in the hell are you applying for a job here?!"

[vixenbynight]

4 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

With the strongly implied sexual abuse on top of his dad being such a dominant presence in his life, it certainly makes his hooking with older men (even in high school!), then seeking them out to date, and then later escalating to murdering and humiliating these older men, look a lot different than it has in the past. No wonder the guy has issues with older men who he seeks to please, and then destroy. I mean, thats not totally his pattern, as he kills younger guys he got with too as well as random bystanders, but its not nothing. 

Andrew had decades long resentment and anger towards older men, that stems from how his father raised him. His father instilled in him this inflated sense of self ("you are special"), his preference for him above his other sibilings (including his own mother) and then he abandons him, without any means of continued financial support to keep him at the level of the lifestyle that his father groomed him to live in.

I do not feel sympathy for Andrew, but from how he was raised, with those two parents, he never really had the chance.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

11 hours ago, vixenbynight said:

then he abandons him, without any means of continued financial support to keep him at the level of the lifestyle that his father groomed him to live in.

According to this article, after Andrew's father fled to the Philippines in 1988, he sent his monthly Navy pension ($900) to Mary Ann every month until 1995. Definitely not defending the guy (and definitely not saying that $900/month was enough to feed his wife and their four kids), but at least he sent her some money for a few years.

The same article also says that the amount of money he was accused of "misappropriating" was $106K.

Edited March 15, 2018 by ElectricBoogaloo
Typo

[txhorns79]

Quote

I do not feel sympathy for Andrew, but from how he was raised, with those two parents, he never really had the chance.

I'm just going to note that plenty of people from backgrounds much worse than Andrew's are able to overcome those obstacles and make it in life, or at least they don't resort to becoming serial killers.  As portrayed by the show, Andrew wanted everything handed to him and did not want to work for it.  He's been shown to be a lazy, spoiled liar who becomes violent when confronted over his mistruths, or when his vision of a perfect life is threatened.  His parents may have played a role in making him what he was, but ultimately the choice was Andrew's.  I just can't countenance the idea that he had never had the chance for something different, because they've shown he very clearly did.   

[Chaos Theory]

There was no evidence of sexual abuse which took me out of the story a bit but the rest of it was somewhat accurate and interesting.   Andrew grew up in an environment of entitlement by his greedy consumerist father who eventually got tagged by the Feds and ran off and was chased by Andrew only to find him living in stark poverty.  No one knows exactly what happened but you can make guesses that the moment affected him greatly because Andrew loved his father and believed his lies.   I liked the idea that the confrontation went a long way into making Andrew into the liar he became.

For the record I don’t blame his parent for Andrews murders.  There are far worse backgrounds that people come out of and they lead productive lives.  I just find these kinds of stories interesting and the reasons one person chooses one path instead of another fascinating.  Andrew made a choice with that first lie and it determined the course of his life.

 

 

In contrast  Versace’s mother gave him real direction and taught him the value of hard work.

Edited March 15, 2018 by Chaos Theory

[vixenbynight]

10 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

His parents may have played a role in making him what he was, but ultimately the choice was Andrew's. I just can't countenance the idea that he had never had the chance for something different, because they've shown he very clearly did.   

Agreed. He did have chances, he just chose to not take them. Or not put himself in the position of again being financially dependent to another older man in his life.

2 minutes ago, Chaos Theory said:

In contrast to Versace’s mother gave him real direction and taught him the value of hard work.

I also think that Gianni was raised in an environment that allowed him to be true to who he was finding himself to be. 

[Ellaria]

An enlightening but nonetheless disturbing episode. Modesto was simply a loathsome individual. I was shocked at this information from the Vanity Fair article linked above but perhaps I should not be: 

Quote

So how, then, did Cunanan’s father Pete process the news that his son had not only mirrored his descent—he had done so in deadly fashion?

By shopping a documentary that would serve as a star vehicle for himself. Two months after the murders and his son’s suicide, the Los Angeles Times reported that Cunanan’s father Pete had already recruited a Philippines filmmaker, relocated to Los Angeles, and apparently alerted press of the project. Director Amable “Tikoy” Aguiluz VI made it clear that, in spite of Andrew being the focus of the media interest because of the murders, Pete still narcissistically saw himself as the star of the story. 

Darren Criss was brilliant in that scene where he confronts his father. His emotions ran the gamut from hopeful to confrontational to broken. 

 

9 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

On a shallow note, Darren was totally rocking the Michael Jackson red suit and the Whip It dance moves. God bless the 80s.

 

Yes, he certainly did. There was a ferocity in his dance moves that was both entertaining and frightening (because we know what comes next). I am interested to see how we get to the end of Andrew's life. 

Edited March 15, 2018 by Ellaria Sand

[SWLinPHX]

Do you think there was any special structure to the way the series was shot to make it meant to be shown in reverse chronological order?  I mean, to me it seems like they took a normal series and just aired the episodes from last to first, so I don't see what their point was or what made it better this way. Each following episode seemed to end where the previous episode started.  To me it seems they could have just as easily aired the episodes in the following order: 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and finally 9 and it would have been just as good -- or even better -- as we follow Andrew's natural progression of despair and depravity.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basically this is a nine-part miniseries about Andrew Cunanan, not Versace.  A part of me wonders if the real life Cunanan was such an interesting study to warrant this much focus or attention.  I mean, it makes for good drama but isn't it almost glorifying his story or emphasizing his importance too much?  It's almost as if Andrew is the celebrity here.

Edited March 15, 2018 by SWLinPHX

[sashayshante]

5 hours ago, SWLinPHX said:

Do you think there was any special structure to the way the series was shot to make it meant to be shown in reverse chronological order?  I mean, to me it seems like they took a normal series and just aired the episodes from last to first, so I don't see what their point was or what made it better this way. Each following episode seemed to end where the previous episode started.  To me it seems they could have just as easily aired the episodes in the following order: 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and finally 9 and it would have been just as good -- or even better, as we follow Andrew's natural progression of despair and depravity.

 

The benefit of telling the story backwards is that everybody knows how the story ends and will therefore be less invested as the series progresses. The other benefit is that telling the story backward is typically how these situations unfold. The crime occurs and then the investigation travels backwards to learn what lead up to the crime. When David and Andrew were at the diner and they spoke about their night at the Mandarin Hotel, I wanted to see that scene. It made me anticipate a future episode. It's important to remember that Versace's murder was not and never should have been the main focus of this case. Getting his death out of the way, I think, was meant to clear the path for the stories of the other victims.

Edited March 15, 2018 by sashayshante
Proofing

[SWLinPHX]

29 minutes ago, sashayshante said:

The benefit of telling the story backwards is that everybody knows how the story ends and will therefore be less invested as the series progresses. The other benefit is that telling the story backward is typically how these situations unfold. The crime occurs and then the investigation travels backwards to learn what lead up to the crime. When David and Andrew were at the diner and they spoke about their night at the Mandarin Hotel, I wanted to see that scene. It made me anticipate a future episode. It's important to remember that Versace's murder was not the and never should have been the main focus of this case. Getting his death out of the way, I think, was meant to clear the path for the stories of the other victims.

I understand that to a point and realize that already, but the technique was not like shows that cleverly use flashbacks to explain everything in an artistic way.  This literally was nothing more than just airing the episodes in reverse order.  I mean you could take any miniseries and reverse the episode order and come out just like this; the following episode would explain what they had mentioned in the previous one.  Of course all that's true if you show it in reverse order.

And you could counter your point by saying that everyone would stay tuned to see the climax of how it all led up to the murder of Versace; not that they were so eager to see how Andrew was as a kid.

I don't know, I just don't see good enough reason to warrant this.  I think if I were to show this to someone I would show it episodes 8 to 1, and then finally 9.

Edited March 15, 2018 by SWLinPHX

[Chaos Theory]

25 minutes ago, sashayshante said:

The benefit of telling the story backwards is that everybody knows how the story ends and will therefore be less invested as the series progresses. The other benefit is that telling the story backward is typically how these situations unfold. The crime occurs and then the investigation travels backwards to learn what lead up to the crime. When David and Andrew were at the diner and they spoke about their night at the Mandarin Hotel, I wanted to see that scene. It made me anticipate a future episode. It's important to remember that Versace's murder was not the and never should have been the main focus of this case. Getting his death out of the way, I think, was meant to clear the path for the stories of the other victims.

Maybe I would have liked to see more Parellels into the two men’s lives but ultimately this is Andrews story and what lead him to kill a string of mostly gay men (I believe there was one at the end that he did kill for his car) and then finally Versace.  Killing Versace was probably Andrews last effort to be famous even infamous but it would be interesting to see him realize that even killing Verace made him more famous.  

This story isn’t really about the murder or investigation of Versace but about the building a psychopath.

[Chaos Theory]

As much as Andrew had a crappy father and an infecutual mother we can only blame them so much for what Andrew became.   He didn’t have to tell that first lie to his boss.  He could have told the truth and lead a truthful life and who knows what he would have become.  But I doubt he knew the value of hard work never being taught that and  been given everything by a father who was living vicariously through his son.    An argument can be made on both sides.  What chance did Andrew really have?   And look how many chances Andrew was given?  

Edited March 15, 2018 by Chaos Theory

[LennieBriscoe]

27 minutes ago, icemiser69 said:

Andrew's mom was portrayed as a very abused woman  (probably from her grade school years and her early childhood home life). 

There is nothing to support this assumption.

17 minutes ago, Chaos Theory said:

 But I doubt he knew the value of hard work ever being taught that been given everything by a father who was living vicariously through his son.

I think some editing is needed here for clarity.

[tennisgurl]

You know what? This whole show is turning into a bizarre, psychotic riff on Death of a Salesman, especially this episode. It has the dad from humble roots desperately trying to live up to an impossible to attain idealized "American Dream", and that obsession, and delusion that if you just kept pushing, things will work out even in the face of reality, eventually destroying the family. The story of Andrew and his father could certainly be summed up in the message of the show, that if people want to find fulfillment, they have to actually look for something deeper than material wealth and being "liked" by everyone, even if its a very shallow kind of liking. You could even see Versace as a variation of Biffs dorky friend who Willie looked down on as "being liked but not WELL liked" but ended up working hard and becoming the success that no one in the Loman family could ever be because he wasn't obsessed with the idea of being successful, and just did what he liked doing. I mean, I could totally see Andrews dad telling him that being liked is the most important thing to being successful. 

Of course, its a MUCH darker version of the story with way more child abuse and murder, but I do see some parallels, even if they weren't intentional. 

[Blakeston]

I thought this episode was well done, but it seemed too easy. As if the writers said to themselves, "How can we depict Modesto as a complete and utter monster, in a way that will explain everything about Andrew?"

I have no doubt that Modesto was an asshole (lord, has there ever been a more ironic name?), and that he spoiled Andrew rotten, and was awful to Mary Ann. But the completely unverified sexual abuse was unnecessary. And the whole "I'll send you back to the loony bin if you look at me the wrong way!" stuff, and the "go ahead and kill me, you sissy!" moment were a bit much.

In general, I've seen way, way too many scenes where a villainous character hands someone a knife or gun and encourages them to kill him, smug with the knowledge they won't be able to do it. It's such a huge cliche at this point.

On the plus side, I thought they did an amazing job making Annaleigh Ashford look young. It's truly hard to believe she's the same person from Masters of Sex.

[dubbel zout]

5 hours ago, vixenbynight said:

Mr. Thrifty probably thought, "If your daddy owns a plantation, why in the hell are you applying for a job here?!"

I LOVED the look on his face, "Yeah, right. But whatever, I'll take a look at your application."

4 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I'm just going to note that plenty of people from backgrounds much worse than Andrew's are able to overcome those obstacles and make it in life, or at least they don't resort to becoming serial killers. 

Exactly. Andrew's upbringing certainly shaped his attitudes and entitlement, but to quote myself, that doesn't mean you kill people because they don't prop your stupid dreams.

Jon Jon Briones at Modesto was fantastic. Really superlative.

The people I felt sorry for in this episode were Andrew's siblings. They were barely afterthoughts to Modesto. As others have mentioned, I'd also get out of that house as soon as I could.

[NinaH]

3 hours ago, Ellaria Sand said:

 

 

Yes, he certainly did. There was a ferocity in his dance moves that was both entertaining and frightening (because we know what comes next). I am interested to see how we get to the end of Andrew's life. 

His dance moves were totally Sprokets 

[sugarbaker design]

I did like how the paperback edition of Brideshead Revisited that little Andrew was reading affected him so much that older Andrew had a Brideshead Revisited poster.  Who knew Andrew would turn out worse than Sebastian Flyte?

[DoubleUTeeEff]

34 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

I mean, I could totally see Andrews dad telling him that being liked is the most important thing to being successful. 

He kind of did because he told Andrew the most important thing was to "fit in" when he was explaining why they had to read that whole book on etiquette or whatever it was.

27 minutes ago, Blakeston said:

In general, I've seen way, way too many scenes where a villainous character hands someone a knife or gun and encourages them to kill him, smug with the knowledge they won't be able to do it. It's such a huge cliche at this point.

I hear you, but his dad did not actually hand him the knife, Andrew picked it up off the table IIRC. But yes, he did stand there like either he knew Andrew wasn't going to hurt him or that he didn't care if he did.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

1 hour ago, dubbel zout said:

Jon Jon Briones at Modesto was fantastic. Really superlative.

I was selfishly hoping they would have a reason for him to sing, even if only for a few seconds!

I just saw that Matt Bomer directed this episode!

[voiceover]

4 hours ago, Chaos Theory said:

 This story isn’t really about the murder or investigation of Versace but about the building a psychopath.

The Asssassin of Gianni Versace.

[sugarbaker design]

8 minutes ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:

I just saw that Matt Bomer directed this episode!

Thanks for sharing that, I keep on forgetting the credits roll after the scenes from next week.  I usually cut out before then.  I have noticed Tom Robb Smith has written every episode.

[sashayshante]

2 hours ago, Blakeston said:

I thought this episode was well done, but it seemed too easy. As if the writers said to themselves, "How can we depict Modesto as a complete and utter monster, in a way that will explain everything about Andrew?"

I have no doubt that Modesto was an asshole (lord, has there ever been a more ironic name?), and that he spoiled Andrew rotten, and was awful to Mary Ann. But the completely unverified sexual abuse was unnecessary. And the whole "I'll send you back to the loony bin if you look at me the wrong way!" stuff, and the "go ahead and kill me, you sissy!" moment were a bit much.

In general, I've seen way, way too many scenes where a villainous character hands someone a knife or gun and encourages them to kill him, smug with the knowledge they won't be able to do it. It's such a huge cliche at this point.

On the plus side, I thought they did an amazing job making Annaleigh Ashford look young. It's truly hard to believe she's the same person from Masters of Sex.

They're trying way too hard to humanize Andrew. That's the biggest problem I have with last night's episode.  Something tells me Andrew was petulant and bratty even as a child, but we didn't see that. We saw some poor confused boy who cried when he found out he was accepted to a private school because it meant his father would bear down on him even more. Sorry, but I don't buy  this idea that Andrew didn't love the overwhelming adulation he received as a child.  I think it goes deeper than his parents spoiled him. I think he developed a personality disorder very young and his parents behavior exacerbated it.

[gesundheit]

I still feel like the reverse chronology is really effective in that I wasn't able to generate much sympathy for him. If we'd started here, it would feel very different (even knowing how it ended in the broader sense since the crimes were real and well-known). Watching what an entitled murderous monster he was BEFORE watching a little boy get raised by a horrible, creepy father is compelling to me in terms of re-tracing an origin story but asks less of me in the compassion department. And frankly I appreciate that when watching a series about a serial killer. I couldn't fall into a trap of knee-jerk rooting for a kid when I'd already seen who he became. More of a curiosity.

That said, dear lord they need to tell these people to stick to their allotted hour. FX has let so many of their solid shows become slogs because of their liberal time management.

[hoodooznoodooz]

Nitpick: After the meeting with his supervisors, would Modesto be attempting to shred and booking a flight so overtly? He was so loud. 

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Loved the use of Hazy Shade of Winter in the scene where Andrew arrives at school. That was so perfectly 80s! And it seemed apropos because many of us associate that song with Less Than Zero. 

Technically, the use of this song could be seen as an anachronism because Andrew graduated from Bishop’s in 1987 and the song was not released as a single until November of that year, but thanks to already having this discussion after S1 of Stranger Things, I now know the Bangles had been performing that song live since 1983. 

Edited March 15, 2018 by ElectricBoogaloo
Typo

[truthaboutluv]

On 3/15/2018 at 1:48 PM, gesundheit said:

I still feel like the reverse chronology is really effective in that I wasn't able to generate much sympathy for him. If we'd started here, it would feel very different (even knowing how it ended in the broader sense since the crimes were real and well-known). Watching what an entitled murderous monster he was BEFORE watching a little boy get raised by a horrible, creepy father is compelling to me in terms of re-tracing an origin story but asks less of me in the compassion department.

This exactly. Couldn't have said it better myself. I still feel the same after seeing this episode as I did some episodes ago when I first started seeing the comments about the show humanizing Andrew and making the audience feel sympathy for him. In my opinion, I don't think that's what the writers tried to do and that's certainly not what I got out of the episode. Yes, Andrew's father was an abusive (whether or not we believe there was sexual abuse, he was clearly abusive to his wife and his favoritism to his one child over his other children wasn't exactly great parenting either), manipulative, lying asshole who abandoned the family.

But Andrew still had the choice to not follow his path and do better and instead he did exactly like his dad and became worse. As awful as that confrontation scene between him and his father was, it just drove home for me, how truly awful Andrew was because despite all that his father did and the destruction he left in his path, Andrew decided to follow the same lying and scamming path to an easy life, versus working hard. So no, I didn't come away feeling sorry for him or feeling the writers were trying to make me feel sorry for him. 

 

On 3/15/2018 at 1:39 PM, sashayshante said:

Something tells me Andrew was petulant and bratty even as a child, but we didn't see that. We saw some poor confused boy who cried when he found out he was accepted to a private school because it meant his father would bear down on him even more. Sorry, but I don't buy  this idea that Andrew didn't love the overwhelming adulation he received as a child.  I think it goes deeper than his parents spoiled him. I think he developed a personality disorder very young and his parents behavior exacerbated it.

While the young boy was played as mostly passive, I thought his interview with the school administrators did show shades of the person Andrew was and eventually became - that constant need for attention, to feel special, to be liked, the neediness, etc. And yeah the young boy may have seemed confused and quiet but they made sure to show the full petulant, annoying, entitled, attention seeking brat by the time he was in high school. 

Regarding Versace, while I understand those who are bothered by how little focus was on him, I don't have an issue with the show title referencing him despite Andrew being the focus. Because as I said in another thread, much like Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman's murders became all about the "Trial of the Century" and the shenanigans of said trial and less about them, the victims, Versace's murder was the one that truly propelled the massive hunt for Cunanan. Yes, he'd been on the FBI Most Wanted List and America's Most Wanted but to the country at large, Cunanan's murder spree was barely news - until he murdered Versace. And that I believe is the point of the series being named after him despite most of the focus being on Andrew. Because Andrew's murder of Versace is what finally put his entire crime spree on the national stage. And sadly, because it's what the crazy nut wanted, made people know his name. 

Edited March 17, 2018 by truthaboutluv

[CeeBeeGee]

5 hours ago, dubbel zout said:

The people I felt sorry for in this episode were Andrew's siblings. They were barely afterthoughts to Modesto. As others have mentioned, I'd also get out of that house as soon as I could.

Apparently IRL (and this pertains also to the poster who surmised that Modesto's favoritism stemmed from Andrew's looking the least Asian of his siblings), 

Spoiler

one of Andrew'solder siblings, Elena (I think she was second oldest) was blonde and blue-eyed, and this caused Modesto to believe that Mary Anne had cheated on him.  This soured him on the marriage and was when he started treating her like shit.

[Florinaldo]

Strong episode, with some reservations.

As much as I have previously found the Versace portion less compelling, I think that one or two added sequences showing GV working at learning his craft, either under his mother or another mentor, could have reinforced the study in contrast between him and AC; I do not think that the series is really trying to establish a parallel between the two as much as to draw a sharp contrast in character and choices made by the two. It could have meant of course finding another good actor with similar looks to GV in his later teens.

As usual they were fortunate with their guest cast, like the young AC; he was very good as the spoiled but insecure child, anxious about not meeting his father's expectations. He even used some of DC's postures and looks from previous episodes, quite fitting a "Prince Andrew" as his brother calls him. Briones was a great find who has not had many prominent roles in film or TV. According to this interview with director Bomer, he was suggested by the writer and by DC, who knew him from Broadway.

GV's mother was creator, while MC was both creator and destroyer. The episode seemed to lean towards him being mostly responsible for AC's later behaviour. Since I believe that nature is as important as nurture, it's probable that MC helped pre-existing character traits to emerge or cristallize in what became a specific destructive person, but AC also made many of his own choices.

That was a truly dysfunctional family; one can understand why the siblings apparently were not very involved in their brother's and mother's later lives. But that seemed like a big house; was there really only three rooms that were useable as bedrooms, so that the three older children had to sleep in such cramped quarters? Or perhaps it was just exaggerated to underscore how AC was the favourite, having the master bedroom to himself.

If Liz was just house-sitting, who threw the house party; are we supposed to think she did it just to enjoy the company of young people?

We did not see much of AC the popular fun kid he was supposed to be in high school; he even got insulted by a jock and then pretty much bombed in his Devo performance, until Liz intervened. The open shirt yearbook photo is an almost exact recreation of one that pops up in any Web search on him (the background is different).

I am not sure about the implied molestation, an unproven rumour; I don't hink it was necessary to drive home the point that MC was an awful father. The pressure he put on his son was enough for him to be characterised as psychological abuser.

This is the episode that is totally transformed by the reverse chronology, and to the benefit of our viewing experience. We have the advantage of knowing how much of a deluded liar AC is to become and all the unjustifiable violence he will commit, which prevents us from feeling much sympathy towards this nice high school kid who is mistreated by his father. Many of his actions and lines in this episode take on a different colour after whaht we have sen and learned from him in his future.

MC's panic and fumbling attempt to cover his tracks when the FBI shows up reminded me of similar reactions from his son when his webs of lies get threatened, like during his birthday party.

[walnutqueen]

Oh, puleeze, spare me. 

Andrew Cunanin is neither special or interesting.  Plenty of us have more fucked up childhoods and broken dreams, yet we haven't resorted to mass murder. 

His sad little life story elicits a very big YAWN from me.

And, bad accent aside, Penelope should've used that fugly stick on her face to be even remotely believable.

[J-Man]

6 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

It has the dad from humble roots desperately trying to live up to an impossible to attain idealized "American Dream"

Coincidentally, here's Jon Jon Briones (Modesto) singing about "The American Dream" from "Miss Saigon."

Minor nitpick: all of the houses on the street where chez Cunanan was located had curbside mailboxes, so why did the mailman deliver things on foot to their front door?

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Another thing we learned in this episode is that Lizzie met Andrew when he was pretty young (according to the Vanity Fair fact checker, they actually met when Andrew was in middle school) which means that she must have known that many of the things he later said about his family and experiences were lies.

[thesupremediva1]

This show is entirely compelling, the sets are beautiful, the cast is amazing, the music spellbinding.

When Darren Criss got out of the car to "Hazy Shade of Winter," I got actual chills. And all I could think was how much joy that scene - and this whole series - would bring Cunanan if he knew this is what he inspired.

And that made me want to cry/throw things/turn the channel. I was a kid in south Jersey when Cunanan showed up and murdered William Reese. There was an APB out for him. The emergency alert system interrupted programming to let us know he was armed, dangerous, and on the loose. I didn't sleep well until September of 1997 after he was caught. We were all terrified in my community. He was like a phantom killer who could show up anywhere.

Much like David Chase with The Sopranos, I have to wonder if Ryan Murphy is intentionally turning the tables on the audience. We're not celebrating him overtly, but we (Americans) are complicit in the making of his celebrity. I do not believe the show is trying to humanize or make excuses for him. I do believe they are trying to show how and why Andrew became a spree killer. The motives are deep, rooted in nature and nurture. You can see in young Andrew that there was a detachment that's just not... normal. Or warm. You can examine someone's history and behavior and draw reasonable conclusions for their behavior without making excuses. But... it's all just so glossy and lovely on screen. And that makes me feel dirty somehow.

Edited March 15, 2018 by thesupremediva1

[Florinaldo]

2 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

While the young boy was played as mostly passive, I thought his interview with the school administrators did show shades of the person Andrew was and eventually became - that constant need for attention, to feel special, to be liked, the neediness, etc.

And the need to give the correct and expected response or reaction. His question "did I make a mistake" during the interview suggests taht his parents rehearsed him for this, as often happens in real life I suspect, and ran him through a set of prepared answers, for which the two ladies were obviously prepared. But he was worried that he missed his line, just like an actor when he blows a bit of dialogue.

5 hours ago, gesundheit said:

That said, dear lord they need to tell these people to stick to their allotted hour. FX has let so many of their solid shows become slogs because of their liberal time management.

I think it is a point in their favour that they allot all the time necessary to tell the story, instead of forcing it to fit inside the hour-length broadcast duration that is standard on North-American TV (Europeans and UK shows are often more flexible). Which is why this season has had episodes that ran anywhere from 50 to 60 minutes of narrative excluding commercials. They already edit out a good deal of stuff from episodes (see the interview with DC I linked to in the "Ascent" thread), so if they held to a strict hour-long broadcast, a good 10-15 minutes would have been lost in this specific episode.

[gesundheit]

48 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

I think it is a point in their favour that they allot all the time necessary to tell the story, instead of forcing it to fit inside the hour-length broadcast duration that is standard on North-American TV (Europeans and UK shows are often more flexible). Which is why this season has had episodes that ran anywhere from 50 to 60 minutes of narrative excluding commercials. They already edit out a good deal of stuff from episodes (see the interview with DC I linked to in the "Ascent" thread), so if they held to a strict hour-long broadcast, a good 10-15 minutes would have been lost in this specific episode.

Right, if they needed that time I'd be all for it. I don't think they did, at any point this season. Nor has American Horror Story ever needed it, and holy macaroni did Sons of Anarchy never need it. I like the show but the super-sized episode running time has come off as very self-indulgent. Makes sense for a finale or premiere or something, but not one single episode fit into the hour slot.

[bosawks]

While I did miss Versace I really missed David and Jeff.

[Robert Lynch]

Was it just me or did the kid playing Andrew resembled a young Mark Paul Gosselaar a bit?