Netflix dropped its latest installment, “Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story,” a true crime series directed by Ryan Murphy.
The series dramatizes the lives of Erik and Lyle Menendez, both convicted in 1996 of the murder of their parents, José and Kitty Menendez, in their Beverly Hills home.
The brothers were accused of murdering their parents for money, but the boys declared it was because of years of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse by their father.
The Menendez case was one of the first trials to be live-streamed on television, making it a media phenomenon in the 1990s. With “Monsters,” Netflix brings a modern lens to a story that has been a controversial event since the late twenty-first century.
The show presents a complex portrayal of the brothers’ claims of years of abuse at the hands of their father and mother.
Social media has exploded in discussions about the brothers, with #MenendezBrothersInjustice trending on TikTok and Instagram.
Younger viewers who never knew about the original case feel sympathy for the brothers, especially Erik, who was only 18 when he committed the crime.
“My whole feed is videos about the Menendez brothers,” junior Peyton Gimbel said. “So many people I have talked to are watching ‘Monsters.’”
“Monsters” is not without its flaws. Critics noted several factual inaccuracies and dramatizations that may mislead audiences.
For example, some scenes exaggerate details or omit key evidence, potentially skewing perceptions of the case.
While most films take artistic license, it is questionable when real events and people’s lives are involved.
“I was confused my first time watching the show because it went against what I had already learned about the case,” Peyton said. “Adding fictional parts is one thing, but completely changing facts can be dangerous, especially if it influences public opinion.”
The over-dramatizations have also drawn in many more viewers. Due to the debate of whether or not the TV series is accurate, “Monsters” has become one of the most popular TV series right now.
The show does an excellent job of highlighting society’s changing perception of male victims of sexual assault.
In the late 1980s and early ‘90s, this topic wasn’t discussed much. Sexual assault was hidden in the dark, particularly in cases with male victims.
In the case of the Menendez brothers, people highly questioned their abuse allegations because society viewed their family as the “perfect American family”.
People could not imagine that a father from such a perfect family would commit such heinous acts.
However, as we revisit the case in 2024, views on sexual assault have changed dramatically.
The series shows how deep societal biases can shape public opinion and legal outcomes. It also exposes how society views male victims of rape. Recently, it has been realized that men, too, are subjected to abuse—a theme which was taboo in the late years of the 1980s and the early ‘90s.
The series replays the same momentum by proving that these biases have impacts on societally-legal findings.
Nevertheless, “Monsters” put the spotlight back on the Menendez brothers and fired up a justice-abuse-second chance debate.
Social media helped fuel this as younger viewers who weren’t alive when the trial took place joined in on the discussion of the case and called for a reexamination of their convictions.
Recent developments suggest the Menendez brothers’ case may not be as settled as it once seemed. Whispers of a potential retrial are beginning to surface; could this case be on the brink of a legal revival, or will it remain a haunting reminder of a justice system resistant to change?
