Law & Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders would benefit if it were not associated with Law & Order. The Law & Order name automatically attracts a certain segment of viewers guaranteed to watch anything that falls under its umbrella regardless of whether or not it follows the format of the original series, but the key isn’t getting viewers, but keeping them.
Law & Order usually features a single crime per episode and shows how cops work with prosecutors to make a case against the guilty. In the original series, the cops usually appeared in the first half then like a baton, the cops pass the case to the prosecutor, usually Jack McCoy, who dominated the second half. The most successful spinoff, Special Victims Unit, spent more time with the cops than the prosecutor and usually the demarcation line was less distinct. Critically successfully spinoffs with less popular appeal such as Criminal Intent shook up the format by getting the criminal’s perspective and predominantly following only a pair of a cops, a quirky, unconventional detective with a more standard detective. Single season spinoffs like LA, which was identical to the original except for location showed that audiences favored Manhattan over the West Coast and preferred to have one lead prosecutor, not two, and Trial by Jury, my personal favorite, followed the attorneys on both sides over the police. Viewers want police procedural shows with a small helping of courtroom drama. The one unifying factor is that the viewer is rooting for the State against the defendant.
Law & Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders basically tosses everything that made the Law & Order franchise popular. It follows the anthology true crime format popularized by FX’s American Crime Story, which in turn may owe a debt of gratitude to ABC’s American Crime (side note: I’ve never seen either though the FX series is in my queue); thus ditching the satisfaction of a single crime solved in one episode (at most two usually aired in one night) and expanding a crime to an eight episode season. It also gives an opportunity for the viewers to cast a more critical eye at all the elements of the show because they will be featured in every episode. It is set on the West Coast, which Law & Order fans have already rejected. It predominantly follows a woman defense attorney, which did not interest viewers in Trial by Jury. The most damning factor is that it empathizes with the defense over the state and also condemns the media, which is a little weird since it is somewhat exploiting what it condemns.
If people ditched Law & Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders for those reasons, I could understand because the first few episodes left me a little cold. Unlike many viewers, I was too busy to follow this story as it unfolded in real time so I approached it with no knowledge of whom I should be focusing on and what details were important. I felt a little unmoored whereas the Law & Order franchise is comforting because it is a known quantity. I only became interested in the show around episode 3 when the motive was finally revealed, and I knew which side should win. It isn’t a coincidence that the third episode is when Edie Falco dominates the narrative.
Law & Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders is really a showcase for Falco to sink her teeth into portraying Leslie Abramson, the lead defense attorney. It is an interesting role because it humanizes the motives of a defense attorney and is the first time that the Law & Order franchise suggests that the deck is really stacked against anyone who does not hit all the privilege markers. It also demands that viewers really question whether or not justice can be found in the courtroom as wealth and the future of the victim’s family evaporates with the verdict.
Law & Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders also raises an implicit concern about law enforcement and the judicial branch. None of them were there when the defendants were the victims yet they act as if they were and punish the defendants accordingly. The series shows a gender divide in the willingness to confront that failure and mitigate punishment in some way. If OJ Simpson’s trial was a backlash by the underdog after years of abuse, the Menendez trial was the reactionary response. There are basically no consequences for anyone who let a crime unfold under their nose and did nothing. This series question the purpose of justice: revenge disguised as punishment or rehabilitation.
For Law & Order devotees, I was particularly excited to see Julianne Nicholson, an alum from Criminal Intent, in Law & Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders. I haven’t seen Constance Marie since George Lopez’s sitcom, American Family, but she makes a strong impression every time that she is on screen. Apparently I’m only allowed to see Raphael Sbarge as some type of therapist on this show and Once Upon A Time. I loved Sam Jaeger in Parenthood, but his mustache was the most memorable part of his performance, and the State’s side was largely overshadowed except Anthony Edwards as the presiding justice. Harry Hamlin of LA Law fame briefly appears and does plenty with what time he has. Josh Charles and Heather Graham chew the scenery a bit much for my taste, but it may be an accurate reflection of how dysfunctional their real life counterparts are. I didn’t recognize Lolita Davidovich so bravo!
Law & Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders will expire on September 24, 2018 on Hulu so if you have been procrastinating, stop and watch it. If you were a fan of Criminal Intent or Trial by Jury, then I think that this installment in the franchise will appeal to you. Falco fans must watch this series. It is perfect for multitasking and watching on your smart phone. I watched it in two days, and I’m fairly busy. I actually think that the smaller the screen, the better your experience will be because you won’t notice the awful wigs and fashion choices used to denote that the series is also a period piece.