Durst, Robert A

Subterms

    Latest story

    163 Shares169 Views

    Why ‘The Jinx’ Owes Its Existence to a Bizarre Movie About Robert Durst

    by

    Film can be influential in strange ways. The HBO series and follow-up wouldn’t have been made if a killer hadn’t taken a liking to a fictional portrayal.Years ago, while doing my civic duty in a Brooklyn courthouse, I was amused to be asked during jury selection if I watched “The Wire.” The lawyer explained that people’s understanding of what constituted evidence, guilt and crime were often tilted by the kind of media they watched. I did watch “The Wire.” I was dismissed.That experience came to mind while viewing “The Jinx: Part Two,” the follow-up series to Andrew Jarecki’s hit HBO original that’s largely responsible for the general public’s awareness of the real estate heir and convicted murderer Robert Durst. In the 2015 finale of “The Jinx,” Durst infamously said on a hot mic — seemingly by accident — that he’d murdered his best friend, Susan Berman; his wife, Kathie McCormack Durst, who had disappeared; and his neighbor Morris Black.The most recent episode of the new show focuses on Berman and a prosecutor’s argument that she helped Durst cover up Kathie’s death by posing as the dead woman on a phone call. The prosecution said Durst killed Berman in 2000 to keep the secret from getting out.Durst’s defense attorney, David Chesnoff, says on-camera that he was “salivating” because he believed they had “a tremendous reasonable doubt argument.” That is not surprising. What’s interesting is the tack he took.Chesnoff is shown in court thunderously defending Durst to the jury, saying that the theory that Berman posed as Kathie Durst “was spun from whole cloth.” He adds, “It began in part as the result of a fictional movie that Jarecki made.” Fictional, he emphasizes twice more, and really leans into that angle, bringing it up several more times, including on a slide that reads, “The evidence will show that the prosecution’s case is based on speculation, a flawed investigation, and their work with Hollywood producers.”If you don’t really know, or remember, what Chesnoff is talking about, the episode doesn’t make it all that clear. What he’s pointing to is “All Good Things,” Jarecki’s 2010 drama about a real estate heir named David Marks (Ryan Gosling), whose wife, Katie (Kirsten Dunst), mysteriously disappears. Marks is obviously modeled on Robert Durst, and Katie on Kathie. Berman’s stand-in, Deborah Lehrman, is played by Lily Rabe. As Chesnoff talks in the “Jinx” episode, red carpet footage from the “All Good Things” premiere briefly appears, as do clips of Lehrman posing as Katie and making a call from a pay phone.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Television

      ‘The Jinx Part Two’ Review: Filmmaking a Murderer

      by

      A new installment of HBO’s landmark true-crime documentary continues the strange, sad story of Robert Durst, in which the show is a major player.Nine years after we first heard Robert Durst mutter “Killed them all, of course,” “The Jinx” is back, with a new, six-episode Part Two that premiered Sunday on HBO. And why not?Maybe it feels unseemly, or like old news, with Durst having died in prison in 2022 after the original series helped convict him of murder. But a lot happened in the meantime. You can imagine that the filmmaker Andrew Jarecki, who directed both parts, felt a responsibility to a story he has now lived with for 20 years. And since “The Jinx” has effectively erased the line between itself and the case it chronicles, you could hope that he felt a responsibility to examine his own role in the prosecution and conviction of Durst, the wealthy and eccentric New York real estate heir.That examination does not come in the four episodes HBO provided for review, but Jarecki acknowledges the show’s continuing influence in a wry, “Can you believe that happened?” fashion.It is noted, once again, that in 2013 “Jinx” producers shared with prosecutors evidence regarding the disappearance and two deaths in which Durst was implicated, kick-starting the investigation that led to his conviction and life sentence in 2021 for the murder of his friend Susan Berman. The impact of the original broadcast on the popular imagination is conveyed when a young law clerk recalls exclaiming “Killed them all of course!” at the mention of Durst’s name, quoting his accidentally recorded words from the original series’s chilling final moments.This theme reaches an early peak in a scene filmed at a screening of that final episode in March 2015 in Jarecki’s apartment, on the same day the fleeing Durst — who had been watching the show along with the rest of us — was found and arrested in New Orleans. Relatives of Durst’s first wife, Kathleen McCormack, who had disappeared 33 years earlier, listen to his apparent confession with remarkable composure, probably acutely aware of the cameras a few feet away waiting to catch their reactions.From left, Jim, Sharon and Liz McCormack, relatives of Durst’s first wife, Kathleen McCormack, who disappeared in 1982.HBOWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Television

      What to Watch This Weekend: ‘The Jinx’ Is Back

      by

      HBO’s “The Jinx — Part Two” offers six more episodes detailing the stranger-than-fiction saga of Robert Durst.Robert Durst, as seen in prison footage in “The Jinx — Part Two.”HBOWhen “The Jinx” premiered in 2015, it was one of the pillars of the new true-crime wave — high-end but sufficiently lurid, with soap-opera twists but also documentary legitimacy. In the absence of criminal justice, maybe entertainment justice could suffice.Now the director Andrew Jarecki is back with “The Jinx — Part Two,” six more episodes detailing the stranger-than-fiction saga of the real estate scion and convicted murderer Robert Durst. (Only the first four episodes were made available for review. Hmm!) This “Jinx” isn’t just about Durst, though; it’s a “Jinx” about “The Jinx,” folding the story back in on itself yet again, additional layers of narratives and truths and maybe-truths, all getting rolled out together as delicious, buttery true-crime dough.The first episode, which airs Sunday at 10 p.m. on HBO, includes footage of dozens of people connected to the case all gathering to watch the original finale together. That was indeed a shocking episode of television, with Durst’s hot-mic bathroom confession as its astounding yet fitting conclusion. (The filmmakers later faced criticism for significantly editing Durst’s remarks, but maintained that the edits were representative of what he said.) The reaction scene plays out not with churning pathos but instead like TikToks of people watching Ned Stark meet his surprising fate or videos of fans in a sports bar groaning in unison. Even subjects of “The Jinx” experience it as a show, as fandom of one’s own life.Over and over, this “Jinx” includes people discussing original “Jinx.” Some describe it directly to Jarecki in interviews, or they mention it in recorded phone calls Durst made from prison, or they say on the witness stand that they watched the show, that they learned details of the case from TV. Actual courthouse footage blends together with hazy re-creation images, and we hear real audio but over fake visuals. And as the show turns its attention to Durst’s long-delayed trial, “The Jinx” takes on a behind-the-scenes quality as much as a true-crime one.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More