Alyssa Fox

“Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story” was released on Sept. 19 on Netflix. The nine episode series depicted the well known case and trial of the Menedez brothers who killed their parents in their Beverly Hills home on Aug. 20, 1989.

There is a very high chance in the past two weeks you’ve heard someone in your English class talking about “those brothers who murdered their parents” or someone humming the beat of Milli Vanilli’s “Blame It On The Rain” because they’ve seen one too many TikTok edits of Nicholas Alexander Chavez to the same beat. I have to tell you, there is no one but Netflix and Ryan Murphy to blame for this. 

On Sept. 19, Netflix released the second installment of Ryan Murphy’s anthology entitled “Monster,” a show that depicts details of well known true crime cases. Last season told the story of Jeffrey Dahmer and this season, called “Monsters” followed Lyle and Erik Menendez. The two Beverly Hills brothers are in jail for murdering their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez, on Aug. 20, 1989. It is later revealed in the first trial of the case that the brothers were subjected to physical and sexual abuse from their parents and killed them out of “self-defense” as they believed Jose and Kitty would kill them because they began to tell about the abuse. Nicholas Alexander Chavez portrayed Lyle while Cooper Koch played Erik, their performances capturing the hearts of many who watch the show. While the show has brought out plenty of opinions on the case itself, which I could sit and talk to you about for hours, I have decided to simply review the depiction portrayed in this series. 

The series is told in chronological order starting when Erik confesses to his therapist that he and Lyle committed the murders. However, the Menendez family dynamic is portrayed to the audience through flashbacks in almost every episode. We are taken through the entire process from the murder to the jury convicting both of the boys guilty of first-degree murder in a span of seven years. 

Koch and Chavez poured heart and soul into portraying these brothers, and that is something that is obvious in every episode. The acting was outstanding between the two, Koch specifically standing out in episode five. The episode entitled “The Hurt Man”, a play off of the nickname Erik gave for himself, was a single-shot 33 minute episode that slowly zoomed in on Erik as he recounted the abuse he faced to his defense attorney, Leslie Abramson. Koch also paid the actual Erik  a phone call in jail, which perhaps contributes to his award-winning type performance. 

However, despite Chavez’s acting being a stand-out point in the show (and perhaps a stand-out to the flock of teenage girls that have resorted to making edits of him on TikTok), he has been criticized for the “inaccurate” portrayal of Lyle. In fact, Erik released a statement from jail noting the inaccuracies of both the show’s portrayal of their trial and the portrayal of Lyle, specifically. Chavez’s acting should not be disregarded for these supposed inaccuracies, as he portrays what the creator Ryan Murphy, also known for his hit shows such as “9-1-1” and “Glee”, tells him too. 

Murphy has said the way he portrays the brothers in the show was simply a collection of all the different points of views that were presented in the case during the two trials that took place. However true it may be, the show did have some inaccuracies that were reflected in the documentary Netflix released on Monday entitled “The Menendez Brothers” which includes 20 hours worth of interviews that were gathered from the brothers in jail in 2023.

For instance, in episode four of “Monsters,” we see security guards search Erik’s cell and find a note from Erik that was basically the most elaborate escape plan you’ve ever heard of. However, in the documentary it is mentioned that actually the idea of the escape plan was false information and the LA County Jail came out with a statement saying it was a false alarm and the note was simply Lyle telling Erik that he did not want to recount their parents’ abuse towards them. Perhaps the brothers are also upset that the show portrays them as bratty, rich, selfish kids that just wanted their parents’ estate. 

I can’t say I blame Murphy for portraying them that way as that is the lifestyle they grew up in (which according to the documentary, they really did spend 700k dollars after their parents’ deaths), however here is my problem with “Monsters.” The flashbacks were working with the plot…until they weren’t. By episode seven, the story has reached the trials and we are being told a whole bunch of different scenarios of how the crime played out based on what people are saying when they testify. This is when, to me, the show became slightly confusing. We get thrown all this extra information from characters like Dominick Dunne, a true-crime journalist who covered the brothers’ case and was part of the reason for the nationwide sensation it became, who talked to his presumably imagined dinner guest about his perspective of their trial. None of it lined up with what the boys said in their trial and simply came from what Dunne pieced together from his interviews and information gathering. To be honest, the way it was told in connection to the plot was extremely confusing. We also find out that Dunne’s daughter, Dominique, was murdered by her abusive ex-boyfriend, which is why he took such an interest in the boys’ case. Once again, extra information that’s not needed. Then, we get OJ Simpson and the earthquake that took place in 1994, which could’ve been very interesting subplots had they not been thrown in in the last two episodes. 

OJ, the Earthquake, the story of the Dunnes, it’s all pivotal information that had a role in their case. However, Murphy just kind of shoved it in at the end and decided not to expand on it at all. That was disappointing and ultimately made me enjoy the show just a little bit less. 

Between the different scenarios blurring with the flashbacks and the extra information that is just not needed, I could see how someone perceives that as misinformation. However, the heart of their story is told exactly how it happened, and I think that’s what Murphy was going for. Did he portray the boys as spoiled brats? Yes. Was there misinformation? Also yes. But I don’t think he did it with ill intention. You can say all you want about the trial and the show, but ultimately we’ve all fallen into the rabbit hole and most of us have sat for hours and watched all nine episodes. 

I give the show 6/10 stars. I enjoyed it and I thought Koch and Chavez acted their butts off. However, Murphy’s depiction of the trial itself confused me and obviously it’s hard to look past the misinformation. Overall, I would recommend the show under two conditions. You should be aware of the topics that are bluntly discussed due to the circumstances the boys were in, and you should definitely watch “The Menendez Brothers” documentary after you finish the show. If you do that, you’ll be sucked into the Menendez Mania, but in an educated and informed way that will allow you to form an opinion on the case that can withstand a 45 minute argument with anyone who is willing (it’s me by the way, I’m willing).