Late to the party.
I just digested this entire series (preceded by All Good Things) in the past 6 hours and I have a lot of thoughts rushing through my head, so I want to use this as my outlet while everything is still fresh in mind.
First of all, holy crap. That is one of the most riveting documentaries I've ever seen. Completely unbelievable. I almost have to treat it as fiction because it's so hard to fathom.
And that ending. Perfectly set up throughout the series (even the fact that his lawyer warned him about the "hot mic" previously) and chilling in its execution.
I'm trying to establish a timeline here based on all the evidence. In 1982, he (allegedly) killed his wife, Kathleen McCormack. In 2000, the case was reopened and his close friend Susan Berman was murdered prior to being questioned. In 2001, his friend and neighbor Morris Black was shot dead and Durst admits (on oath) to dismembering the body and attempting to hide the evidence (the head was never found). In addition, Wikipedia lists three other possible "disappearances" that could be traced back to Durst in 1971 and 1997. Which is *beep* frightening to consider.
Then there are other weird discrepancies and behaviors that led to him being caught. Shoplifting a sandwich when he could have easily paid. Coming forward following the release of All Good Things and agreeing to be interviewed by the director, Andrew Jarecki, who clearly thinks he's guilty based on the subject matter of his film. And then there's him talking to himself (reminded me of Gollum in Lord of the Rings) either rehearsing or admitting/convincing to himself what he's done. All of this shows a severe disregard for self-preservation and a blatant desire to be caught.
So does he want to be caught? What demons is he struggling with? Why did he want to be filmed outside of his brother's home? Why did he visit there later on his own? What were his intentions? Was he going to kill his brother next? What was going through his head during this time?
Is he a sociopath? Does he have psychotic tendencies? Dissociative disorder? Some other undiagnosed mental condition? Some have suggested Asperger's syndrome, but that might only explain why his answers seem so cold and methodical. What was the motive for killing in the first place?
And then there's the controversy surrounding the second interview with Jarecki. The producers decide the need to interview him again following the discovery of the "Beverley" letter. However, at this point, Durst seems reluctant to cooperate. Is it because of what happened earlier with the first "hot mic" situation? Did his lawyers advise against him to give any further testimony? (Or did he somehow have inside knowledge that new evidence had been presented?) He flat out lies to Jarecki about going to Madrid (which I'm surprised Jarecki doesn't confront him about in the end). The timeline established in the film suggests that the second interview occurred as "leverage" following the incident in front of his brother's home (which they conveniently had the earlier footage that Durst himself had insisted on shooting -- was all of this premeditated???). I'm getting a chill down my spine just imagining the repercussions of all of this.
The more likely answer is that the order of events were modified in post-production in order to dictate a more compelling plot strand throughout the docu-series. I'm sure there are more answers that will eventually come to light after Durst stands trial for Berman's murder later this year (and Jarecki breaks his silence). I guess all of this is irrelevant given the context of the show. The facts presented here are still apparent and undeniable.
In All Good Things, Jarecki seems to suggest that Durst hired Black to perform a "hit" on Berman, and then they had some sort of "disagreement" which resulted in Black's "accidental" death. However, the admission at the end of this series seems to clearly imply that Durst was behind it all. The finale was so creepy in observing Durst's reaction to the letter (the uncontrollable belching/retching), followed by the rampant thought process after he excuses himself to the bathroom... I want to deconstruct everything he says at this point based on what we know.
There it is. You’re caught.His reaction upon finally being alone. I'm caught. I'm trapped. There's no way out.
You’re right, of course.His imagined response to Jarecki inquiring about the envelope. What he wanted to say in order to exorcise his demons, which I think was the whole point of agreeing to interview in the first place.
But, you can’t imagine...[The gory details][What I've been through]
Arrest him.What he imagines authorities will say once they obtain this new evidence.
I don’t know what’s in the house.This is strange. Is he implying that there is some evidence left at the house? Is Kathleen buried somewhere in the house? He seems to be denying it to himself (and the imagined jury).
Oh, I want this.He wants to be caught. He's secretly wanted this all along. That's why he agreed to this series of interviews. He wants to be free of the lies and the guilt that have haunted him his whole life.
What a disaster.Instant remorse for what he's done and the tangled web of lies he's weaved. Why didn't I just leave it alone?
He was right. I was wrong.Admitting to what Jarecki said about the envelope and the two writing samples being remarkably similar. There's no way out of this.
And the burping.Embarrassment at how much implicit guilt he revealed by his telling belching reaction. How can I explain that away?
I’m having difficulty with the question.Imagining how he will respond to a question on the stand, how he will evade future questioning. Is it still possible?
What the hell did I do?Realizing and feeling instant remorse for everything he's done. Not just the murders, but basically signing his own death sentence by agreeing to be interviewed. The hubris in believing he would never get caught.
Killed them all, of course.Explicit guilt. Whether it's what he perceives what will be said about him (based on the damning evidence) or finally coming to terms with himself of what he's done. Catharsis.
What I notice that's interesting about this train of thought (which ends abruptly...makes me wonder if anything else was said that's being saved for trial) is that there is no retaliatory thoughts. No animal being cornered mentality. No plans to kill Jarecki or figure out a way out of this scenario. He's almost relieved and accepting of this. He wants this. He wants to be free of all of it.
I guess it's amazing to imagine that stuff like this actually happens. And we'll probably never get the full story or the whole truth. Nobody tells the whole truth. share