Connect with us

Entertainment

In 'The Jinx — Part Two' finale, Andrew Jarecki says Robert Durst was enabled by wife and siblings

Published

on

In 'The Jinx — Part Two' finale, Andrew Jarecki says Robert Durst was enabled by wife and siblings

Filmmaker Andrew Jarecki has spent much of the last 20 years thinking about Robert Durst, the notorious real estate heir who was suspected in multiple murders but managed to evade justice until the very end of his life.

Jarecki’s Emmy-winning 2015 docuseries, “The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst,” thrust Durst into the spotlight by revisiting the mysterious deaths to which he was linked: the 1982 disappearance of Durst’s first wife, Kathie McCormack Durst; the murder of his best friend, Los Angeles writer Susan Berman, in 2000; and the grisly killing and dismemberment of his elderly neighbor, Morris Black, in 2001. And it famously led to Durst’s arrest in New Orleans the day before the broadcast of the explosive yet controversial finale in which he muttered, “killed them all, of course” to himself while in the bathroom.

In “The Jinx — Part Two,” a six-episode follow-up that concluded Sunday on HBO and is available to stream on Max, Jarecki looks at the dramatic events that have unfolded since Durst’s quasi-confession aired on national television and triggered a craze for high-end true-crime documentaries. This time around, the focus is less on Durst and his damaged psychology and more on the circle of friends and confidantes who helped him along the way.

“When we were making the first ‘Jinx,’ we would say, ‘How do you kill three people over 30 years and get away with it? It takes a village,’” said Jarecki, in a windowless editing suite in Chelsea, where he was joined by executive producer Zac Stuart-Pontier, who after 15 years in “The Jinx” world has a nearly instant recall of all things Durst-related. The conversation, which was scheduled for a half-hour, instead stretched to 90 minutes, an indication that the documentarians are nowhere near finished talking about Durst, who died in 2022 — or the friends and family who enabled him for years.

Advertisement

“This idea of complicity was for us so fascinating because it broadens the story,” Jarecki said. “Who are these people who see themselves as good, honest, decent people and don’t see themselves as accomplices in anything?”

Sunday’s finale, fittingly titled “It Takes a Village,” takes a critical look at the people who understood Durst — and what he was capable of — better than anyone: his siblings, Wendy, Douglas and Thomas; and his second wife and heir, Debrah Lee Charatan, who did not sit for an interview but is present in the series through video depositions and often riveting prison phone calls with her husband. The series portrays her as a shrewd opportunist, more consigliere than spouse, who helped Durst safeguard his fortune through numerous legal battles, used his wealth to amass a real estate empire of her own, and is now fighting a wrongful-death lawsuit from Kathie’s family, the McCormacks.

Robert Durst and his friend Susan Berman, who was killed in 2000.

(HBO)

Advertisement

“This is a person who’s really played the long game,” said Jarecki, whose 2010 feature film “All Good Things” was inspired by Durst — and led to his participation in “The Jinx.”

The finale recounts the history of Charatan’s relationship with Durst, which began in the late 1980s, when she was newly divorced and freshly bankrupt, and he was a wealthy eccentric rumored to have killed his first wife. The couple married in a secret ceremony in 2000, shortly after authorities in Westchester County, N.Y., reopened the investigation into Kathie’s disappearance — and days before Berman was shot in the head.

The series concludes with a dramatization of a woman resembling Charatan driving a luxury convertible down a scenic road and arriving at a palatial waterfront estate. It is intercut with deposition footage of the real Charatan, who is interrogated about sticking by Durst as he was accused of horrific things. “Was it worth it?” asks an attorney for the McCormack family. “I think so,” she says.

“I think she thought, ‘Well, I’m gonna make a calculation, that there’s so much value in staying connected to this person [Durst], because he’s going to die with 100-plus million dollars,’” Jarecki said. “By the way, it was hard, what she did — managing Bob for all those years. That was not easy. He’s an incredibly time-consuming, infuriating partner.” (Exhibit A: In one tense video call shown in the series, Durst clashes with Charatan over payment of his legal fees, threatening to write her out of his will. She skillfully walks him back.)

Charatan’s relationship with Durst came under more scrutiny following his death in January 2022. Because of a legal technicality in California, his conviction for Berman’s murder was abated — essentially vacated. This triggered the McCormack family to file a $100-million wrongful-death lawsuit against Durst’s estate, which is controlled by Charatan.

Advertisement
Andrew Jarecki, left, and Robert Durst standing on a street near a planter.

Director Andrew Jarecki, left, and Robert Durst.

(HBO)

Charatan sat for a deposition in the case. In portions that appear in “The Jinx,” she admits to living with another man throughout her marriage to Durst and says that she “respects” the jury’s guilty verdict in the Berman case. However, she says she does not believe that Durst killed Kathie.

“She has had so many chances to redeem herself, including potentially being in the show,” Jarecki said. “She could have explained why she was with him. She could have explained what she really believed.” The filmmaker said he tried to get Charatan to participate in the documentary, even going to dinner with her multiple times to plead his case, but was not successful.

“It Takes a Village” also considers the role played by Durst’s estranged younger siblings, who in deposition testimony say that they feared their older brother and even suspected he may have had something to do with Kathie’s disappearance but did little to assist the investigation at the time. They also reportedly never reached out to the McCormack family to offer support or condolences.

Advertisement

In audio testimony, Thomas Durst says that his siblings Wendy and Douglas never mentioned Kathie again after the disappearance: “It was like she had become a non-person and I decided, ‘You know what? Kathie is not just missing. Kathie’s dead, and Bob is responsible — but I don’t know what I can do.’”

Kathie’s body was never found, and in 2017 she was declared legally dead. Durst was formally charged with her death in 2021, but he died before a trial got underway.

“What would it have cost for them to reach out to Kathie’s family and say: ‘Listen, we didn’t kill Kathie. But boy, we feel terrible about what happened. And we want to make some kind of a contribution for you,’” Jarecki said. “They didn’t have to admit their complicity, but at least it would have been an acknowledgment.”

“The Jinx” also captures the moment when Jarecki receives a phone call informing him that Durst is dead. Though his demise was not exactly surprising — Durst was 78 and had been in failing health for years — it still left him nonplussed, Jarecki said. “He had been in my life for so long, it didn’t feel real that he was going to disappear,” he said. “I didn’t miss him. I didn’t think, ‘Oh, we had these beautiful times together.’ … I just thought, I actually don’t know how I feel about this.”

In the months before his death, Jarecki and Stuart-Pontier said they worked together on numerous drafts of a letter to Durst, pleading with him to come clean about what happened to Kathie. But Durst never revealed what he knew about her fate.

Advertisement

The gist of the letter was that Durst should “just tell people what happened with Kathie,” Jarecki said. “Maybe it was a terrible accident. Whatever it was, even if it’s bad, even if it makes you look terrible … everybody’s going to say, ‘Even though he did some terrible things, before he died he somehow found a way to have a little tiny bit of redemption.’” Jarecki believed that Durst saw himself as fundamentally misunderstood and tried to appeal to that.

A man in a blue polo shirt sitting next to a woman in a pink top.

Jim McCormack, brother of Kathie Durst, and his wife, Sharon McCormack, in “The Jinx — Part Two.”

(HBO)

“One of the reasons why he agreed to talk to me to begin with is that he had applied to get into a co-op building and was rejected,” he said. “And his attitude was like, ‘Oh, I’ve never been convicted of murder. So why are they treating me like a pariah?’”

They decided not to send the letter because “it was inserting us in the story in a way that might alter [it],” said Jarecki, who believes that Durst killed Kathie because she had accomplished so much and thrown into relief how little he’d done despite extraordinary privilege. “Bob is a faker, and Bob knows he’s a faker,” he said. “Kathie comes along and falls in love with him, and at a certain point realizes that he’s a faker. And he’s really humiliated by that.”

Advertisement

The filmmakers began to think about another season of “The Jinx” as they reviewed testimony from conditional witnesses in the Berman case — people like Nick Chavin, the longtime friend turned “secret witness” against Durst. “There’s nothing like friends turning on each other,” Stuart-Pontier said. “That was the first inkling that the people around Bob were going to really play a huge part in the telling of the story going forward.”

“The Jinx — Part Two” makes the case that before Berman became one of Durst’s victims, she was one of his enablers. Perhaps the biggest bombshell of the season is the audiotape of an interview Berman did with journalist Albert Goldman a few days after Kathie’s disappearance, in which she smeared her friend’s character and planted the idea that she’d been the victim of a robbery — all of which suggested she was helping Durst cover up a crime.

The theme of complicity is, if anything, more relevant in the current political climate than it was when Season 1 of “The Jinx” aired in 2015, just a few months before Donald Trump announced he was running for president. It’s difficult to watch Season 2 without thinking about the biographical similarities between Trump and Durst, controversial scions of powerful New York real estate dynasties known for acting with impunity.

“All of this stuff is very current,” Jarecki said, noting how Republicans who once denounced Trump have since fallen back in line. “We’ve talked about why ‘The Jinx’ matters now. But it just feels like this idea of complicity is so important to what’s happening.”

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: Here comes “THE BRIDE!”, audacious and wild – Rue Morgue

Published

on

Movie Review: Here comes “THE BRIDE!”, audacious and wild – Rue Morgue

That’s both a promise and a challenge she delivers, since what follows may rub some viewers the wrong way. Yet Gyllenhaal’s full-throttle commitment to her vision is compelling in and of itself, and she has marshalled an absolutely smashing-looking and -sounding production. The story proper begins in 1936 Chicago, which, like everything and everyplace else in the movie, has been luminously shot by cinematographer Lawrence Sher and sumptuously conjured by production designer Karen Murphy. Her involvement is appropriate given that her previous credits include Bradley Cooper’s A STAR IS BORN and Baz Luhrmann’s ELVIS, since among other things, THE BRIDE! is a nostalgic musical. Its Frankenstein (Christian Bale), who has taken the name of his maker, is obsessed with big-screen tuners, and imagines himself in elaborate song-and-dance numbers. (Considering the reception to JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX, one must applaud the daring of Warner Bros. for greenlighting another expensive film in which a tormented protagonist has that kind of fantasy life.)

THE BRIDE! may be revisionist on many levels, but its characterization of its “monster” holds true to past screen incarnations from Karloff’s to Elordi’s: His scarred appearance masks a lonely soul who desires companionship. Frankenstein has arrived in Chicago to seek out Dr. Cornelia Euphronious (Annette Bening), correctly believing she has the scientific know-how to create an appropriate mate for him. Rather than piece one together, Dr. Euphronious resurrects the corpse of Ida (Jessie Buckley), whose consorting with underworld types led to her brutal death. Previously chafing against the man’s world she inhabited in life, she becomes even more defiant and unruly as a revenant, apparently possessed by the spirit of Shelley herself, declaiming in free-associative sentences and quoting rebellious literature.

Buckley, currently an Oscar favorite for her very different literary-inspired role in HAMNET, tears into the role of the Bride (who now goes by the name Penny) with invigorating abandon that bursts off the screen. Unsure of her identity yet overflowing with self-confident bravado, she’s the opposite of the sensitive “Frank,” but they’re united by the world that stands against them. That becomes literal when a violent incident sends them on the lam, road-tripping to New York City and beyond, on a trail inspired by the films of Ronnie Reed (Jake Gyllenhaal), Frank’s favorite song-and-dance-man star.

With THE BRIDE!, Gyllenhaal has made a film that’s at once her very own and a feverish homage to all sorts of cinema past and present. It’s a horror story, a lovers-on-the-run movie, a crime thriller, a musical and more, and historical fealty be damned if it makes for a good scene (as when Penny and Frank sneak into a 3D movie over a decade before such features became popular). In-references are everywhere: It might just be a coincidence that the couple’s travels take them past Fredonia, NY (cf. “Freedonia” in the Marx Brothers’ DUCK SOUP), but it’s certainly no accident that the former Ida is targeted by a crime boss named Lupino, referencing the actress and pioneering filmmaker whose works included noirs and women’s-issues stories. Penny’s exploits lead legions of admiring women to adopt her look and anarchic attitude, echoing the first JOKER (while a headline calls them “Twisted Sisters”), and the use of one Irving Berlin song in a Frankensteinian context immediately recalls a classic comedic take on the property.

Whether the audience should be put in mind of a spoof at a key point in a film with different goals is another matter. At times like these, Gyllenhaal’s pastiche ambitions overtake emotional investment in the story. As strong as the two lead performances are (Bale is quite moving, conveying a great deal of soul from behind his extensive prosthetics), it’s easier to feel for them in individual scenes than during the entire course of the just-over-two-hour running time. The diversions can be entertaining, to be sure, but they also result in an uncertainty of tone. The dissonance continues straight through to the end, where the filmmaker’s choice of closing-credits song once again suggests we’re not supposed to take all this too seriously.

Advertisement

There’s nonetheless much to admire and enjoy about THE BRIDE!, and this kind of risk-taking by a major studio is always to be encouraged (especially considering that we’ll see how long that lasts at Warner Bros. once Paramount takes it over). Beyond the terrific work by the aforementioned actors, there’s fine support from Peter Sarsgaard and Penelope Cruz as detectives on Penny and Frank’s heels, with Sandy Powell’s lavish costumes and Hildur Guðnadóttir’s rich, varied score vital to fashioning this fully imagined world. Kudos also to makeup and prosthetics designer Nadia Stacey and to Chris Gallaher and Scott Stoddard, who did those honors on Frank, for their visceral, evocative work. Uneven as it may be, THE BRIDE! is also as alive! as any film you’ll likely see this year.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

These 3 Disney movie songs, animated with sign language, are headed to Disney+

Published

on

These 3 Disney movie songs, animated with sign language, are headed to Disney+

New animated sequences of songs from “Encanto,” “Frozen 2” and “Moana 2” are headed to Disney+.

Disney Animation announced Wednesday that “Songs in Sign Language,” comprised of three musical numbers from recent Disney movies newly reimagined in American Sign Language, will debut April 27 in honor of National Deaf History Month.

Directed by veteran Disney animator Hyrum Osmond, “Songs in Sign Language” will feature fresh animation for “Encanto’s” chart-topper “We Don’t Talk About Bruno,” “Frozen 2’s” poignant ballad “The Next Right Thing” and “Moana 2’s” anthem “Beyond.” Produced by Heather Blodget and Christina Chen, the new versions of these songs were created in collaboration with L.A.-based theater company Deaf West Theatre.

“In the majority of cases, we created entirely new animation,” Osmond said in a press statement. “There were a lot of adjustments that we had to do within the animation to be true to the original intention.”

Deaf West Theatre artistic director DJ Kurs, sign language reference choreographer Catalene Sacchetti and a group of eight performers from Deaf West worked together to craft and choreograph the ASL version of the musical numbers for “Songs in Sign Language.” The creatives focused on being true to the concepts and emotion of the songs rather than direct translations of the lyrics.

Advertisement

Kurs said his team jumped at the chance to collaborate and integrate ASL into “the fabric of Disney storytelling.”

“Disney stories are the universal language of childhood,” Kurs said in a statement. “The chance to bring our language into that world was a historic opportunity to reach a global audience. Working on this project was very emotional. For so long, we have known and loved the artistic medium of Disney Animation. Here, the art form was adapting to us. I hope this unlocks possibilities in the minds and hearts of Deaf children, and that this all leads to more down the road.”

Osmond, who led a team of more than 20 animators on this project, said animation was the perfect medium to showcase sign language, which he described as “one of the most beautiful ways of communication on Earth.” The director, whose father is deaf, also saw this project as an opportunity to connect with the Deaf community.

“Growing up, I never learned sign language, and that barrier prevented me from really connecting with my dad,” Osmond said. “This reimagining of Disney Animation musical numbers helps bring down barriers and allows us to connect in a special way with our audiences in the Deaf community. I’m grateful that the Studio got behind making something so impactful.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Maxime Giroux – ‘In Cold Light’ movie review

Published

on

Maxime Giroux – ‘In Cold Light’ movie review

Maxime Giroux – ‘In Cold Light’

Advertisement

The action is relentless in the complex thriller In Cold Light, a tense combination of crime and fugitive tale and family drama. It is the third feature and first English language film by Maxime Giroux, best known for a very different kind of film, the critically acclaimed 2014 drama Felix & Meira.

The tension and high energy of In Cold Light almost overwhelm the film, but are relieved, barely, by moments of character development and introspection that keep the audience pulling for the restrained and outwardly cold main character. 

Speaking at the film’s Canadian premiere, director Giroux admitted he found creating an action film a challenge. Part of his approach was using very minimal dialogue, especially for the central character, letting the action speak for itself, and allowing silence to intensify suspense. Giroux has said he likes the lack of dialogue and speaks highly of the importance of silence in cinema; he prefers using “physical aspects of communication” in his films. 

Young Ava Bly (Maika Monroe) is a competent and businesslike drug dealer, working in partnership with her brother Tom (Jesse Irving) and a small team. As the film begins, Ava has just been released from a brief prison sentence. She is hoping to return to her former position, but her brother’s associates consider her a risk due to her recent incarceration. While she works to re-establish herself, a shocking encounter with a corrupt police officer sends Ava’s life into chaos and forces her to go on the run.

Ava’s fugitive experience introduces a new character, to whom Ava turns for help: her father, Will Bly, played by Troy Kotsur, known for his excellent performance in CODA. Their first interaction is handled in a fascinating way, as Will is deaf and the two communicate through sign language. This, of course, provides another form of the silent interaction the director prefers; he explained that much of the father-daughter interaction was rewritten with the actor in mind. Their conflict is nicely expressed through a scene in which their initial conversation is intermittently cut off by a faulty light which goes out periodically, making communication through sign momentarily impossible, nicely expressing the rift between father and daughter. 

Advertisement

As Ava continues to evade danger, her escape becomes complicated by new information, placing her in a painful dilemma. We gradually learn more about Ava, her background, and her character through occasional flashbacks and glimpses of her dreams. The plot becomes more complex and more poignant, and gains features of a mystery as well as an action tale, as she is pressed to choose from among equally unacceptable alternatives.

The climax of her efforts to protect both herself and those close to her comes to a head as she meets with the director of a rival drug gang. Veteran actress Helen Hunt is perfect in the minor but significant role of Claire, the rival drug lord, who plays odd mind games with Ava in an intriguing psychological fencing match. It’s an unusual scene, in which Ava’s personality is made clearer, and Claire’s understated dominance and casual speech do not quite conceal the threat she represents. 

The frantic pace and emotional turmoil are enhanced by the camera work, which tends to focus tightly on Ava, and by a harsh, minimal musical score that sets the tone without distracting from the action. Giroux chose to shoot the film in Super 60; he describes digital as “too perfect” for the look he was going for, and since “Ava is rough,” the film portrays her better. The director describes the entire movie as “rough,” in fact, and deliberately chose a dark, washed-out look for much of the footage, occasionally using light and colour, in the form of fireworks, lightning, or a colourful carnival, to both relieve and emphasise the darkness. 

The dynamic, intense story holds the attention in spite of the lengthy, sometimes repetitive chase scenes and subdued dialogue. Ava’s predicament, and the difficult decisions she is forced to make, are made surprisingly relatable, from the initial disaster that starts the action to the surprising flash-forward that concludes the film, on as high a note as the situation could allow. Fans of action movies will definitely enjoy this one.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending