Imagine a world where true crime stories aren't just chilling tales of horror, but also spark heated debates about justice, morality, and who really deserves the label of 'monster.' That's the electrifying territory Ryan Murphy has been exploring with his Netflix 'Monster' series, and it's got viewers hooked—but why hasn't he tackled the shocking case of Luigi Mangione yet? Buckle up, because this is the story that could redefine the franchise, and it's one most people are dying to see unfold.
Ryan Murphy's 'Monster' anthology has skyrocketed Netflix's viewership with its unflinching dives into real-life atrocities, blending gruesome details with psychological depth. The inaugural season kicked things off by chronicling the horrific deeds of serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer, painting a picture of a man whose actions left a trail of devastation. Then, it took a fascinating turn with the second season, focusing on Lyle and Erik Menéndez, the brothers who killed their parents amid allegations of severe abuse. This shift raised a provocative question: in a story of familial violence, who exactly qualifies as the monster—the abusers or the abused?
Fast-forward to 2024, and Murphy circled back to the serial killer genre with 'Monster: The Ed Gein Story,' delving into the macabre life of Ed Gein. This real-life figure didn't just commit murders; he also desecrated graves and stole bodies, inspiring classics like Tobe Hooper's 'The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.' Horror enthusiasts are buzzing about this installment, drawn in by its ties to iconic films. But if Murphy aims to shatter streaming records, the logical next chapter might center on Luigi Mangione, the young man accused of assassinating UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in broad daylight. And this is the part most people miss—why isn't it happening?
Spoiler alert: it's not on the horizon just yet. In a candid chat with Variety, Murphy revealed that Mangione simply wasn't feasible for season three because he's still shrouded in mystery. 'We know virtually nothing about him,' Murphy explained. 'There was no material to build a script on—we lacked the details. Perhaps the trial will uncover more.' Still, he hinted that Mangione's case is tucked away in his 'maybe someday' folder, leaving the door ajar for future possibilities.
Even though Murphy has no immediate plans for a Mangione episode, it's harmless—and intriguing—to ponder what such a season could look like. Let's break it down step by step, starting with the basics of Mangione's life, which remains largely untold.
Luigi Mangione entered the world on May 6, 1998, and from what we can piece together, he enjoyed a privileged and secure upbringing. He excelled academically, graduating as valedictorian from his Baltimore high school, and went on to earn both bachelor's and master's degrees in science and engineering from the prestigious University of Pennsylvania. His studies centered on robotics, and he even dipped his toes into the video game world, contributing to titles like 'Civilization VI.' Along the way, he developed a keen interest in artificial intelligence. Professionally, he worked as a coder, but he reportedly found the job monotonous and unfulfilling.
So, what could drive a seemingly brilliant and accomplished individual to allegedly commit such a violent act? The answer lies in a document he created: a manifesto. For those new to the term, a manifesto is essentially a public declaration of beliefs or intentions, often outlining grievances and calls for change. Mangione's manifesto was a scathing indictment of the U.S. health insurance system, blasting it as corrupt and exploitative. He wrote, 'Frankly, these parasites had it coming,' expressing outrage that the world's wealthiest nation ranks around 42nd globally in life expectancy. He argued that insurance giants have driven up healthcare costs so exorbitantly that countless people can't afford essential treatments, leading to preventable deaths.
Of course, resorting to a public shooting isn't a justifiable solution to these systemic issues—it's a criminal act that harms society. But here's where it gets controversial: a series on Mangione could captivate audiences precisely because he appears to have been an intelligent, promising young man. Some speculate that personal health struggles, like a spinal fusion surgery following a surfing mishap, might have fueled his desperation. Yet, his manifesto suggests his actions stemmed from a broader frustration—he believed these corporate leaders would never be held accountable for the lives lost through denied claims. Mangione's deed was undeniably monstrous, but echoing the Menéndez season, does this narrative reveal multiple villains? Are the executives profiting from a broken system equally culpable, or is that a dangerous oversimplification?
To illustrate, think about how debates rage over corporate accountability in industries like healthcare. For example, when pharmaceutical companies hike drug prices, leading to tragedies, are they 'monsters' in a different sense? This case forces us to confront uncomfortable truths about inequality and justice. What do you think—does Mangione's story deserve the spotlight, or would it glorify violence? Is there room to sympathize with his motives without excusing his actions? Share your thoughts in the comments; I'd love to hear if you agree, disagree, or see a counterpoint I haven't considered. After all, true crime isn't just about the crimes—it's about the conversations they ignite.
