I'll Be Gone in the Dark

While I don't share the frustration of those who expected a documentary focused primarily on the Golden State Killer, I do think "I'll Be Gone in the Dark" has problems, despite the many strengths of the series. Liz Garbus is an exceptionally talented filmmaker who has directed several superior documentaries. This is not her best work.

Michelle McNamara is the lead story. As the episodes accumulate it becomes increasingly clear that while smart, passionate and dedicated, she is not especially interesting. We learn about her family, upbringing, blogging, fact gathering, obsession, and drug abuse. Great care is taken not to judge her or question the decisions that led to her death.

Her husband comes across as a well-intentioned enabler, woefully out of touch with changes in McNamara's health. Viewers are left to wonder how much child rearing was left to a nanny we never meet. When McNamara's sister shares that she ordered a full toxicology, which revealed fentanyl from black market drugs, the implications are left hanging.

We never learn what shape the incomplete draft of the book was in, or the extent of the revisions and additions. Much more interesting are the interviews with survivors of the GSK. The honest reflections and painful revelations say more about the vast harm done by the murderer/rapist than anything we learn about McNamara. They were brave to share. Their stories are chilling. They live with pain that never really goes away.

McNamara did not solve the case. In some ways, she became another victim of the GSK. The film casts her in as favorable a light as is possible, yet the real heroes are the dedicated law enforcement officers (some retired), and the courageous survivors. The advancement of DNA testing, along with a growing database, was essential to bringing long delayed justice to become a reality. There were many victims of the GSK. The brave survivors are the true heart of the series. Tragically, McNamara was a victim of her own making.

This is simply excellent documentary filmmaking. I'm very familiar with the EAR/ONS (Golden Stare Killer) case having studied it on my own for many years. Of course, I'm ecstatic with the arrest of a suspect (leaving name out since he's not convicted) as I'm sure Michelle would be too. The first episode really hit home because I know what it's like to spend hour after hour day after day obsessed with amateur detective work. You sometimes wonder if you're having any impact at all and are often mocked for trying to shed light into places where it's never landed before. Michelle's work proved that amateur slueuthing can make a difference in subtle and important ways. Would the case have been solved without her contributions? Maybe, even probably, but that's not really the point. Her work demonstrates that the victims in these terrible crimes do matter, no matter how long the cases remain unsolved. The victims matter to her and to all of those who strive to solve these mysteries, and it's that fact that keeps amateur detectives motivated to the point of obsession and NOT some morbid fascination with human tragedy. I said all of the above because I feel the filmmakers have done an excellent job capturing the real motivations for people like Michelle McNamara and all other armchair detectives. Since the subject matter is both the Golden State Killer case and Michelle McNamara's obsession with it, it's much more nuanced than a more traditional true-crime documentary where the subjects are generally comprised of police officers, the subject of their investigation, and, on occasion, surviving victims and family members. 'I'll Be Gone in the Dark' functions on all of those levels too but also goes deeper by using a non-traditional protagonist. The filmmakers deserve kudos for utilizing this unique angle, and in the first episode they've done an excellent job of setting up the the characters and the conflict of the documentary. If the remaining episodes are on par with the first, this documentary series will easily score an 8/10. (Note: I am not affiliated with the filmmakers, Michelle McNamara, or her estate in any way. The above review reflects my unbiased opinion of this documentary. Rest in peace Michelle.)

This series is advertised as being a true cime story about the Golden State Killer. Very quickly in the first episode, you feel like it's rather an advert for Michelle McNamarra's blog, podcast and book. The blog's URL is repeated multiple times like these bad adverts for car insurance and we're told by various people how great Michelle is and how great her book is going to be. A lot of time is spent explaining how Michelle got interested in the case, how she investigated it, how she got access to evidence and sources, her thoughts and theories and how she wrote about it all. Is this just a badly disguised tribute to Michelle from her family and friends? If you stick with it, you do end up hearing from the victims and their story, and how the GSK operated but it does take a while. The episodes though are often a jumble of bits which don't seem to have a particular order or flow to them. You don't feel like you are progressing through time or through an investigation. It's more like listening to someone remembering parts of Michelle's life story in random order until you reach the point when the crimes themselves are discussed. This makes it difficult to get into and at times quite boring. Had they stuck to talking about the crimes, victims and investigations/evidence, it would have been a 2 (perhaps 3) episodes series but interesting throughout.

Interesting, thrilling documentary which glues one to the screen. Having said, details and ideas keep being repeated with lengthy and sometimes irrelevant interviews. Could have easily cut down into four-five episodes.

As others have noted, this series is as much about Michelle McNamara as it is about the California rapes and murders. McNamara's story --- a sad but unremarkable descent into obsession and addiction --- is simply not interesting enough to justify the extended treatment it gets. The series is on surer footing when its focus shifts to the crimes and, in particular, to the victims of those crimes.