Los Angeles, California – HBO’s groundbreaking true-crime docuseries, “The Jinx,” aired nine years ago and contributed significantly to the rise in popularity of true-crime content. Alongside Netflix’s “Making a Murderer” and the podcast “Serial,” “The Jinx” stood out due to the involvement of the enigmatic subject, Robert Durst, a suspect in various heinous crimes.
Durst’s captivating interviews with director Andrew Jarecki, where he discussed alleged crimes, provided a unique allure to the series. The show culminated in a hot-mic incident that Jarecki treated as a potential confession, leading to Durst’s arrest for murder based on the evidence uncovered in the documentary. The follow-up series delves into Durst’s trial and the events leading up to it but lacks the same impact as the original without Durst’s participation.
The second chapter of “The Jinx” includes footage of a viewing party held by the filmmakers in 2015, where the family of Durst’s suspected victim seemed relieved at the supposed confession played during the finale. However, the omission of certain details raises ethical questions about the filmmakers’ approach. The lack of Durst’s presence in the new episodes leaves the series struggling to deliver compelling revelations, relying heavily on reenactments that fail to engage viewers.
While the third episode offers some additional insight into the backstory, “The Jinx – Part Two” highlights the unique appeal of the original series – Durst’s captivating presence as an interview subject. The new episodes feel like a mystery show in search of a mystery, lacking the enthralling aspects that made the original so intriguing.
As the final two episodes remain undisclosed to critics, there is potential for new revelations to emerge. However, the current state of the series portrays it as a true crime narrative with limited truths to unveil. Overall, the absence of Durst’s participation in “The Jinx – Part Two” leaves the audience longing for the intriguing dynamics that characterized the original series.