Dirty John tells a terrifying story with a lot of melodrama and not much else
TV Features Dirty JohnNote to readers: Dirty John is about emotional and financial domestic violence.
“Dirty John” Meehan is a man of utter evil, of no remorse, a bad guy who knows how to play a long con. He’s charming and persuasive, until he’s not. He’s a grifter and a con man who targets wealthy women, isolates them from their families, and finds ways to siphon off their wealth. He’d been in and out of jail on various charges involving weapons, drugs, stalking, and harassment. He had no job but wore faded scrubs and called himself an anesthesiologist. He had no income and no nice clothes, but had explanations for everything, and enough swagger to be convincing. He met Debra Newell, a wealthy interior designer and businesswoman, over a dating app the day after he left prison, and persuaded her to marry him only a two months into their relationship. He installed security cameras to watch her every move, isolated her from her family, and took her money.
Dirty John, currently airing as a limited miniseries on Bravo, wants to be a prestige TV drama, but it can’t reckon with that lurid narrative. The podcast was a carefully researched and reported story, layering interviews and background information, letting an outrageous story speak for itself. Christopher Goffard wrote the series of articles in the L.A. Times and also hosted the Wondery podcast, which includes interviews with Debra Newell, an Orange County interior designer; her two grown daughters, Jacquelyn and Terra; her nephew, Shad, and mom, Arlane; and a handful of other extended family members and law enforcement agents. There’s no titular Dirty John in earshot, though listeners don’t know until the last episode whether he’s in prison, dead, or just out of the picture. In the deluge of true-crime podcasts, Dirty John stood out because the story is so shocking, particularly in its final twist (which we won’t reveal here.) Goffard does a fine job of reporting and narrating the podcast, though to its detriment, he doesn’t engage with some of the bigger questions the narrative raises. Consuming true-crime as pop culture already requires some private moral negotiation of finding entertainment in somebody else’s trauma; when that trauma isn’t framed within a larger purpose, it’s a slippery slope into popping popcorn while watching a barely fictionalized man prey on a woman and her family.
And that’s how we find ourselves in front of the TV watching Dirty John, which heats up a real-life story that needs no more fuel. That might have worked—if the events hadn’t happened so recently, maybe, or if the show was more heavily fictionalized—but it hits so many of the actual events note for note, uses many of the same names, and completely disengages from the violence and terror that form the bones of the real narrative. Dirty John Meehan is a more malicious and masterful criminal than most, and Debra Newell has more money and style than most, but the core of the emotional abuse is sadly ordinary. As played by Eric Bana, Dirty John goes through motions of violent outbursts and apologies without a convincingly evil center. We know he’s a bad guy because Debra’s older daughter, renamed Veronica in the TV show, keeps telling us so. There might have been some pleasure to glean from a miniseries like this, an enjoyably salacious story—something like Desperate Housewives, which creator Alexandra Cunningham also produced. But the show extricates itself from the true story it’s telling; instead of digging into it, it dresses it up in gold-sequin dresses and stilettos.
Juno Temple plays that sour-faced older daughter, a flattened caricature of bratty rich-kid entitlement. Her actions, we’re told, are rooted in love and concern, but it’s hard to find genuine warmth beneath Veronica’s cool stereotype. Veronica (Jacquelyn in the podcast and real life) is ostensibly one of the most interesting personalities: Her Valley Girl accent belies outspokenness and determination, and she’s immediately convinced, before there’s much actual evidence, that John is out to get her mom’s money. Veronica turns her skepticism into action, doing some actual detective work to figure out what John’s M.O. is. But she’s written as an outspoken bitch, not a woman with spot-on intuition whose deep concern can manifest as being a difficult daughter.
Julia Garner plays Terra, Debra’s sweet-voiced, zombie-obsessed daughter. Garner, who did excellent work in The Americans, isn’t given enough room to establish Terra’s motivations, and in the early episodes, the script mechanically walks her through a few big plot points. Debra and her two daughters form a compelling relationship that the miniseries glosses over—an oversight that diminishes the abuse Dirty John fractures them with.
Steadying this ship is Connie Britton, who embraces the contradictions in Debra Newell: she’s a successful, wealthy businesswoman; a confident interior designer; a naive and trusting woman who just wants a relationship with “a good man.” She’s the one character whose complexities are given more shape on the screen than in the podcast, where Newell could come across so naive and suggestible that it was easy for listeners to fall into the trap of victim-blaming, questioning how she never saw this coming. Britton plays that wide-eyed innocence with increasing worry, exposing insecurities in Newell’s personal life and balancing them against her professional confidence. In Britton’s hands, Newell isn’t dumb, she’s a woman open to love, full of vulnerability and optimism. Sure, it’s worrying that Dirty John took $80,000 or $90,000 of her cash without telling her, but she loves and trusts him, and if he said he invested it, why wouldn’t she believe him? Plus, her mother, Arlane—a complete waste of Jean Smart, who they couldn’t even get a good wig for—loves him.
There are plenty of plot points that are re-created according to Goffard’s reporting, but without the context the podcast provides. The TV show, in its first three episodes, mentions Debra’s sister, who was killed by her own husband decades earlier. Arlane, moved by her faith, forgave him within hours of the murder. That’s a rich background for Debra’s current abusive relationship, but it’s lightly explained with some clunky dialogue while Eric Bana angrily eats a sandwich. That’s a neat summary for the problems of this adaptation as a whole: Instead of digging into characters and context, Dirty John the TV show bobbles to the surface, clumsily pulling out some exposition as needed.
The conclusion of the podcast (and real-life events, and presumably the TV show) is gutting, and isn’t very far outside the realm of nighttime soaps based entirely in fiction. The podcast was at least careful, through extensive interviews and sound clips, to remind listeners that Dirty John was borne of the real world, not something that could comfortably air alongside Vanderpump Rules or Real Housewives. Connie Britton brings strength and humanity to her performance, but even that’s not enough to compensate for this dramatic mishandling.
52 Comments
So we have trigger warnings now for “emotional and financial domestic violence”, which as far as I can tell means nobody was actually hit?The world just keeps getting sillier by the day.
I gotta say I never thought I’d see trigger warnings on AV Club of all places. How far we’ve comeDon’t see another success story of turning a podcast into a series like Homecoming with this one
You can get PTSD from this kind of shit. Graphic and believable threats of violence, emotional manipulation, bankrupting people, black mail, punching walls, throwing things, etc. If someone has gone through that they may not want to revisit the topic. I have to be honest – I don’t get why someone can’t just push back or walk away from this kind of situation. But it isn’t about me getting it. I’ve known way too many people I love and respect who have experienced emotionally abusive relationships and have suffered consequences for years afterwards. Smart, capable, strong people. I’m assuming you don’t know anyone who has gone through it, in which case you’re very lucky and I hope your luck and the luck of your friends and family stays that way. BTW – at risk of spoiling the show, things eventually escalate. Check out the podcast, it was extremely well done and may help give you some perspective.
You can get PTSD from having your hand chopped off or seeing a guy get shot, but I’d also be very surprised if they were given warnings.
I’d be surprised as well. These things are far less common. Something like 1 in 4 women are victims of sexual assault and/or physical assault from an intimate partner in their lifetimes. How many women do you know?But maybe all types of violence should get a warning. Would you prefer that? Or is there something about these warnings that bothers you? Do you feel like a warning like this takes something away from you? I’m not trying to attack you, I’m legitimately curious. I personally enjoy all sorts of entertainment. Some of it is violent. Most of it comes with no warning. I’ve led a pretty charmed life so most violence exists in a fantasy realm for me – I’ve never been raped, or trapped in an abusive relationship, or shot, or had a hand chopped off. I do know if they started putting more warning labels on this stuff it wouldn’t detract from my enjoyment at all.
I don’t think the warnings take anything away from me, it just seems odd to preface the article with them. It definitely makes sense for their to be websites that catalog this stuff, so people who have issues with it can find out if there’ll be a problem, but putting it at the front of the article feels a bit like if a restaurant review began with an allergy warning.
But it isn’t about me getting it.
Thank you for getting this concept and expressing it.
He just doesn’t want people being coddled! I agree, as a straight white man who grew up in a stable family environment in a first world country I was never coddled so no other person should be either…
I am grateful that they do now. I had a friend bring his partner to Colossal on the review score it got from AV Club. While the movie is good, it does have some disturbing depictions of domestic abuse that they were not expecting. His partner started crying and they had to leave the theater early.Domestic abuse is extremely traumatic even if there was no physical violence, and I think having a warning about that to make someone aware the content might bring up that trauma is worth it even if that warning offends your delicate sensitivity to being kind to others and aware of other’s emotions.
people are working to get radio stations to ban “Baby, It’s Cold Outside” in light of the #MeToo movement… while ironically ignoring the lyrics of many of today’s popular songs which are much worse than anything that song could say. Welcome to 2018.
We’ve been providing these kinds of notes to readers for years — it’s an easy way to give a head’s-up to readers who might want it, and it doesn’t interfere with the review itself, or with readers who just want to jump right in. It’s a misconception that partner abuse is only physical, and for anybody who is or has been in an abusive relationship, it’s not silly at all.
With respect, I don’t believe emotional abuse, and especially “financial” abuse, warrant a trigger warning. For something like graphic violence or sexual assault I can see the utility of a TW as those are genuinely horrible, life-changing events and I understand how it would be hurtful to encounter those things without any forewarning. But emotional abuse, while it certainly is bad, is not as serious as physical or sexual abuse. It’s also way more common, I’m willing to bet that most of us have dealt with emotional abuse at some point in our lives, and I find the belief that it generates the same kind of trauma that rape or physical violence do to be incorrect and frankly a little disrespectful to the people who have gone through far more horrible situations.
Secondly, moving trigger warnings into these broader categories makes me worried that pretty much every form of pop culture will need them in the future. Guardians of the Galaxy 2 had emotional manipulation in it, does that need a warning before we discuss it? Springsteen’s Tunnel of Love is full of broken relationships, heartbreak, and cheating; does that count?The world is unfortunately a terrible place where disturbing things happen. Because of that sad fact I understand the value of showing kindness and consideration to the people who need it most, but that kindness can be taken too far and turned into a coddling that keeps people from learning how to handle the unpleasantness that is unfortunately a guaranteed part of life.
What qualifies you to determine what type of abuse is the worst abuse? How did you earn your position of deciding what people should be warned about? Are you going to tell us what problems cause you stress so we can decide if they are silly or not and let you know?
By that logic, since anybody can be traumatized by any thing and it’s all equally relevant we need to place trigger warnings on every single thing we do and say since it would be cruel and heartless for anybody to be exposed to something they find traumatic.
The idea that content notices is preventing a generation of milk babies from being the hard-nosed commandos this world demands is the crustiest old Andy Rooney bullshit I’ve heard in a long while.
Thanks for the straw man argument. I never said avoiding traumatic issues made people weak, but like it or not there is some research suggesting that confronting the source of psychological trauma may be more beneficial than avoiding it.
you literally got an example of why a trigger warning like this is useful above.
also – it’s just a piece of information. you are literally not affected by this. sure, we can call it “content warning” or whatever, but who cares. grow up and learn some empathy.
That’s wonderful that you don’t have these kinds of traumas in your background. Not everybody is so fortunate, and it costs us nothing to include a brief note about what to expect from a harrowing true-life story like Dirty John. And it costs readers like you nothing to skip over them; we should all be so lucky.
My father regularly mocked me when I was unemployed and often told me that he hoped I wouldn’t get a real job so that he could laugh when I became a “ditch digger.” He also forced me into getting loans I didn’t want and then threatened to cut off my financial support if I didn’t follow his orders. When I blew out my knee in an accident the first thing he asked was how much my treatment was going to cost him. Does that count as “emotional and financial domestic violence” and give me the victim cred I supposedly need to be qualified to discuss this issue?
My entire point is that this is such a broad, vague definition of “traumatic” that it applies to nearly everyone. So either we have to put trigger warnings on pretty much everything because human beings are capable of being terrible to each other in a truly infinite number of ways and it “costs nothing”, or we can recognize that there are a small number of truly despicable things we can give people a heads-up on but trust that people are resilient enough to handle the smaller things on their own.
I find the belief that it generates the same kind of trauma that rape or physical violence do to be incorrect and frankly a little disrespectful to the people who have gone through far more horrible situations. Sympathy is not a zero sum game. You can feel sympathy for someone who has suffered one kind of trauma and also feel sympathy for someone else who has suffered a different kind of trauma. Also, trauma doesn’t exist on a clean continuum.
Meet Woman A. Woman A has always had issues around her image, her self-esteem. She has some depression and anxiety. But she meets a guy who tells her she’s beautiful. She falls in love. And she leanrs as long as she stays in line – does what he wants and says – he’s pretty good to her. But when she misbehaves, he screams at her. Tells her she’s worthless, she’s garbage, she’s a slut and a whore and no one else will ever love her. He isolates her from her friends. He cleans out their shared bank account without explaining why or where the money is going. Sometimes he throws things. He punches holes in walls. He has lots of guns around the house. He coerces her into sex when she doesn’t want it, and kinds of sex she finds degrading and disgusting. He’s threatened to break her jaw when she’s spoken up, he’s told her if her friends or family get involved, he’ll kill them. She is trapped in a relationship with this man for three years. He never lays a hand on her in anger.
Meet Woman B. Woman B is a hard charging professional. She in a high-pressure role at an elite corporation. But she feels like her career is getting derailed. Her boss is constantly flirting with her. Making comments about her appearance. Asking inappropriate questions about her sexual life and relationships. One day he forwards her a “joke” email. The punchline is a graphic cartoon of a woman with large breasts having sex with a dog. This is the third time in the last five years she’s had a supervisor treat her this way, or make a hard pass at her. None of them have ever touched her.
Meet Woman C. Woman C goes to a party with her old buddy, Friend Zone Bob. She suspects Friend Zone Bob has a little crush on her, but she’s made it clear she’s not interested. But they are friends. They go to the party together. She gets drunk. She passes out. She wakes up to Friend Zone Bob having sex with her. She never gave consent. She throws him out. The next morning he emails her to say wow, crazy night, hope I didn’t get carried away. It takes her a year and a half before she can have a normal relationship.
Meet Man D. Man D was a Marine in Iraq. On patrol, his best friend from basic training was walking next to him and stepped on an IED and got his dick and balls blown off. Man D is in several fire fights. He shoots and kills an old woman he is sure – pretty sure – was ferrying munitions from one building to another for insurgents. He eventually joins a counter intelligence unit and interrogates hundreds of civilians. Some of them he threatens. Some of them he makes promises to, promises he knows he can’t keep. He hates doing these things but he does it for the mission, and to protect American lives. One day he learns the family of a long time informant – practically a kid, a kid he’d grown fond of – has been tortured and killed in retaliation for the informant’s collaboration with Man D. On his last day in country,this is what he sees: The camp dogs – local strays – have grown accustomed to approaching the American soldiers for pets and food, and one of the officers is scared insurgents could tape bombs to the dogs. So on Man D’s last day in country, the officer orders all the camp dogs to be shot. Most of the soldiers hate to do this because the’ve been in camp living with these dogs for six months or more. But some of the soldiers take a weird joy in this, and make up the excuse that they can’t waste bullets on this assingment, so they use shovels and the butts of their guns. Man D returns home without a scratch on him. All of these people have some kind of PTSD. All of these people are real – I know them. Who had it worse? Who deserves a warning? Who deserves sympathy? Who deserves more sympathy?
Making the world just a little bit less shitty for folks who’ve had a rough time doesn’t cost us that much. Or do we all just need to toughen up?
well done, my friend, seriously well done. good points and good ways to drive those points to people who might otherwise not have a FUCKING CLUE WHAT THEY”RE COMPLAINING ABOUT ON AN ENTERTAINMENT WEBSITE.Bravo, my new hero today.
But emotional abuse, while it certainly is bad, is not as serious as physical or sexual abuse. It’s also way more common, I’m willing to bet that most of us have dealt with emotional abuse at some point in our lives, and I find the belief that it generates the same kind of trauma that rape or physical violence do to be incorrect and frankly a little disrespectful to the people who have gone through far more horrible situations. And who the hell are you to dictate whose trauma is worse? I take it you’ve never experienced any kind of emotional abuse, in which case you should consider yourself lucky and stop minimizing other people’s suffering. Maybe try learning some empathy.
COUNTERPOINT: Eh, whatever. I don’t need such warnings. I can avoid them.
Kill yourself.
You resent the trigger warning yet you believe it is only abuse if there is physical abuse (hitting)? I recommend the following search terms: power and control relationships, gaslighting, and emotional spousal abuse. If you have more information, you might have a different opinion, sir.
I hope you never experience something requiring those trigger warnings. Fucking grow some empathy.
“Nobody was actually hit”.Wow. It’s always the truly callous people who seem to live in a bubble. I don’t get it. The world is so big. How does one stay so sheltered for so long?
I have a friend who has legit PTSD from what her ex-husband did to her – financially among other things. Won’t get into details because it’s unusual enough that I don’t want to risk her privacy, but it was pretty ugly and she still has the occasional really bad day from the long-term psychological trauma that was wrought upon her.
I like that this is the kind of thing that makes you mad.
Meh, it’s a single line that is harmless to most and important to a few. It’s sillier that you’re upset enough to comment on something tiny for not benefiting you personally.
I’m sorry, I know this is completely beside the point, but her nephew’s name is Shad?
Short for Shadrach, presumably.
Or Shadman.H draws real fucking good on his Cintiq!
Named after Shaddam the IV of House Corrino.
It was always his mom’s favorite bible story/Beastie Boys song.
people with money give their children stupid names.
It’s one of the many ways that the very rich and the very poor are alike.
i dont know any poor people named “shad” or “track” or “bristol”
I don’t think the Palins were rich when they named their kids.
So it’s victim porn? No thanks.
Jackie “The Joke Man’ Martling would write a movie from the perspective of a certain “Dirty Johnny”.
“Eric Bana angrily eats a sandwich.”Just wanna pull this out for extra scrutiny, because the image it conjured in my mind made me laugh.
It’s so bad.
Bana, or the sandwich?ETA: Fried peanut-butter Bana sandwich.
Yes.
“You wouldn’t like me when I angrily eat a sandwich.”
This podcast is my guilty pleasure in that I’ve listened all the way through it about 4 times despite finding the narrator to have a very annoying voice. Also, each time I come away with the same sentiment: “G-d damn, that woman is stupid.”
No desire to see this played out on TV unless Bana actually morphs into the Hulk at some point.
This might put his sandwich eating into perspective:https://sabotagetimes.com/life/eric-bana-remembers-the-time-he-made-peter-otoole-choke-on-his-chicken-sandwich
“emotional and financial domestic violence”Hoo boy is this stupid. First, trigger warning in a movie review. Second, the use of the word “violence”—words have meanings and “emotional violence” is not a thing. Emotional *abuse* is a thing, but violence means physical harm. Third, “financial violence”? What in God’s name does that even mean? Does Starbucks commit financial violence when they convince people to pay $4 for a cup of coffee?Sometimes you’ll read pushback against the lazy stereotype of millennials as coddled and entitled. Those people pushing back will say that millennials are as hard-working and industrious as anybody, and the real entitled snowflakes are the self-satisfied boomers who enjoyed the fruits of an economic boom and then pulled the ladder up after them. And that pushback is absolutely true and correct! But then you see a trigger warning for “emotional and financial domestic violence” in a movie review and you’re reminded once again that the lazy stereotypes of millennials aren’t completely invented out of whole cloth. Well, let’s just hope no one was scarred for life by reading this “Dirty John” review.
debra is an awful person. her daughter jaquelyn is even worse. the only sympathetic person in that family is the daughter terra. i listened to a few episodes of the podcast with my wife. i hate wealthy people. alot.
eric bana is great. im only interested this whole mess because of him being on that show. which is a terrible show, btw.
The podcast and newspaper story were so good that the TV series suffers by comparison. In those accounts, the real people did an excellent job of representing themselves—and because they were real, they felt fresh and authentic. Try as she might, Julia Garner (a wonderful actress) could not get down Terra’s remarkable, charming accent and unique voice, nor the sturdy physique (as seen in newspaper photos) that was key to the story. Ditto for every other real-life character and player. Listen to the podcast and forget the TV show. Hollywood failed to replicate.