When Monster: The Ed Gein Story dropped on Netflix, viewers (us included) wasted no time pressing play. Within days, the third instalment of the Monster franchise shot to number one on the streaming platform, despite – or maybe because of – it being hailed as one of the most disturbing series ever made.
Official viewing figures aren’t yet out, but Monster: The Ed Gein Story has a lacklustre 23% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Reviews are mixed: some call it “way better” than its Monster predecessors, others say it’s their “least favourite”. Everyone, however, agrees on one thing – it’s gruesome. Disturbingly so. But still, we can’t stop watching. And now plenty of us are starting to get the ick about our own viewing habits as a result.
Across the show’s eight episodes – from the mind of Ryan Murphy (the brains behind American Horror Story, The Watcher, and American Crime Story) – there are numerous references to exactly this sticky juxtaposition: the series is vile, and we might be too for indulging it. From Ed Gein’s pointed line, “You’re the one who can’t look away”, to a scene showing the visceral and shocked reaction of Psycho’s 1950s audience (who would likely keel over if they saw the stuff modern audiences tune into regularly), Monster: The Ed Gein Story feels like a critique of our desensitisation.
Throwing further fuel on the fire, the show’s creative choices, which follow Murphy’s trademark embellishment and fetishisation of true crime tales, happily deviate from the facts – perhaps acknowledging that we’re now all so far gone (read: desensitised to violence and butchery) that Gein’s real-life crimes wouldn’t deliver enough of a shock factor, or hold our attention. We now need additional romantic subplots, fictionalised murders, and exaggerated gore to lock us in (and to stop us from double-screening on our phones).
But why… Is it because we’ve now seen it all before? And if so, what does that say about our collective psyche? Unsurprisingly, nothing good or hopeful.
Between the impact of graphic video games (research shows they’re normalising aggressive behaviour and resulting in real-life violence, especially for younger players, as seen in this week’s episode of 24 Hours in Police Custody) and the countless true crime documentaries and dramas that have been a staple part of our TV viewing schedules for the last few years, what should shock us… simply no longer does. In fact, studies have shown that regular exposure to violent media can lead to a notable decrease in empathetic responses. Something that could partly explain the spike in apathy many are feeling about the world at large.
Everyone's clicking on...
Horrific videos of war are routinely plastered across social media, the daily stream of deeply depressing news stories, and a tumultuous political climate all feed in to the way our brains are being shaped – and a detrimental desire for death-on-screen. Experts say we’re living in a ‘shock and yawn’ era, with events that would have once dominated the news cycle for weeks now fading into insignificance in mere hours.
The ‘big shrug’ – as our collective burnout has also been dubbed – is a direct response to information overload and upheaval of the norm, according to experts, who cite the likes of Brexit, Trump’s presidency, the COVID-19 pandemic, and climate change to name a few.
All of this is to say, apathy has left us hungry for content that will finally make us feel something again (literally, anything - good or bad), which is so much harder to achieve when we’re all so numbed out.
Perhaps then, Ryan Murphy’s Monster: The Ed Gein Story series isn’t just a true crime retelling, but rather a meta-commentary on the viewers who can’t stop tuning in. “I’m relatively certain [the show] is supposed to be a commentary on how much the media warps and distorts the reality around these kinds of crimes,” someone theorised on Reddit, amassing only ‘upvotes’ on their post. Another added they felt the show “rightfully critiques the media… for fueling societal decay through sensationalism, leaving us numb and jaded.”
Another user on X summed this up perfectly: “[The series doesn’t] just show the dark abyss of such monstrous minds, but also holds up the mirror to how sick society can be.” This poses the question: are we as viewers still observers, or have we become part of the spectacle?
One expert, Paul Davies, consulting psychologist and host of Everything's Psychology, thinks there could at least have been a positive origin to the slippery slope we’ve found ourselves all tumbling down, en route to our sofas, primed for another true crime binge. “For many, a healthy interest in [the genre] is driven by empathy,” he explains. “In other words, we have an innate desire to try to make sense out of the world around us, and that includes people’s behaviour.”
Speaking about why so many of us are obsessed with true crime, Davies points out that “uncommon behaviour can feel like a puzzle we need to solve, and we are drawn to absorb as much evidence as we can to build up our knowledge.”
But, the expert warns Cosmopolitan UK, “our interest can turn into hedonic curiosity, with the thrill or emotional jolt it gives us becoming the underlying reason for our fascination.” Davies says that over time, “this can become dangerous because our brain demands increasingly intense stimulation to achieve the same level of enjoyment.”
Are we entirely to blame, though? As our appetite for true crime grows, creators and audiences alike have a responsibility to engage with these stories in a way that acknowledges the real trauma behind them, rather than exploiting it.
Davies suggests creators address how the “narrative is written”. Victims, he says, should not be treated as “mere plot devices” because the “more we sensationalise, the more our empathy is replaced by titillation.” We need to connect more to those harmed by true crime, rather than attempt to get inside the minds of those who carry it out.
As for audiences, it’s “much harder”. Likening this type of ‘entertainment’ to the confectionery aisle in the supermarket, Davies says “the content has been created to appeal to our basest human instincts,” so it’s difficult to avoid temptation to indulge in it.
He goes on to note that viewers can – and should – perform a “sense-check” to understand why we find these stories so compelling. “If you find insight into the unknown interesting, or gain an education from the stories, then great,” he says. “However, if it’s simply adrenaline, outrage, or the comfort of voyeurism, it could be worth stepping back.”
It’s the latter audience that show creator Murphy typically seems to target. But with the recurring references to our insatiable appetite for true crime in his Gein portrayal, Murphy – be it intentionally or not – has challenged viewers to question why we watch, wince, and eagerly queue up the next episode. Like it or not, Monster: The Ed Gein Story doesn’t just ask what makes a monster but why we keep watching them. And perhaps whether it’s time to turn off and touch some grass instead.
