(4.5/5)I like to think this crime documentary miniseries known simply as ‘The Staircase’ is a hidden treasure, despite the likelihood that anyone who has seen this film has probably told ten other people to watch it, and those ten have told ten others; add to this too the percentage of people that may have caught it accidentally channel surfing – films like this don’t stay hidden for long. Even around Row Three I am second or third generation in the hyping of this movie. However naively I hold out the possibility that to someone this remains undiscovered.
The Staircase is the mother of all courtroom dramas, forget your CSI and Law and Order and think rather the sensational tinge of Capturing the Friedmans, the headlong glance into character flaw of Deliver us From Evil, or the meticulous attention to detail of something like HBO’s The Wire; we are in the higher echelon of this kind of portrait of human tragedy, where the epistemological limits are stretched, the morass of procedural detail documented, and all you can do is soak it all in over the seven hour duration until the final verdict is heard.
A woman is dead at the bottom of a staircase, is it murder or is it an accident? The accused, Michael Peterson, is a high profile novelist whose story is the sort that makes Nancy Grace salivate (her deranged insight appears in the film more than once). In Durham, North Carolina, forensics and hard evidence vie with issues of class and bigotry. Peterson’s Shapiro-like attorneys and the nature of the crime evoke much of the circus that was the O.J. trial, and indeed the same kind of showmanship persists throughout (at one point the need of a catchy Johnny Cochran rhyme is bemoaned).
Where The Staircase differs however is in the richness of its detail. One of the chief surprises of this documentary is the sheer scope of access the filmmaker, Jean-Xavier Lestrade, was afforded to the entire judicial process and to the array of characters that populate this story. Clearly having to sign some kind of confidentiality agreement, Lestrade’s camera is allowed to be a fly on the wall to observe both the prosecution and the defense teams during the extent of the investigation and court proceedings. The film gives us a firsthand glimpse of the judicial process in a way I have never seen before, showing the fissures in the process, the steely calculation involved in manipulating jury sensibilities. As Peterson himself states at one point, it is no longer about what happened on the night of the crime, or anything so lofty as ‘the truth’, but rather it is about winning at all costs. The Staircase is as much gladiator sport in this regard as it is a depiction of courtroom proceedings. The access to Michael Peterson is richly telling, as we like a jury evaluate his every move and utterance, begging the question as to whether what he says is sincere or the guile of a great liar; you will be asking yourself until the very end.
And then there are the bombshells, which only adds to the overall intrigue. Soon after one of these bombshells is reported on the Durham Nightly News, Defense Attorney David Rudolf breaks the fourth wall with the audience and exasperatedly tells the cameraman “Now you got yourself a movie”. Indeed.
By the end I found myself angrily disagreeing with the final verdict (and the epilogue after the film, as read online, is even crazier) but oh brother, what a ride.
Just a reminder, if commenting on this I would appreciate adding spoiler warnings, feel free to copy and paste:
****SPOILER for the Staircase**** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase ****
Ugh, Nancy Grace. Giving her a platform to air her completely evidence-free fear-mongering statements is bordering on criminal. She should go stand on a corner soapbox like the other crazy self-important folks out there.
The Staircase has been on my to watch list for years now – maybe I’ll bump ‘er up a bit.
One of the most addictive Crime Documentaries ever, indeed! The perfect balance between intelligent inquiry and lurid soap opera melodrama.
The number of twists and turns in this thing is absolutely unreal, and I think half the success (as far as entertainment to the viewer is concerned) is that the main guy remains implacable up to the end (…even in the final post-DVD extra interview)
My allegiances in the case changed a couple of times before the end, I think it is additionally interesting that, like one of the sisters says, his profession is about making things up, about imagining scenarios and how they would play out.
The wikipedia update of the case when searching Michael Peterson seems to adequately explain what actually happened, and I find it insane that the evidence discussed in that post was not more sufficiently evaluated by the defense team. It is a fascinating case study for how you can construe something to the point of certainty with limited evidence serving as the only facts.
****SPOILER for the Staircase**** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase ****
Regardless of Peterson’s guilt or innocence, it seems absolutely ludicrous that a Jury wouldn’t have a ‘shadow of a doubt’ based on how the case played out. I’d never want to be left in the hands of a Jury of my peers. Ouch.
And how about that crazy coroner lady?
****SPOILER for the Staircase**** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase **** ***** SPOILER for the Staircase ****
that was one the message I got from the film, how broken the system actually is… like he says the rich get off because they are the only ones that can afford to defend themselves properly.
but I am still baffled how an owl feather in the deceased’s hair was never followed up on in the investigation, and apparently there were drops of blood on the doorstep.
I think the back cover has a quote about you would think the people in this film were scripted, they are such characters.
Absolutely, in a soap-opera kinda way. I’ve heard it quipped down into a “TVs Dallas Meets The Thin Blue Line” kind of way.
Actually, watching THE THIN BLUE LINE, THE STAIRCASE, DEAR ZACHARY, and PARADISE LOST is a pretty good overview on how different in tone and style justice/crime/trial documentaries can be done.
Paradise Lost is next on my list.
This has been on the watch list since Jay first mentioned it.
I do Love Paradise Lost & Paradise Lost 2 – both excellent.
I suggest everyone also check out Lestrade’s Murder on a Sunday Morning and Berlinger/Sinofsky’s Brother’s Keeper as well.
Still haven’t seen “Brother’s Keeper”. I should get on that as well…
Another excellent courtroom documentary is “The Trials of Darryl Hunt”.