SPOILER WARNING: This story contains spoilers from “Devil in Disguise: John Wayne Gacy“, now streaming on Peacock.
When it comes to true crime TV shows, especially those about serial killers, most shows have a common element: violence. While some argue that the focus is on the victims' stories, they also feature murders, sometimes gruesomely framed, and extensive backstory on the killer.
When Patrick McManus began his journey of creating a series about the case of John Wayne Gacy, it was the opposite of what he wanted to do. In fact, he refused to participate in the show unless it focused exclusively on the victims and featured none of the actual murders of Gacy's 33 known victims.
Below, McManus reflects on the series' initial rejection, working closely with GLAAD throughout the process, reaching out to the families of the five victims, and competing in the true crime genre, namely Ryan Murphy.
You've already starred in several true crime series, most recently in two seasons of Dr. Drita. What specifically drew you to the crimes of John Wayne Gacy and his victims?
Look, short answer: I wasn't attracted to it. I said no a couple of times before I said yes because I didn't see it coming. At the time, I had another serial killer story in front of me, and I didn't want to do another closed-in story. I'm so grateful that Universal and Peacock pushed me. I said I would do it if I could focus on the victims, the police, the lawyers and the families, and when I told them that I didn't know what that meant. It wasn't until we got the room working that I realized we could write these short stories. I even pitched it to the studio, asking, “Would you be okay with me writing these stories that have absolutely nothing to do with John Wayne Gacy except for a little bit of light here or there?” They said yes. I thought they were lying, but they immediately supported me.
How do you think the audience will react to No showing real violence?
I'm really interested in how this will go. We know that a certain way of telling a story, relying on something that might seem a little more salacious or random, works. It attracts people, and I don't know if a show that doesn't show murder or that allows itself to slow down and just tell a story of hope or tragedy or dreams lost or dreams found or love or what it was like to be a sex worker in Chicago in the '70s would work. I don't know if it will work, but it's definitely worth a try.
Can you talk about the research process?
All of our research started with NBC News and Documentary film “Peacock”. So they had an incredible treasure trove of research. We have created various books that have become a source of information and inspiration for us. And then we have Patrick Murphy, our private investigator. He produced thousands of pages of research based on court documents, interviews, interrogations, etc.
From the very beginning, we wanted to make every effort to contact all living family members and even a couple of living victims. So, a list was compiled based on many hours of research that I had nothing to do with, trying to track down the home addresses, emails, phone numbers of everyone we could find. In the end, we only contacted five people. We came to us with the full understanding that there was a possibility that they would become angry or hurt. The point of this is not for people to give us their blessing. The purpose of this is for them to be heard, and while it didn't stop us from making the show, I wanted them to have the opportunity to tell us what they really thought and guide us as much as possible if they wanted to. I will say that out of the five people we connected, five out of five wished us well.
James Badge Dale as Kozenczak and Gabriel Luna as Tovar
Brooke Palmer/Peacock
You haven't shown anything from the trial. Have you ever discussed any of this?
No, I hate challenges. “Doctor Death” was an example of how I strategically showed the process, and that was only because we knew it was a process from the beginning. in court that we will show the operations for the first time. In the case of The Devil in Disguise, the trial was so well known and so hackneyed.
The show's music, composed by Leopold Ross and Nick Chuba, includes 33 tracks, based on the number of known victims. Whose idea was this?
It was actually a late night conversation with our composers where we were trying to figure out how to score the show in a way that could honor the victims. A big part of what they do and why I work with them again and again is that they are exceptional at their work. I don't just mean voicing our shows, but also fundamentally understanding the vision of what each show is. I give them credit for taking my rambling and creating something special with our music.
I know a lot of your writers' room is queer, and you've been working closely with GLAAD on this as well. What was this process like?
Early on in the development of the series, even before meeting with the writers, I knew that part of the story would be about the latent homophobia that surfaced in the investigation of John Wayne Gacy. It was very important to me to have GLAAD as a partner. They agreed to look at our drafts and advise on scripts. At that time, they did not agree to act as official consultants because they wanted to see the final product before formalizing our partnership, and I completely understood that. But I have to tell you, I don't think I was nervous about anything in this process other than waiting for GLAAD to look at the cuts. I remember exactly where I was when GLAAD called me and said they were ready to become an official and public partner of the show. That's what I'm most proud of in this whole process: they gave us what we needed to know to tell this story correctly, truthfully and respectfully.
Let's dive into formatting. Each episode focuses on the story of a different victim, but I found it interesting that the last two episodes were the stories of David Cram and Geoffrey Rignall, who both survived. How did you come to this decision?
There was no point to the madness related to the order of the story, except for Johnny Chic in the second episode, because we connected the school ring to the story. David Cram's story is complex, as there are many conspiracy theories about his complicity in Gacy's life. This was so controversial that we decided not to investigate it except for the moments when [prosecutor William] Kunkle interrogated him. But we felt it was important to bring the story of care to the end. It just felt like it fit right.
And then in the finale, you told the story of Geoffrey Rignall.
Before the writers' room, when I was doing research alone, I knew Rignall would be the final story. I knew this for two reasons. Number 1, this was truly the only story that could truly describe the neglect and systemic failure of the police department. It was a story that completely embraced it. The second reason is very subtle and I don't know if everyone will understand it because we never state it directly. Since Geoffrey was part of the troupe, he was very bohemian and sexually free. He lived life to the fullest. He was just full of life and love. With John Wayne Gacy, people have tried to explain what he did because he had an abusive, alcoholic father. They may try to explain this away by saying that he was struggling with his identity.
One of the things we wanted to make very clear to the audience is that millions of people suffer under the yoke of abusive parents. And there are millions of people who have struggled with their identity in the face of cultural bias, systemic bias, school bias, family bias. But none of them killed 33 people. So by showing this life that was so free in every way – and that will likely be judged to this day – we made the statement that this strange man was simply living life to the fullest and had nothing to do with debauchery.
Brooke Palmer/Peacock
In the finale, we only see Gacy in one scene, in a car, smoking with Rignall. Was it a conscious decision not to show it?
Very much, but it didn't start out that way. We have about 23 minutes of scenes that we shot with Gacy – the original script was all about the day of his execution, and we had Gacy throughout. One Sunday morning I woke up in the montage and felt it was wrong. I called editor Ryan Denny and asked if he would cut Gacy out to show me. I said, “I feel like this is our last chance to tell the audience that Gacy is not at the center of the story.” He did the editing and we watched it together on Zoom. We got to the end and I looked at him and asked, “What do you think?” He said, “That’s exactly how it should be.” And I agree. Then I was afraid to tell Chernus. He looked and understood everything completely. He asked me, “Was my performance bad?” I was like, “No, no, no, your performance is great, but do you understand?” He says: “Yes, I understand.” That answering machine scene? It's so good.
Are you planning to watch other upcoming serial killer series? Are you keeping an eye on your competitors?
I understand why you put it that way, but I would never call them competitors. This is not just a canned line. I have always believed that art, be it television, film, dance, painting or theater, is subjective. But there is no objectivity in art. I'm a fan of a lot of other people's work. I'll say it straight. I'm a big Ryan Murphy fan. I've been working since Nip/Tuck. What Ryan does is he always swings for the fences and whether he hits it every time or not will be determined subjectively. But the most important thing that Ryan did from the beginning was that he was one of the first creators and showrunners to actually open up the possibilities of television and allow people who typically didn't look like they belonged on television or didn't have a particular background to be on television, and he deserves a ton of credit for what he did for television. So, that's a long-winded way of saying that I'll definitely tune in and check out what he's done because, for the sake of subjectivity, whether you like it or not, I'm always intrigued by what he does.
This interview has been edited and condensed.