Don’t Date Brandon Review Criticizes Lazy True-Crime Show

The true-crime documentary "Don’t Date Brandon" has been reviewed and found to be lacking in crucial detail, failing to adequately convey the plight of the women affected by the subject's destructive actions. The reviewer suggests that the proliferation of true-crime documentaries, which frequently depict men who engage in predatory behavior towards women—often those who are emotionally vulnerable or unhappy with aspects of their lives—may serve as a form of feminist public service announcement. These narratives, characterized by patterns of love-bombing, isolation, control, coercion, destabilization, and sometimes violence or death, could be intended to educate younger audiences about identifying early warning signs of predatory behavior and equipping them with the knowledge to protect themselves.

However, the review posits that if this educational intent is not the driving force behind such programming, then these documentaries risk becoming mere voyeuristic content, filling the demand for sensationalized narratives without providing genuine insight or justice. The specific critique of "Don’t Date Brandon" highlights a perceived laziness in its execution, suggesting that the show does not do justice to the horrors experienced by the women involved. The narrative focuses on the destructive path one man carved through his local dating pool, but the documentary's approach is described as feeling voyeuristic and misguided, failing to provide the necessary depth for viewers to fully comprehend the severity of the women's experiences. This lack of detail is a significant failing, according to the review, which implies that the documentary prioritizes sensationalism over substantive storytelling and empathetic portrayal.

The reviewer speculates on the potential motives behind the surge in true-crime content, particularly those focusing on male perpetrators and female victims. This genre, which has become a dominant force in popular documentary filmmaking, often showcases stories of manipulation and abuse. The recurring theme involves men who present themselves as saviors to women, only to subsequently isolate, control, coerce, and ultimately harm them, sometimes fatally. The reviewer entertains the idea that this trend might be an intentional, albeit covert, initiative by the feminist movement to serve as a form of psychological operation, aiming to raise awareness and provide a cautionary guide. This perspective suggests that the repeated exposure to such narratives could be a deliberate strategy to equip individuals, especially younger ones, with the tools to recognize and evade dangerous individuals.

Without this presumed educational or protective purpose, the reviewer concludes that the genre, and "Don’t Date Brandon" specifically, devolves into superficial entertainment. The documentary's failure to delve into the complexities of the victims' experiences and the perpetrator's methods is seen as a missed opportunity to offer a more meaningful and impactful exploration of the subject matter. The review implies that the show's superficial treatment of serious issues contributes to a broader trend of exploitative storytelling within the true-crime space, where the suffering of individuals is presented for passive consumption rather than for genuine understanding or societal learning. The critique underscores a desire for more thoughtful and responsible engagement with sensitive topics in documentary filmmaking.