Love Story and the Ethics of Biopics

By: Gianna Taft, Staff Writer Edited by: Tessa Reiner

On February 12, 2026, Ryan Murphy’s latest show Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette was released. The show would explore the whirlwind romance between John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette after their introduction to one another in the 1990s. It had, however, already been a part of public discourse long before its release date. 

Back in the summer of 2025 when Murphy announced the show’s development, JFK’s Grandson, Jack Schlossberg, took to social media to voice his opinion, criticizing Murphy for “profiting off” his uncle’s story. He continued his qualms with the series on an Instagram story, “for those wondering whether his family was ever consulted, or has anything to do with the new show being made about him, the answer is no, and there’s not really much we can do.” Murphy replied to Schlossberg’s comments in a podcast, saying, “I thought it was an odd choice to be mad about your relative that you don’t really remember.”

The feud between Murphy and Schlossberg represents an issue with multiple Ryan Murphy’s television series, and biopics as a genre. The issue of exploitation and sensationalization of real people’s lives within biopics are far from a recent issue, but have gotten more intense within the past decade. Blonde (2022), Pam and Tommy (2022), and the entirety of the Monster (2022) series, are all examples of projects that fall into this exploitative nature and raised much public concern upon their release.

In a similar fashion to the reaction of Love Story’s development by Jack Schlossberg, one of the largest issues within the biopic genre is the lack of consent filmmakers get from the individuals or families of the individuals whose stories they want to depict on screen. In terms of the Monsters series, Ryan Murphy claimed to have attempted to contact 20 family members and friends of Dahmer victims in order to gain input for the show. He claims that not a single person replied to his efforts. Instead of taking no answer as a no, Murphy prevailed, relying solely on public research about the Dahmer case. This lack of consent carried over onto the next season of Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story, in which Erik Menendez and some of the Menendez family expressed their contempt for the series, with Erik releasing a statement that in part reads, “now Murphy shapes his horrible narrative through vile and appalling character portrayals of Lyle and of me disheartening slander.”

The release of Pam and Tommy (2022) created even harsher backlash from audiences. The show, created by Robert Siegel, depicts the theft and illegal release of Pamela Anderson and Tommy Lee’s sex tape in 1995. The story was highly publicized and highly exploitative of the couple, particularly Pamela Anderson who also worked as a Playboy bunny model. The public was relentless and in 1997 the couple lost a lawsuit against Penthouse, who published the tape. The judge deemed their stolen tape “newsworthy” due to their celebrity status, and ruled that because the images were already published outside of Penthouse, it was no longer considered private material. This blatant disregard for the privacy and consent of Lee, and more so Anderson, was again disregarded with the release of the show. The co-showrunner claimed to have contacted her (similarly to Murphy), and got no response. Anderson has never endorsed or agreed to the show’s creation or release, even later telling Variety, “the idea of the whole thing happening was just really crushing for me,” yet this again never encouraged the showrunners to scrap the show entirely. In the case of Pam and Tommy, the show’s release was all the more disgusting considering the violation and harassment Anderson experienced from the media in the ‘90s and early 2000s, making the nonconsensual biopic written about the unauthorized release of her and Lee’s sex tape all the more counterproductive and confusing. If these shows are created to shed light on real tragedies from the victim’s perspective(s), why are they continuously excluded from the conversation?

Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy and JFK Jr., who passed away in 1999, couldn’t have given consent to tell their story; yet when Jack Schlossberg tried to stand up for his uncle, that didn’t go over well either. So when is the line drawn? When will creators and studios realize that not everything needs to or should be put to screen?

This isn’t to say that all biopics are inherently bad or have bad intentions. Movies such as I, Tonya (2017), and Miracle (2005) worked closely with the subjects of their films (Tonya Harding and Herb Brooks) throughout the filming process to ensure that they were satisfied with the way their story was being portrayed. Of course this results in more sympathetic and biased retellings of history, but it’s difficult to tell any story without subjectivity. Handling subject material that is emotional and personal to many calls for the intense levels of communication and understanding it deserves, because who are these movies for if not for the subjects whose stories are being told?

With many, albeit untitled, biopics set to release in the next few years, it’s important to humanize these projects. Depending on the subject of the biopic, not every film can be sympathetic towards who it is portraying, nor should it be. Biopics, though of course dramatized for the big screen, should try harder in their attempts at gaining both accuracy and consent when telling other people's stories. People like Jack Schlossberg and Pamela Anderson, despite being in the public eye, shouldn’t have to watch caricatures of themselves or their loved ones, being profited off of at their own expense, for an audience’s entertainment. Exploitation should not replace storytelling.

Film is nuanced, it’s biased, it’s right and wrong. Most of all, it leaves an everlasting impression on society and it's time to start treating it as such.

© 2026 by FETCH COLLECTIVE