Netflix’s ‘Monster’ Reimagines the Lizzie Borden Case With Aileen Wuornos

What changed

Netflix released a new season of Ryan Murphy’s Monster about the 1892 Lizzie Borden case. The eight-episode season revisits Borden, who was 32 when she was accused of killing her father and stepmother with an axe at their Fall River mansion; she ultimately received a $300,000 inheritance, described as worth $10 million today.

The season also brings in Aileen Wuornos, played by Sarah Paulson, and has triggered debate over historical accuracy, suspected AI-generated footage and a reported budget of $5 million to $7 million per episode, or $40 million to $56 million in total. Netflix has not publicly confirmed those figures.

Why it matters

The central tension is simple: this is historical crime presented as entertainment, and the show is asking viewers to accept a lot of invention around a case whose official hearing established no motive.

Murphy uses Borden and Wuornos to examine abuse, violence and female rage. That is a clear creative choice, but there is no evidence Borden inspired Wuornos. The connection belongs to the series’ interpretation, not the historical record.

That distinction explains the split in viewer reaction. Some have praised the performances and the emotional themes. Others argue that the added criminal storylines, including Wuornos, pull attention away from Borden. One viewer called the extra material irrelevant; another found the series worthwhile while conceding that it was not historically accurate.

The suspected AI footage adds a second layer of unease. Viewers raised the possibility in online discussion, but it remains unconfirmed. If the production did use AI-generated material, the question is not only whether it looks convincing. It is whether a drama about real victims and real crimes should make its reconstructions harder to distinguish from the record.

The reported scale of the production sharpens that question. At as much as $56 million for eight episodes, Monster: The Lizzie Borden Story is an expensive argument for creative freedom. Its success will depend on whether audiences see the added material as illuminating Borden’s story or simply making the mystery bigger, louder and less certain.