Dynasty review of Rupert Murdoch signals a hardening family succession battle
A new four-part documentary, Dynasty, lays out the Murdoch family’s long-running succession conflict and the tabloid-era scandals centred on rupert murdoch. Its assembly of archive material, testimony from figures such as Paul McMullan and Hugh Grant, and internal documents points toward a trajectory focused on trust engineering, a secret plan called Project Family Harmony, and the legal fallout that produced a $3. 3bn settlement.
Dynasty documentary presents Rupert Murdoch’s family, archive and missing voices
The film runs through decades of archive material and testimony while noting the family declined to be interviewed, and it includes a cameo from Hugh Grant and recollections by former News of the World reporter Paul McMullan. Director Liz Garbus assembles longtime chroniclers and former staff to recount phone-hacking episodes and sexual-harassment scandals, and it intersperses family anecdotes—such as Monopoly games and childhood neglect—with reporting on rupert murdoch’s editorial revamps of tabloids and endorsements of political figures.
Mark Devereux memo, Lachlan and Project Family Harmony drive the Nevada trust battle
An internal memo written by Mark Devereux, acting for Elisabeth Murdoch’s representative, set off a chain that became a court battle over a Nevada trust and culminated in a $3. 3bn settlement to siblings who were excluded when Lachlan was handed control of parts of the business. Project Family Harmony is described in the film as a secret plan by Rupert and Lachlan to change a family trust and nullify equal voting rights after Rupert’s death, giving Lachlan decisive control and limiting James’s influence.
That legal and corporate maneuvering is portrayed as explicitly political in intent in the documentary, with Project Family Harmony framed as designed to preserve the business’s conservative orientation and to prevent more liberal siblings from shifting it leftwards. The film highlights contributions from former reporters and journalists who worked inside the tabloids and notes episodes, such as editor Rebekah Brooks’s blistering management style, that shaped workplace culture and reputational risk.
If Project Family Harmony continues — scenario A; Should James or Elisabeth shift course — scenario B
If Project Family Harmony continues as the organising principle, the context suggests control will consolidate around Lachlan and the trust structure that was changed in Nevada, reinforcing a governance model that privileges voting control over sibling equality. That path is grounded in the documentary’s recounting of the trust changes, the memo that triggered litigation, and the court outcome that produced the $3. 3bn settlement, all specific elements presented on screen.
Should James or Elisabeth succeed in reopening or reversing trust provisions, the documentary’s record of internal emails, texts and legal filings indicates the next phase would be renewed litigation and potential redistribution of voting rights. Such a shift would rest on further legal challenges or a voluntary family renegotiation; the film shows how disputes over control already produced a multi-billion-dollar settlement and court action.
Either trajectory is shaped by the film’s two recurring facts: an elder patriarch who engineered succession levers, and detailed documentary evidence—archival pages, messages and firsthand recollections—used to contest those levers. The documentary repeatedly ties personal family dynamics to formal legal steps, making clear how private memos and trust drafts became public legal events.
The next confirmed milestone the context provides is Rupert’s 95th birthday, described in the film as a present reference point for the generation currently litigating and negotiating control. What the context does not resolve is whether remaining trust provisions will face new challenges or whether the family will participate directly in future disclosures; that will be settled only by further legal filings or by new family statements or testimony. Still, the documentary points toward a near-term world in which legal structures and internal memos, not only personal rivalry, determine which sibling ultimately holds formal power.
