User reviews

I rented this because I expected it to be intense, having seen Matthew Bright's work in "Freeway". It's definitely that. It's hard not to compare it to "The Deliberate Stranger": each focuses on a different aspect of Bundy's story. "Stranger" focused more on the investigation and the actual facts, and Mark Harmon's performance captured the smoothness and charm which enabled Bundy to gain his victims' trust. This movie is all about the animal beneath. In reality, Bundy's ability to keep that beast hidden was part of what enabled him to carry on as long as he did. This film lays bare that monster, and shows it in all its ugliness. I'm seeing a lot of criticism of this movie for being good at what it set out to do: to make you share in the revulsion of what Ted Bundy was. Complaining that it's in bad taste? What does 'taste' have to do with a sadistic animal who snuffed out dozens of young womens' lives, just to fulfill his need to feel powerful? In this respect, this movie is superior to "Stranger": that one is much too tame and sanitized. What kind of hypocrite watches a movie about a serial killer, and complains that it's too lurid? While "Stranger" is more successful as a factual and interesting telling of Bundy's story, this is a much more impactful movie that makes you feel as though you're actually in the room with that demon. Only 15 minutes into the movie, I felt filthy just from watching his odious behavior. Bright's purpose here was not so much to make a biography as it was to use Bundy's story to point out something fundamental about human nature: the desire for control, and how it drives us to harm each other. While not as good as Bright's earlier "Freeway", it's still a good, disturbing movie, much in the brutal vein of "Henry, Portrait of a Serial Killer". It's actually much more violent - especially sexually - than the latter, though not as gruesome.

If you are really into serial killers, I strongly recommend this. In some ways it's quite unique, and the lead performance is very menacing. The film almost seems like a farce at times, but in a way that perhaps captures the surreal aspect of serial killing in a way rarely, if ever caught well on camera before(Although American Psycho touches this area as well.). It's far from a perfect film, but it is a worthy watch for many fans of the subject. While the tone of the film may offend some deeply, for others who can stomach the crudeness, they actually may find this film to be very funny at times. I know I did. Now don't get me wrong, the things Ted Bundy did are obviously not funny at all. Nonetheless this film takes a bit of a different look at things from the perspective of Bundy, and at times it can be quite entertaining here. In this way it ends up being a strange but somewhat thought provoking film. As I said, if you are interested in the genre, I strongly recommend taking a look at this film. It's not the best Bundy film, but it is well worth a watch for many. Some of the funniest moments in the film have to do more with Bundy's apparent kleptomaniac tendencies. Some could say that this film is fairly disrespectful to his victims and overall is in bad taste. I can understand this definitely. Though I felt the film sort of evens itself out in the end by showing what a coward Bundy really was. Nor did I feel that the film glorified Bundy in any way. What you see is a monster of a man for sure, which is what he was. A monster when in control, but more like a crybaby when he wasn't. As with all serial killer films, watch at your own risk. 7/10.

"Ted Bundy" is definitely one of the most unpleasant viewing experiences I struggled myself through this year, but - then again - that is only logical since the actual Ted Bundy also was one of the most unpleasant persons to ever walk the planet's surface. And then still, I certainly don't have to complain about feeling unpleasant, because the (too) many people that crossed paths with Bundy, notably the victims and their families, truly must have gone through hell.

Between 2000 and 2009, there was a gigantic wave of true crime movies about US serial killers. Since horror cinema was going through a long non-fertile and uninspired period, this was a God's gift for many directors (*) because portraits of real serial killers don't much of a plot. All the notorious figures received one or even several biopics: Ed Gein, Aileen Wuornos, Zodiac Killer, John Wayne Gacy, BTK-killer, Jeffrey Dahmer, Richard Ramirez, the Lonely Heart Killers. Ted Bundy could not be left out of this list, of course, but just as Bundy himself was an unusual killer who could not be classified within the known profiles, his biopic also can't be compared to all the routine and inferior films about other serial killers.

Why is "Ted Bundy" worth your time if you have the stomach for it? For starters because there was a multi-talented and promising (at the time, at least) director involved. Matthew Bright demonstrated, with the excellent "Freeway" and "Confessions of a Trick Baby", that he doesn't avoid sensitive taboo subjects like teen prostitution, drug addiction and child abuse. He was the ideal man to narrate the shocking but story of Bundy as raw, nihilistic, and disturbing as it really was.

Secondly, Matthew Bright was enormously "helped" by how absurd and unfathomable the facts in the case of Ted Bundy were. His story is one of those that simply must be factual because, if it had been written as fiction, people would claim it's totally implausible and unrealistic. How is it possible that Bundy made so many victims and remained under the radar for so long, even though his modus operandi and means of transportation were so conspicuous? How can a woman remain so loyal to a man who abuses and humiliates her, like Bundy did to Lee? How can it be that someone like Bundy escapes from jail twice or receives declarations of love from hundreds of women after his conviction? The explicit violence and cruelty in this film is often hard to look at, notably the scene in the cabin and the "submission fantasy", especially when realizing this freak and monster could do whatever he pleased for several years.

As 9 out of 10 of you know, Ted Bundy was America's most notorious mass murderer. A highly unusual sexual criminal who no one really knew and - according to this - someone that didn't even know himself properly.

Seemingly a charming college educated man from a middle class home who could have been a lawyer in another life - he even defended himself in court - but all too clearly also a world-class psychotic.

("A man who defends himself has a fool for a client.")

More bizarre still he seemed to have some limited control over his demons - certainly enough to fool the world that he had no serious dark side. Although one g/f saw strange things in him and knew the he was an immoral thief. Did anyone else notice anything strange? This movie says "no" and isn't even really looking anyway.

(At the risk of being too harsh, taking gift or favour from a known habitual thief makes you one yourself. His unmarried mother g/f was no fool.)

Strangely, having taken on a subject like Ted Bundy, director Matthew Bright instantly loses his nerve. The horror of the crimes might be hard on the stomach, but having decided to view a mock-up we need to have it more direct and in-our-face. This movie gives us an easy time of brutal murder (having seen the more direct Friday the Thirteenth or any other slasher movie) and that isn't on.

Too often we stand to far back to get a colder view of the horror and at least one of the crimes (involving a cheerleader) is unexplained. The fictional verbal foreplay ("you turn me on... but I am too old for you") indicates that this was - in the mind of the author - a case of rape and murder. If not in any particular order.

In the weird world mind of the sex killer - maybe he killed/disabled her first in order for her to be spared the ordeal of rape? There are so many debates going on here. Debates without a full stop.

The problem with stealing sex and power from a human being is that it is messy. Killing can be only part of the cleaning up process or a device to extend the pleasure. Obviously you are going to be caught (or at least risk it) if you don't do this. Bundy was mad - but clearly no fool. He took risks, but not getting caught never left the forefront of his mind.

The main strength of this movie is it indicates how easy it is to take someone. The blow on the back of the head with a heavy object can disable in a second. Most of these crimes took place in public streets and not always in dark conditions. Sudden violence without warning. Some never even saw Bundy.

This movie says he took women to kill and sometimes he took to rape and kill. A view I would share - but it is only an educated guess based on the trial evidence. The woman that fought back and survived was surely taken for sex or maybe he got sloppy?

(Even rapists and killers can have "off days.")

I have a real problem with the structure of the script. Despite having such obvious drama as murder, sex (consenting and non), morals and even jailbreak it never gets out of second gear. The director limits himself to a few "false" shocks and grainy art cam, but otherwise plods forward.

The force of law and order are put to one side - in the manner of many modern films. They appear when they are needed.

Lead Michael Reilley Burke is quite good, although Bundy has only two main states: Madman and normal guy. He had a slick tongue and many warmed to him, but there was always a bit of crazy around the eyes. You can always see it in photographs. Maybe it was something that attracted women - and continued to attract deluded women long after he was exposed.

This is a rare film that I give an extra star to for topic. It might change someone's behaviour or make people think twice about how they live. You are never safe only safer. We need to be told that there are people on this earth (nearly always heterosexual men) who think nothing of your life or your dignity and would take it in a second.

Ted Bundy still walks the streets of America - the only thing that has changed is his name...

If you watch this movie and don't know anything about the real Ted Bundy, you may not be disappointed. However, if you have read material on him such as the Ann Rule novel "The Stranger Beside Me" (an excellent read, by the way), you are going to hate this movie. "Ted Bundy" (I put the name of the movie in quotes to differentiate the film from the actual person) is an ambitious movie indeed, but unfortunately the makers of this film are more concerned with making a horror movie than an accurate portrayal of a complex and ruthless serial killer.

There is a lot wrong with "Ted Bundy". For one, this movie ends with a relatively haunting epilogue in subtitles, stating that in the months leading to Ted Bundy's execution, he received more than 200 letters a day from women who claim to have loved him. This fact may not be exaggerated, but the film leaves viewers wondering why any woman would love the guy they see in this film.

Michael Reilly Burke (who, if you were wondering, is no relation to this critic) may not be a bad actor, but there is one major flaw in his portrayal of Ted Bundy. Specifically, Ted Bundy, in real life, was a good looking guy, whereas Burke is not good looking in the slightest. Bundy's good looks were part of the reason he got away with so many grizzly murders. The scariest thing about Ted Bundy was that (most of) the women whom he killed would regard Ted Bundy as the last person who would brutally kill them. One look at Burke, on the other hand, would probably want to make anyone, let alone women, want to run fast.

It would be cruel to say that Burke is ugly. The truth is, though, that there is nothing appealing at all about the way Burke looks or acts. Case in point: the first scene involves Burke looking into a mirror and, while repeating, "Hi, I'm Ted Bundy. Nice to meet you," makes creepy sucking noises and strange faces. He looks more like an antisocial geek doing a lame imitation of Hannibal Lector.

That's not so much Burke's fault as it is the fault of whomever filmed this movie. The director really takes a disturbing true story and exploits it as a campy horror film. In portraying Bundy as a faceless, one-dimensional killer, the director really missed the point of what truly made Bundy scary.

The best movie about Ted Bundy remains "The Deliberate Stranger", the 1986 TV movie starring Mark Harmon. That movie, although it did not have the R-rated freedom this one does, portrayed Ted Bundy as an outgoing, handsome young man who no one believed at first would be so ruthless against women. The film focused more on Ted Bundy himself, and the police's confusion as to how this supposedly normal guy could commit such heinous murders. "The Deliberate Stranger", although it didn't show much in the way of blood and guts, was chilling because it mainly stuck straight to the facts.

The people who made "Ted Bundy" appear to know the basic, encyclopedic facts about the sociopathic killer, but seem to have made up their own facts as they went along. For instance, the scene where Burke follows a woman home, then looks into her bedroom and begins to masturbate, seemed highly unlikely. A neighbor sees him (apparently not for the first time) and throws water at him. Ann Rule described no such occurrence in "The Stranger Beside Me", which offered a very detailed account of Bundy's crimes. All the ways in which Bundy was apprehended in this film are also exaggerated, at least according to what I've read.

Another inconsistent subplot, probably made more confusing by hearsay, was Bundy's steady girlfriend, played by Boti Bliss. Her character, Lee, is based on the real woman (who went, for a while, by the alias Elizabeth Kendall) that would go on to write "The Phantom Prince" about her life with Bundy. Here, she is portrayed as way too oblivious to the obvious. The biggest dead ringer for her should have been the lewd sexual acts Bundy does to her, such as tying her to the bed and having her pretend she's dead. I don't know if Bundy really subjected his girlfriend to such an act, but there's no doubt this women wouldn't wonder, "Gee, I never knew Ted was a serial killer. I lived with him for years. Who is he?" I felt like saying, "C'mon, lady, the pretending you're dead didn't reveal anything obvious to you?"

Bundy was indeed a monster in real life. He wouldn't have murdered over 30 women in his lifetime if he wasn't. However, the scenes where he rapes and murders women, although they are gruesome, really miss what made Bundy so scary. He was a handsome, well-educated man who could have done a lot of good with his life, but instead chose to harm innocent victims. You'd know that fact from watching "The Deliberate Stranger", where the murders happen mostly off screen. In this movie, the murders happen right before your eyes, but the things that made the real Ted Bundy scary are completely lost here. This may as well be a horror flick from the makers of "Euro Trip". The filmmakers just missed the point of Ted Bundy. Period.

Perhaps the most upsetting is an otherwise good execution scene, combining real footage of people holding signs up in favor of Bundy's death, ruined by an ambiguous montage of kids saying "I am Ted Bundy". What was the point of that end footage? Not only should Spike Lee sue these filmmakers for pointlessly ripping off "Malcolm X", but why would these kids even know who Ted Bundy is? Of course, exploitation defies reason. Just ask whoever made this film.

Perhaps the most offensive movie I have ever seen. The first 80% shows our wacky hero Ted doing what he does best - stealing to an inappropriate techno beat (it was 1974!) & stalking honeys. Don't miss the wacky necrophilia montage! And the Colorado lodge murder is set to a synth version of Jingle Bells. That Ted was such a kick! One bright spot in the movie is Tom Savini's performance as a cop who cracks Ted's facade in naming all the victims. It's a good scene and belongs in a much better movie. But at last we get back to fun Ted heading to Florida for more good times.

Then the movie completely changes tone to an anti-capital punishment thesis. The bad ol' state wants to kill our guy! Funny Ted is sad. Poor Ted just a wacky clown brought down by the man. C'mon. If you're anti-death penalty, isn't there a better poster boy than TED BUNDY?? Movie offers no insight into Ted's motives or how he was able to fool so many for so long. And that ending with the kids? Good lord. Just an awful movie.

Matthew Bright's "Ted Bundy" gives us what might contain the best portrayal of a modern serial murderer on film. In the title role, Michael Burke is so revolting and psychopathic, he shows us what the slain and surviving women who met up with Bundy must have seen. His nonstop criminal was a compulsive thief and peeping tom before attempting to take a life for the first time. Ted follows a college gal home from a discotheque and, after he spies on her and masturbates in public while doing so, eventually in a subsequent scene, he steps up to the next level and beats a woman near death (that poor lady apparently survived her ordeal).

Once he has crossed that line, all hell breaks loose and any female who comes into his gaze could be a potential crime statistic. His relationship with Boti Bliss is a sick imitation of a loving man who positions himself in society as an upstanding figure and actually is a lethal destruction machine capable of taking lives until stopped by police or a bullet. Or both.

Ted later takes his homicidal self on the road and terrorizes several states in the Northwestern US (contrary to the urban legend concerning Debbie Harry, there's no evidence Ted ever went to New York). He manages to con person after person and the crime he eventually was sentenced to die for in Florida shouldn't have been logistically possible. He is the ultimate opportunist and his ability to resume his violence in the last third of the film when that should have been the end of his freedom will disgust any viewer in their right mind.

Too many filmmakers try to explain the motives for their subjects' acts. Bright and Burke simply present Ted as he was, a disturbed little boy who never "grew up", but enlarged into an adult offender with twisted fantasies of torture, rape and necrophilia that he brought into a world not ready to deal with these pathologies. He blamed the alcohol and pornography he consumed for his acts, of course, because the extreme audacity any felon like this would need to live with their lack of a conscience never admits that they are at fault.

The film take a voyeuristic slant on the material, with lots of lingering shots on the victims bodies.

Perhaps this was the goal of the director, but it blends elements of soft-core porn with the murder scenes. Almost a grindhouse horror movie. But since it's based on real murders, there's no camp factor, and is just bad taste.

For narrative purposes, it focuses on Ted rather than others around his killing sprees, but superficially. It doesn't try get under the hood and becomes repetitive.

It also makes him appear as if he's just a robot doing the killings, one right after the other. But I've seen interviews of him where there's a lot of internal conflict, self-serving fear, narcissism etc.

The script and the director takes chances, but don't deliver. The actors I think did their best, but overall it's a big missed opportunity to make this more than a rated R version of a Hallmark movie of the week.

The story of Ted Bundy is a truly fascinating one. The movie "Ted Bundy" however, failed to portray many of the most interesting periods in his life. That, along with one glaring bit of unrealism and a complete lack of tastefulness kept me from enjoying this movie. Some fine acting performances make the film watchable, but only barely.

Ted Bundy had a troubling childhood where he discovered in his early teens that he was illegitimate and that the man who had acted his father was in fact not. This was a terrible shock to young Ted and he retreated into pulp fiction detective stories that were actually soft-core pornography. Between feeling he had been betrayed by his mother and the sexual arousal he got from these stories, his pathos began to form.

All the while, Ted Bundy got good grades and kept up appearances at school. He graduated high school and college without real difficulty. He became very politically active for the Republican party here in Seattle, and made some contacts that would later be horrified to learn to whom they had given allegiance, most notably a man named Ralph Munro who would become the Attorney General of the state of Washington.

It is at this point where the movie starts, and not with his political prowess, but rather with a relationship he had with a local woman. The film depicts him trying to have genuine human contact and showing real concern to this woman, two things of which this monster was completely incapable. It only briefly shows him in a social situation where he proves highly charismatic, and can get almost anyone to like him within a few moments, a trait necessary to his future endeavors.

These scenes in Seattle offer a technical quibble as they seem to have been shot in Pasadena or some other southern CA location. There are shots with the San Gabriel Mountains in the background and some dreadful scenes at a park where the background is very sparse. Here in Seattle, one would have to drive 100 miles or more to find a park with a hillside barren of trees in the background, but this does not discourage our film makers. The most aggravating part of this is the fact that there are many places in northern CA that could have been used for Seattle without running the cost up too much, but the producers of the film were evidently not concerned.

Most of the rest of the film is devoted to his killings, and even shows a couple with seemingly perverse pleasure. While they do show him as a monster, there is almost a sick humor to them that I found somewhat inappropriate. The film does well to show that one of his jail breaks was facilitated by his befriending a guard.

The film completely disregards one of the most fascinating periods of his life however; his trial. Ted Bundy proved to be a fairly adept attorney and was able to mount a creative defense and the judge even complimented him on his litigation skills when pronouncing the verdict. While in prison awaiting trial, Ted Bundy developed a romance and went so far as to call the woman as a witness in his trial, and make his wedding vows part of his murder trial. This is totally overlooked by the movie.

All in all, this movie seems to be an excuse to show a couple of rape-murders rather than a serious attempt to understand the mental mis-wiring of one of the sickest persons ever to walk the face of the earth.

The most accurate Bundy film every made. Reading the other reviews, some mock scenes like him with corpses, for instance, like the scenes were invented by filmakers but they really happened. It wasn't some shock scene the film makers came up with, it's what Bundy actually did. He'd go back to his dump sites for weeks after killing his victims where he'd apply makeup on them. He was a necrophiliac. He was also a notorious thief. Those scenes have been described as campy but, again, they actually happened. As for the film, it's a well made film, very disturbing and terrifying at times.

Firstly I'd like to say, that I think I may have read something somewhere that this film was supposed to be loosely based on "THE" Ted Bundy. Which is why Bundy was "Bundy" on the title. But for the soul purpose of trying to be historically correct. You don't name a film after more or less one of the biggest serial killers in history then make it a ROUGH DRAFT, or loosley based lol with a lot of very false information and pure speculation on 90 percent of events. But still follow his timeline. Literally most of this movie is fiction. Made up of what people thought Bundy was like. Or may have acted in secret. Which is literally not described in the movie as a psychopath would act. The movie more so portrays Bundy as insane in his spare time 😂. When Bundy was a calm cool collective person, which a psychopath, a real psychopath is not what many believe it to be. Rather insane. The real Bundy probably would have been quiet. Maybe a very crazy look in his eye with a little change in demeanor showing his true colors. But the screaming and acting like an idiot. Lol I think the people who made this movie are insane. They hit nut job from asylum on the head. Michael Burke don't look, sound, act nothing like Ted in the movie. And again. Most stuff is fictitious. Truthfully. This was just a poor representation all around.

This movie might be okay if you don't know any details about Ted Bundy but if you do more than likely you will think it sucks.

This is a very disturbing film. The rage that was in Ted Bundy (Michael Reilly Burke) was not easy to watch. I don't think they could have found anyone better than Burke to do the character. Smooth and easy to the ladies until he got them where he wanted and then he was maniacal in his treatment.

He had a fetish for necrophilia, as he wanted his women almost dead as he raped them.

His smooth manner even enabled him to keep the guards off guard after he was arrested facilitating an escape. He managed to escape twice before he had his date with Old Sparky. Even a plea to help solve all the murders he committed, would not save him.

He was probably the worst serial killer in history. He was certainly a disgusting man.

Be prepared to leave your lights on in order to sleep for at least three days after first viewing this morbidly fascinating account of mass-murdering, intelligent sociopath Ted Bundy and his descent into soul-less depravity. As a study in human nature gone wrong, this is a fascinating body of work. Particularly because this movie is, unfortunately, based on the facts, I am grateful that the viewer is not forced to witness Bundy's every demonic act, though little is actually left to mystery. Chilling, thought-provoking, disturbing, tragic, and well-made, this movie is an often shocking account of one cold-blooded monster's reign of terror.

The best part for this viewer is that the movie allows us to see Bundy sentenced to death.

A. Freimann

This film isn't Shakespeare. But in it's defense, it may be the only film that portrays this villainous piece of human waste as exactly that and nothing more than that.

What we have here is Michael Reilly Burke (in his lone starring role of his career), in a not so convincing portrayal of Bundy. Bundy in real life was a role player n a genuine necrophiliac, a sadistic killer, handsome and charismatic, well versed with law n psychology n always with his turtleneck tshirts but Burke's portrayal reduced him into a comedic character. The masturbation scene n the facial expressions during the sexual acts were comedic. He didn't look like a student at all. In fact Zac Efron gave a good performance in Extremely......

The film lacked tension n suspense although it has violence, especially the repeated scenes of Bundy bludgeoning his victims n the aftermath necrophiliac acts.

The only 3 scenes I enjoyed are: when his girlfriend asks him whether he is enjoying the sexual act which she is painfully going thru. The scene where the officer beats Bundy with a baton. I wanted more repeated bashing of Bundy. And the best is the cotton ball n diaper scene.

We have Tiffany Shepis n Tom Savini in minor roles. Tom Savini shud hav been given the role of the cop who inserts cotton ball..... He wud hav done a better act with his grin on his face while inserting the cotton ball. First saw this in 2002 on a dvd. Revisited it recently.

Matthew Bright is best known for directing 'Freeway' and 'Freeway 2', two of the oddest movies ever to end up on the shelf at Blockbuster et al. Bright also wrote the absolutely bizarre cult classic 'Forbidden Zone', and even a telemovie about the awful 80s sit-com 'Diff'rent Strokes', so when I heard he had made this bio concerning one of the most infamous serial killers in modern history, I literally didn't know WHAT to expect. The opening sequences of 'Ted Bundy' with the unknown (to me) Bundy lookalike Michael Reilly Burke acting like a doofus in a bow tie had me wondering for a moment if Bright was going to play it strictly for laughs, but things quickly get darker and more serious. Bright adds very little of his usual black humour and flamboyant touches and the movie is all the more effective for it. The film doesn't attempt to explain why Bundy did what he did, there is no mention of his childhood or pop psychology, and I for one welcomed that. Burke increasingly became more convincing as Bundy, and the many murders were brutal and quite shocking. The long, drawn out execution at the climax was disturbing and highly effecting, and will be difficult for most viewers to forget. The strong supporting cast in the movie are largely unknowns, but keep an eye out for horror legend Tom Savini (who also did the special effects) and 'Repo Man's Tracey Walter in small but memorable roles. 'Ted Bundy' is in many ways a change in pace for Matthew Bright, but shows that there is a lot more to him than you might think. I was impressed by this movie, one of the best true life serial killer bios I have seen, and one which raises many more questions than it answers. I recommend it to anyone who is fascinated by the darker side of human nature, and puzzled by aberrant behaviour.