Bostonský škrtič (2008)

Absolutely Brilliant!

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Blistering performances.

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

I love movies based in Boston, since I am from the Boston area I have high expectations. This looked good but wasn't. The acting was not good also many plot holes. All around disappointment. Will not be watching this again.

There are so many movies to watch these days I can be forgiven if I missed the earlier versions of the Boston Strangler. As a Brit, I had heard of the Strangler in childhood but didn't really know the story (true or otherwise). Just done a little bit of extra research to back up my thought process.I actually enjoyed this film though I totally agree that David Faustino is no Tony Curtis, that this film is no blockbuster and Albert is portrayed as too cocky and unlikely to be the actual Strangler. Perhaps Mr Feiffer wanted us to think that from the beginning, more a scenario of who was the strangler but who it wasn't - and it couldn't be Albert, although the evidence in the film pointed to him.The use of the newspaper cutting was clever and even subtle reference to the 1968 Tony Curtis movie itself. The guy in the cell with Albert and who collaborated with him, the name in the movie is different, real life is George something? A man of high IQ.Obviously it prompts further research to understand background and I would like to see the 1968 curtis film plus a later one of 2006. What I am curious about is that the crimes of strangulations stopped, did they not, after Alberts arrest and detention - or did they continue? At the end of the movie (and this is hardly a spoiler in the circumstances) it is declared that there is conclusive DNA evidence against Albert being the killer of a couple of the ladies strangled and the film itself suggests that there were copycat crimes, as indeed there were for Jack the Ripper in London.The film should be seen. it is not a powerful drama but I do believe that it does what it sets out to do (to tell the untold story) and sets the ever curious among us to do more research on the subject.

Boston Strangler: The Untold Story has been told. Not by this movie. It has been told by numerous docs and news shows. This movie is another example of low rent studios try to cash in on serial killer exploits no matter if it is a bad movie. Spike Lee showed with Son of Sam how to make a great movie based on a serial killer that has been covered from head to toe by docs and news shows. Nothing was shown that grabbed me by my collar. No tension existed. Either who ever made this didn't know how to build up to the murders or didn't care. They collected their money from the studio. They don't care what people think. I am pleading directly to the director and studio chief of this movie to stop this. Planet earth is over run with waste. We as a people do not need to add to it with this sorry movie. Where do disappointed people write to get a refund? Who is with me?

"Boston Strangler : The Untold Story" is a poorly acted, horrendously written, low budget, garbage movie. This film fails on so many levels, it's difficult to know where to start. The acting is about on the level you would expect from a high school theater. As to why Bud Bundy was cast as the lead in this role, I'll never know. But to the actor's credit, they didn't have much to work with. The writing in this film is among the worst I've ever seen. We are forced to sit through many long pointless scenes and terrible, self-serving, completely unrealistic dialog sequences.I recommend no one see this movie. Doing almost anything else for an hour and a half would be a better use of your time.