Movies: Ted Bundy: Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile

[alko]

It seems, there will be another Ted Bundy movie.

Click to read more...

 

[Jumptheshark]

isnt the movie already done?

thought they started filming two years ago

 

[Trap Jesus]

Love Efron as a casting decision to play Bundy. We'll see how it turns out.

 

[MetalheadPenguinsFan]

Interesting

 

[bohlmeister]

Always thought Rob Lowe should play Bundy.

 

[End on a Hinote]

Always thought Rob Lowe should play Bundy.

Apparently he was offered the role in a 2002 DVD movie of him but turned it down. I always thought he would be the perfect actor to play him, he looks quite similar to Bundy.

 

[alko]

 

[ORRFForever]

It is terrific!

 

[Tuggy]

Honestly, it was average for me. I'd give it a 6/10.

I much preferred something like "The Ted Bundy Tapes". But I watched them around the same time, so that could be why I didn't care for the movie as much.

 

[End on a Hinote]

Thought it was very average aside from Efron's excellent portrayal.

Is it just me or can you really tell the difference in quality between a Netflix original film and a theatrical one?

 

[ORRFForever]

Is it just me or can you really tell the difference in quality between a Netflix original film and a theatrical one?

Yeah.

Netflix Originals are much better that a TV movie but not up to a theater release - altho, they do sometimes release their movies in the theater.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Thought it was very average aside from Efron's excellent portrayal.

Is it just me or can you really tell the difference in quality between a Netflix original film and a theatrical one?

It can feel that way but I'm not sure how much of this is just due to inherent bias due to Netflix's poor track record for movies. Seems like people go into watching a Netflix movie saying, "Ugh... Netflix." Looking through their filmography, the exceptions that stand out are:

Beasts of No Nation
Okja
The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Roma

I have not seen this movie yet BTW.

 

[Nizdizzle]

I found this one really unsatisfying.

SPOILERS AHEAD:

Spoiler

You pretty much know from the outset that Bundy is a terrible human being. There is no slow burn, or gradual realization to the film. Just a series of mostly sequential events. The movie never really explores Bundy's ability to charm and coerce his victims and mainly focuses on his family and a girl that it obsessed with him (never shows why she is obsessed with him). I enjoyed most of the courtroom scenes, and thought Efron and Malkovich had a great chemistry.

One review I read really nailed the issues I had with it: Naming the picture Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil, and Vile and then having nothing wicked, vile, or evil present in the movie just seems like it didn't capture what it promised, and I think Zac Efron could have done a great job if the let him portray the darker side of the character.

 

[ORRFForever]

It can feel that way but I'm not sure how much of this is just due to inherent bias due to Netflix's poor track record for movies. Seems like people go into watching a Netflix movie saying, "Ugh... Netflix." Looking through their filmography, the exceptions that stand out are:

Beasts of No Nation
Okja
The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Roma

I have not seen this movie yet BTW.

Good point.

We would probably have to see everything on the big screen to tell.

 

[ORRFForever]

I found this one really unsatisfying.

SPOILERS AHEAD:

Spoiler

You pretty much know from the outset that Bundy is a terrible human being. There is no slow burn, or gradual realization to the film. Just a series of mostly sequential events. The movie never really explores Bundy's ability to charm and coerce his victims and mainly focuses on his family and a girl that it obsessed with him (never shows why she is obsessed with him). I enjoyed most of the courtroom scenes, and thought Efron and Malkovich had a great chemistry.

One review I read really nailed the issues I had with it: Naming the picture Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil, and Vile and then having nothing wicked, vile, or evil present in the movie just seems like it didn't capture what it promised, and I think Zac Efron could have done a great job if the let him portray the darker side of the character.

Anyone remember the TV movie with Mark Harmon?...

 

[ACC1224]

It can feel that way but I'm not sure how much of this is just due to inherent bias due to Netflix's poor track record for movies. Seems like people go into watching a Netflix movie saying, "Ugh... Netflix." Looking through their filmography, the exceptions that stand out are:

Beasts of No Nation
Okja
The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Roma

I have not seen this movie yet BTW.

That was brutal.

 

[Osprey]

Is it just me or can you really tell the difference in quality between a Netflix original film and a theatrical one?

I think that it's mostly our imagination. When watching a Netflix original film, it's easy to chalk anything that we feel could've been better about it up to it being from Netflix, but theatrical films are loaded with things that could've been better, as well. There are also countless bad movies that hit theaters, but, when one comes from Netflix, it can confirm these feelings.

I've watched several Netflix original films and all of them were good enough to be at least average theatrical films. They were all produced for $10-50M, which is the low end for theatrical films, but still in the range. We can't expect a $25M film to entertain us in the same way as a $150M film might. If you compare Netflix's movies to theatrical movies with similarly low budgets, though, they stack up pretty well, I think.

BTW, the best Netflix film that I've seen is The Highwaymen (with Kevin Costner and Woody Harrelson). That had a $50M budget, a slew of recognizable faces, a good script and great production values. Everything about it was theatrical quality, IMO.

 

[jasonleaffan]

I watched it but, this movie is misleading. It barely covers any of the extremely wicked and vile things Ted does, but delves deeply into his relationship which was not what I was tuning in for. By not really exposing the depths of his depravity, it leads you to believe he was just your run of the mill serial killer. This film does go hand in hand with the recent multi part doc they released on him.

 

[chicagoskycam]

Doc on Netflix was better but this was interesting from a different perspective I guess. Gives you a lot of detail about his relationship and how it impacted her.

 

[Jovavic]

Disappointing, for sure. Efron was pretty good but they told the wrong story and made it boring

 

[End on a Hinote]

I think that it's mostly our imagination. When watching a Netflix original film, it's easy to chalk anything that we feel could've been better about it up to it being from Netflix, but theatrical films are loaded with things that could've been better, as well. There are also countless bad movies that hit theaters, but, when one comes from Netflix, it can confirm these feelings.

I've watched several Netflix original films and all of them were good enough to be at least average theatrical films. They were all produced for $10-50M, which is the low end for theatrical films, but still in the range. We can't expect a $25M film to entertain us in the same way as a $150M film might. If you compare Netflix's movies to theatrical movies with similarly low budgets, though, they stack up pretty well, I think.

BTW, the best Netflix film that I've seen is The Highwaymen (with Kevin Costner and Woody Harrelson). That had a $50M budget, a slew of recognizable faces, a good script and great production values. Everything about it was theatrical quality, IMO.

That could be true, too. I think Netflix does a great job with it TV series' and some of their films arent that bad either. It just seems to be their "popcorn" movies like Bright and Bird Box that struggle. But I do agree about the possoble stigma of it being an online movie. When Lillyhammer was released in 2012 I was overwhelmed by the idea of what is essentially a website releasing a TV Series.

It can feel that way but I'm not sure how much of this is just due to inherent bias due to Netflix's poor track record for movies. Seems like people go into watching a Netflix movie saying, "Ugh... Netflix." Looking through their filmography, the exceptions that stand out are:

Beasts of No Nation
Okja
The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Roma

I have not seen this movie yet BTW.

Forgot about Beasts, that was a good one for sure. Haven't seen the others yet.

Yeah.

Netflix Originals are much better that a TV movie but not up to a theater release - altho, they do sometimes release their movies in the theater.

It's true, Netflix is definitely a step above Lifetime and Hallmark for films.

 

[Osprey]

That could be true, too. I think Netflix does a great job with it TV series' and some of their films arent that bad either. It just seems to be their "popcorn" movies like Bright and Bird Box that struggle. But I do agree about the possoble stigma of it being an online movie. When Lillyhammer was released in 2012 I was overwhelmed by the idea of what is essentially a website releasing a TV Series.

I haven't seen Bright, but I thought that Bird Box was pretty decent and of theatrical quality, especially for the genre. It could've been better in a few ways, but that's the case with nearly every theatrical horror films, as well. Heck, the general reaction to Bird Box, as lukewarm as it was, was probably better than what half of all theatrically released horror films receive. When you consider how many mediocre horror films make it into theaters, it was fine, IMO.

Edit: I watched Bright last night. That, too, was pretty decent and of theatrical quality, IMO.

 

[Trap Jesus]

That was brutal.

I wasn't a big fan, but it didn't feel like a "Netflix movie". Huge name directors that did not need to go the Netflix route. Same goes for Okja and Roma, and to an extent Beasts of No Nation.