Dahmer has a creepier feel to it, while Henry is in-your-face offensive. Henry is a much more violent and grusome film, yet it has it's own sort of dark humor to it.
Dahmer 2002 movie review serial#
Both are well-acted movies which depict horrific, real life, killers. Going for an almost stream-of-consciousness approach, director David Jacobson creates a world in which the exploits of serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer seem. I can't help comparing this film with Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. The result is somewhat interesting, yet uncomfortable. It just tries to create a snapshot of him. The movie doesn't try to either glorify nor explain Dahmer. The non-linear story line is creative, but the story is just nasty. Still, it is such an unpleasant character that I can't give this more than a 6.
We only see Dahmer murder two people in the picture while his acts of necrophilia and cannibalism are lightly touched on.
It does successfully give you some insight into Dahmer's character. Jacobson provides several illuminating flashbacks to Dahmer's sad, troubled childhood, his anguish and self-hatred about his homosexuality, and his problems with alcoholism. The title alone is exploitive, yet, to its credit, the film doesn't emphasize the most gruesome aspects of Dahmer's terrible crimes. This film presents exclusively the point of view of Jeffrey Dahmer, a. Written and directed by David Jacobson in 2002. It's basically a psychological portrait of a serial killer, and the subject and actions depicted are both revolting and despicable. Detailed plot synopsis reviews of Dahmer. Providing no real new insight into Dahmer's mind and falling far short in terms of exploitation value, the film simply exists in a sort of void that, despite assured performances and direction, leaves the viewer dry.Dahmer is a tough film to watch and even tougher to rate. Though the interaction with a personable young man whom Dahmer lures into his lair (Artel Kayaru) does provide psychological chills by providing insight into Dahmer's twisted logic, one increasingly gets the impression that there is no real reason for the film to exist. Flashbacks in particular tend to weigh the film down as it moves along, appearing from time to time to provide a glimpse into some of Dahmer's previous crimes, but providing absolutely no motivation for those crimes, which even he seems initially repulsed by. Dahmer glides between past and present, re-creating Dahmer’s life as a. Since those details have been so graphically portrayed in the previous and much more obviously sensational The Secret Life of Jeffrey Dahmer, Dahmer's lack of gore and historical ambiguity at times edges it toward a more low-key form of exploitation, though the solid lead of Jeremy Renner (despite bearing little to no physical resemblance to Dahmer through the majority of the film) as well as a fine supporting cast and an underlying honesty keep it barely afloat despite its shortcomings. Movie Reviews Trailers Film Festivals Movie Reunions Movie Previews. At its worst, the film is a pointless attempt to once again capitalize on the name of a true-to-life boogeyman in the form of failed exploitation that doesn't even begin to explore the deeply revolting nature of his crimes. At its best, David Jacobson's journey into the mind of one of history's most notorious serial killers is an unusually restrained and introspective view of an unhinged mind that committed unspeakable acts of atrocity that, if portrayed accurately, would detract from the subtle approach taken in Dahmer.
0 kommentar(er)
