B.T.K.

The only good thing about the movie is the main actor is semi-decent. Otherwise the color pallet is off-putting, the death scenes are lame, most of the movie is boring, there's no character development and the movie just ends without much of a resolution at all. Not worth your time even for someone who likes watching bad movies. It's not so much bad as it is pointless. Not to mention the title makes little sense as it has very little in correlation to the real life B. T. K. killer

Rating - 15/100

I am really not sure what writer and director Michael Feifer was trying to do here. I hate to think he was just capitalizing on the publicity surrounding the B.T.K killer, but it seems obvious that he didn't do more than that.

Kane Hodder as Dennis Rader was scary. Even when he was doing his day job, he came across as someone you really didn't want to mess with. Pity those that did, as they often wound up as his victims in the evening. When he talked to one young girl about her dog, or another that was lost, you could just see the predator oozing out his pores.

Hodder was the only good thing about this movie. He played the evil Rader better than anyone I could imagine. He was the essence of evil.

Unfortunately the rest of the move was definitely lacking in the sleaze one would expect of a film about a serial killer. If you are going to do a story about serial killers, a whole lot more realism would be nice.

Any discussion of Rader's past or motivations, or anything about the police work that led to his arrest was seriously an afterthought.

A missed opportunity to make a seriously good picture, on the horrific crimes of the most notorious 'B.T.K' Serial Killer. 'B.T.K' (the film) is not just inaccurate but for most times, pretty dull. Any documentary on this most terrible, horrific case, would have been far more compelling.

This wasn't one of the worst films I've seen however, I haven't much positive to say about it either, except that it was a real stinker.

When you watch a horror film you want to see certain elements that make the story thrilling and scary.

What makes a bad film is when you already know the plot, the serial killer, and his motives, the film is predictable and you can already have a solid guess of how it will end. BTK doesn't move you, it doesn't shock, or scare you, and is very dull and uninspiring.

BTK is a film about a well know American serial killer. I, however, didn't know anything about him before watching this film.

To start with it felt as if it were shot in the '80s or '90s with some close-up camera angles, and gritty shots of our killer's face, and the victims, I was flabbergasted to find out was filmed in 2008.

There were very few moments where I was intrigued as the story was quite slow-paced. The positive moments included Kane Hodder's performance as Dennis Rader going about his day-to-day life. He was a strict security officer that seemed to thrive, and get enjoyment being the authority. It almost seemed as if he believed in his mind that he was upholding the law and being such a great role model to society.

That was semi-interesting. Now for the dreary parts of the film, and believe me there were many. The writing and overall plot were lackluster. The performances and casting minus Hodder were sluggish and lacked passion. It was as if the casting directors just grabbed regular people off the street and offered them a few hundred dollars to play a minor part in the story. And finally, the overall execution of the film was just poor. You don't feel satisfied by the end of the film, and quite obviously shouldn't have any positive feelings towards Rader being a sadistic psychopath.

This is one of these watch it once and then forget type films. Although I highly recommend skipping it altogether.

3/10.

I try not to go off on rants when commenting. After seeing this I can't help but rant. This was such an amateurish attempt to put a spin on the story B.T.K. The real life story of this serial killer is fascinating in a macabre sense. B.T.K. was a media sensation known world wide. Now why would a director try to make a movie based on their half cocked interpretation of what made B.T.K tick? All they had to do was stick with what happened. Once in a while people that make movies get to clever for themselves. I got caught up reading about B.T.K and watching docs on what this killer did. As Rachel Maddow would say try to talk me down. B.T.K. is a movie. In movies it's expected that a director will take a little creative license with facts. B.T.K. went beyond that. What could have been a engrossing movie about a serial killer turned out to be a director playing Freud. This director needs to watch Son of Sam by Spike Lee before making one more movie.