The Secret Life: Jeffrey Dahmer

I bought this used and only payed $1.99 for it. That said, it's worth that kind of money. It's pretty decent for an extreme-low-budget film, but it could have been much better. To me, Carl Crew wasn't believable as Jeffrey Dahmer. He wasn't the right physical type, nor did he speak with Dahmer's distinctive nasal accent. And frankly, the constant "I should have stayed with God" diatribe becomes annoying after a while.

For a more realistic and subdued look at Dahmer's life, see the new film "Dahmer" with Jeremy Renner. Renner's performance as Jeffrey is so dead-on, it's scary. And while it doesn't get into as many of Jeffrey's killings, everyone should already know the basic story by now.

Bottom Line: If you can see this movie cheap, it's worth a look. But the 2002 movie is far superior, in my opinion.

"The Secret Life" starts with the worst possible narrative intro: "The crimes committed by Jeffrey Dahmer are too horrible to make a film about...". Okay, so what are you suggesting? That we shouldn't bother to continue watching as the film won't be accurate or bloody, anyway? And they were right, too! The film isn't the least bit shocking and contains almost no blood or gore at all. Although I think that's mainly due to the low budget production values and not because of Dahmer's crimes being too horrific. Basically, "The Secret Life: Jeffrey Dahmer" is just one sequence repeated over and over again. Young, pitiful and mentally confused Jeffrey picks up victims (always males, as he was a homosexual), kills them and then talks about how it wasn't his intention to hurt them and about how lonely he is. This gets boring really quick and even the admirable performance by unknown actor Carl Crew can't save this movie from being a total dud. Still, this version is much better than the pretentious and hopelessly muddled "Dahmer" that got released in 2002.

This is a tough film to review, since several factors need to be taken into account. Let's filter the more judgmental..Ok, are you interested in the facts concerning the serial killer of Jeffrey Dahmer? Can you withstand an independent, low-budget film? Are you objective enough to NOT dislike a film solely due to its lack of stars or professional look? Well, if you said yes then you should have a mind open enough to handle this one. This film is an almost 100% accurate dramatization of Dahmer's adult life and subsequent murder spree, and is styled as an autobiography. It isn't a glamorized, unrealistic account that unfortunately the theatrical film "Dahmer" (2001) was. The movie begins with Dahmer, played quite convincingly by Carl Crew, sitting in the police car as they raid his apartment. His thoughts of what got him there are presented to us in a past-tense, narrated style that accurately explains much of Dahmer's psychoses and motives which led him to commit murder almost 20 times. We get to know the character, both the devious side as well as the side that came moderately close to living a normal life. It isn't anyone's fault but Dahmer's that 17 people died, but being a criminal psychology student, I was pleased to more than just his animalistic side represented, truthfully, in this film. You see him having a loving relationship with his grandmother as well as trying to find companionship, but of course we witness the side of him that everyone remembers. It should be noted that there is little actual onscreen violence, with much of it suggestive in shots such as spattering of blood or a body being struck through a blurred curtain. You do see two deaths that I remember, one being a pretty bloodless throat slash and the other being a man shoved alive into a barrel of acid. While you don't see anything graphic, this cruelty and the convincing acting of both Crew and his victim make this a disturbing scene. And while the actual onscreen mutilation is kept low, you will see the results. There is a prop hand and head or two, but it seems as if this was to disturb the viewer and doesn't look to be exploitive. Besides, these fake anatomical pieces are where the budget limitations are visible. Although acceptable, they look enough like fakes to not be too disturbing. The film actually concludes before Dahmer's death in 1994, due to the fact that it was released a year or two prior. That's about the only big difference from the real story, and the information that remains is, as I've stated, very true to the facts. The film quality could be better, the dialogue often sounds a little too quiet, and the acting of several characters IS a bit hammy, but it's not overboard. In my opinion, this is a flawed but ultimately honest and serious look into one of America's most remembered serial killers. I think it's safe to say the film is memorable as well, and I respect it for overcoming its limitations to deliver the story in a believable manner, aided by a thoroughly excellent Carl Crew as Dahmer.

Considering the type of films one usually comes across produced on this low of a budget, Dahmer "The Secret Life", is suprisingly well made. Despite it's shortcomings;tedious scripting and dialouge, sub-par cinematography, and repetative scene structure-(i.e. two or three run-throughs of Dahmer's modus operendii would have been more than sufficient.) definate high points do shine through. Carl Crew's acting job held my interest till the end. Special make-up effects were better than I've seen on alot of "Big Budget" movies. The producers seem to have spent most of the limited funds where it counts most anyway. Overall, I'd rate this movie with three out of a possible four stars.

The Secret Life: Jeffrey Dahmer is slightly interesting, but it goes around in circles too much. It never really taps into his mind, or shows why he is, what he is. It just shows Dahmer luring countless victims, and that's it. The special they did on Dahmer on the show Mugshots, was much more informational and interesting. Overall, slightly interesting, but the special they did on the show Mugshots, is far better. ** (out of four)