B.T.K.

Yeah, it's a semi-pro attempt @ the story, but just seeing all the bad facelifts on the nobody actresses and the way the tension of the story keeps you going (even though you know the ending) is worth it. The lead actor playing Dennis is pretty good, and a decent set of guns on him as well. The way his scars in real life were not covered up was a good idea. Makes you wonder if that was part of the story until you read the bio on the actor. Bad acting is everywhere, but how many people want to be in a movie about a serial killer. Not a date movie that's for sure. I'll never leave my car parked 1/2 way in my driveway blocking the sidewalk after seeing this movie...lol

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.

Very interesting subject for a film but very poorly done. Timelines of murders were completely out. The way in which he was caught was completely different. If you know anything about B.T.K in real life and like me was interested in watching a film regarding this, don't bother!

The only half decent thing about this was the lead actor playing B.T.K. He did come across as a good actor to employ for this role. Unfortunately the writers clearly got confused that this film is called B.T.K. It could have been about any Serial Killer.

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.