IMDb RATING
5.4/10
6.5K
YOUR RATING
Based on real events, Paul Bernardo and his wife, Karla Homolka, kidnap, sexually abuse, and murder three young girls.Based on real events, Paul Bernardo and his wife, Karla Homolka, kidnap, sexually abuse, and murder three young girls.Based on real events, Paul Bernardo and his wife, Karla Homolka, kidnap, sexually abuse, and murder three young girls.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Carole White
- Waitress
- (as Carole Ita White)
Kristen Honey
- Tina McCarthy
- (as Kristen Swieconek)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Karla was difficult to watch. Not necessarily because of the subject matter or that it's based on real events. No. It was difficult to watch because they tried to make you feel bad for Karla. The woman knowingly married a serial rapist. She willingly made a gift of her younger sister to him. The same sister that died because of it. Not to mention she participated in the rape and murder of several children and managed to cop a plea deal on the whole thing when caught by concealing evidence along with help from her lawyer.
Karla Homolka was not a victim. She was a willing participant and any attempt to turn her into a sympathetic character is just pissing on the graves of the people she helped to kill.
Karla Homolka was not a victim. She was a willing participant and any attempt to turn her into a sympathetic character is just pissing on the graves of the people she helped to kill.
In most respects, this is a very "modest" film, with only some very brief shots of a naked breast and no other frontal nudity. Even the major violence occurs in a Hitchcockian manner...recognized, but off-camera. (There are several scenes in which Karl is struck by Paul, but they are on par with a typical TV western.) The underlying problem is that this film is very true to the facts as they are known about this case. This apparently disturbs a great many people. No effort is made to justify the actions of Karla and Paul, though the majority of the story is told from the self-serving point of view of Karla herself. We are given no insight into what it might have been in their pasts that would lead them to act in this manner and commit such horrible acts. My reaction to this film, being very familiar with the case itself, is not one of revulsion or horror, but one of great sadness. These were some truly sick people. Be sure to view the extras on the DVD, as they help illuminate what actually happened after the trial and reinforce the fact that the courts and jury did not believe Karla for a moment.
I'm rarely a fan of one star ratings, as they are usually reserved for the ignorant, uncultured, or extremely bored. This time, I'm afraid, there really is no choice but to rate this as lowly as possible. The truth of who this woman is was not demonstrated in this film, and that served to inappropriately victimize a naturally born psychopath while barely paying respect to the victims: Tammy Homolka, Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy. This murderess is portrayed as a classic Stockholm's sufferer, but the overwhelming evidence proved she was anything but. I know I'm writing this in 2020, and this film was made a little over 10 years prior, but it doesn't erase the fact that we need to stop telling stories like this unless they are true to the facts and serve to respect and pay homage to the victims. When you can walk away from a true crime story without quite remembering the names of the victims, the story has failed. Everyone involved with this production should be ashamed. I refused to finish out of respect for Leslie, Kristen, Tammy, and loved ones still reeling from this unbelievable nightmare created by two narcissistic, psychopathic bags of flesh and bone.
Being Canadian and the fact this film isn't widely available up here I feel compelled to offer some comment on what many consider a tragic story exploited for financial gain to no end.
Those of us that lived this story back in the early 1990's and the subsequent trial of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka can attest to the degree of disgust many felt at the crimes these two committed. The film is accurate in many respects as to details of the story, but make no mistake that the details were far more sadistic and brutal than what has been portrayed in this movie. At least to those of us that have read the transcripts of the videotapes that Bernardo took of his victims, and one can hardly blame the director from omitting those details or forcing an actor to play such a role out.
My only beef with this movie however is that it does attempt to paint a picture of Karla Homolka being just as much a victim here as Bernardo, and although no one can deny she was under his influence and subject to this violent outbursts, to suggest she had no control over this situation and simply tagged along for the ride is to suggest that she was just as much a victim of Bernardo as the two murder victims. Those versed in this case know much better and the role she may have played in the death of Kristen French (aka Kaitlyn Ross) is something we'll likely never know as there are those that suggest she was directly responsible for killing the second victim.
The acting in this film is nothing notable, but given the nature of the roles played here it's wonder they found anyone to play these two to begin with. Because of the difficult subject matter I'll let the mediocre acting pass because for it to be much better would almost be like saying the actors immersed themselves perhaps a little too much in characters that most would find revolting and if not downright sickening.
In the final analysis, 'Karla' is a film you'll only watch once and personally I don't think this was necessarily ever meant to be a movie for mass consumption either at the theatre or your local videostore. That being said, Canadians should have the right to see this movie for those so inclined vs. having the state tell us what is suitable or unsuitable for our viewing pleasure as there are movies out on the market FAR more disturbing about real life events than this flick could ever hope to be.
Those of us that lived this story back in the early 1990's and the subsequent trial of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka can attest to the degree of disgust many felt at the crimes these two committed. The film is accurate in many respects as to details of the story, but make no mistake that the details were far more sadistic and brutal than what has been portrayed in this movie. At least to those of us that have read the transcripts of the videotapes that Bernardo took of his victims, and one can hardly blame the director from omitting those details or forcing an actor to play such a role out.
My only beef with this movie however is that it does attempt to paint a picture of Karla Homolka being just as much a victim here as Bernardo, and although no one can deny she was under his influence and subject to this violent outbursts, to suggest she had no control over this situation and simply tagged along for the ride is to suggest that she was just as much a victim of Bernardo as the two murder victims. Those versed in this case know much better and the role she may have played in the death of Kristen French (aka Kaitlyn Ross) is something we'll likely never know as there are those that suggest she was directly responsible for killing the second victim.
The acting in this film is nothing notable, but given the nature of the roles played here it's wonder they found anyone to play these two to begin with. Because of the difficult subject matter I'll let the mediocre acting pass because for it to be much better would almost be like saying the actors immersed themselves perhaps a little too much in characters that most would find revolting and if not downright sickening.
In the final analysis, 'Karla' is a film you'll only watch once and personally I don't think this was necessarily ever meant to be a movie for mass consumption either at the theatre or your local videostore. That being said, Canadians should have the right to see this movie for those so inclined vs. having the state tell us what is suitable or unsuitable for our viewing pleasure as there are movies out on the market FAR more disturbing about real life events than this flick could ever hope to be.
Girl falls in love with boy, discovers he's a rapist, marries him and colludes in his continued depravity, then gets caught.
Earnest tale told in plain flashback, with no insight on the characters and no interest in the nature of truth and little by way of visceral horror. The killing scenes are tame, giving no sense of the rush of adrenalin in perpetrators or victims, or the ugliness and finality of violent death. So overall it feels like an old-fashioned made for TV movie.
You get to the postscript and find an entirely different character from the one portrayed by the lead actress, and it's a real head scratcher to think they didn't use that angle to mess things up and break from the linear story telling.
Performances are fine. Lighting is mostly bright, so no great moodiness. Music did its job.
Overall: Simple tale of depravity that didn't feel depraved.
Seems there was controversy in Canada over this, and several of the actors repudiated the film, with lurid tales of misconduct on the set. Its real weakness is that it pulls its punches and fails to be nasty enough.
Earnest tale told in plain flashback, with no insight on the characters and no interest in the nature of truth and little by way of visceral horror. The killing scenes are tame, giving no sense of the rush of adrenalin in perpetrators or victims, or the ugliness and finality of violent death. So overall it feels like an old-fashioned made for TV movie.
You get to the postscript and find an entirely different character from the one portrayed by the lead actress, and it's a real head scratcher to think they didn't use that angle to mess things up and break from the linear story telling.
Performances are fine. Lighting is mostly bright, so no great moodiness. Music did its job.
Overall: Simple tale of depravity that didn't feel depraved.
Seems there was controversy in Canada over this, and several of the actors repudiated the film, with lurid tales of misconduct on the set. Its real weakness is that it pulls its punches and fails to be nasty enough.
Did you know
- TriviaSince the film's release, Misha Collins has said that he regrets participating in it. He said that he was unaware of the infamy and strong emotions in Canada surrounding the crimes. After a telephone conversation with a victim who managed to escape, he now routinely tells people not to watch the film, especially when it comes up at Supernatural (2005) conventions. Occasionally, fans ask him to sign their DVDs of the film.
- GoofsWhen Karla and Paul drive off after abducting a teen, about 56 minutes in, a crew member in sunglasses is clearly visible on screen.
- Quotes
[last lines]
Karla Homolka: Dr Arnold was right. I did kill somebody. I killed my sister. How can anyone ever be forgiven for that? I think about what I did every day. I really do.
- Alternate versionsThe film was scheduled to have its world premiere at the Montreal World Film Festival in August 2005, but it got pulled due to the controversy surrounding it. Since then some of the rape scenes of the teen girls have been removed for the 2006 theatrical release in order not to break any Canadian child pornography laws.
- ConnectionsReferenced in Nasi: Scény z manzelského zivota (2016)
- How long is Karla?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $5,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $130,416
- Runtime1 hour 42 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content