Dahmer

Magandang pelikula!

source: Dahmer

I was hesitant to watch this film at first for obvious reasons, but am glad I did. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I doubt very much that the real Jeffrey Dahmer was as likeable as Jeremy Renner made his character to be, but then I wasn't watching just for the blood and guts. Renner's portrayal made me want to watch. On that level the film succeeds. Of course, the film was at times hard to watch. Artel Kayaru sparkles as Rodney, and I hope we get to see him in future roles. I liked the way the movie ended without getting too technical about how Dahmer was eventually caught. It wasn't necessary as this story will be told again and again. Instead this film gave us an insight into a very disturbed mind. I'm giving it a strong "9."

I saw this film a few years ago, The final scene showed Dahmer disemboweling one of his victims and having sex with the body. Just watched this again and that was no longer in the film. Doing a search shows this version seems to have disappeared with only a trace at amazon.co.uk Very unusual for there to be no record of this on IMDb or WikipediA. Made the film that much more disturbing. I wouldn't say that should be a deal-breaker because I would recommend this film for Renners portrayal and performance. I will say that the movie really let me down the second time viewing due to the total lack of gore that the UNCUT version provided.

This movie is a true example of a 5 star indie film. It is scary and exciting, well edited and directed. It is such a unique portrayal of this story we have all heard a million times. The director really kept things interesting and fresh. This is the type of film I recommend to anyone that wants to see a high quality indie. Great Soundtrack too.

and not OTT serial killer film I've seen. I like the whole view of Dahmer as a very lonely kid. On reading about him you, or rather I, get that impression. Autophobia is a terrifying thing to suffer from and I can see how this, in an unstable mind, could lead to what he did. The performances were great, especially from Jeremy Renner. The camera work was superb. The blending of flash backs with real time events were smooth and stylish. the soundtrack in fact was quite good too. We all know the outline of your average serial killer e.g broken family - killing animals - beaten by mother - go kill women etc etc. Dahmer didn't fit this, probably why he got away with it so often and probably why he's more interesting than any of the other psychopaths out there. I think you'll find it dull if you are looking for blood and gore but Dahmer wasn't one of those kind of killers, he killed for company, not blood lust.

Jacobson's film shows little violence. That's a point I'd like to stress because there is a certain audience I think will appreciate this film but who may not give it a chance because they expect graphic nastiness. Against the film's interests, the marketing tries to sell the film to the cheap horror-movie audience and I think this is a pity. Instead of depicting violence, Jacobson's film discomforts you using dramatic means - principally writing and acting. All of which are used with enough skill to distinguish the film from cheap horror movies. It would be wrong and unfair to dismiss Dahmer because of its packaging. It is a well-written and performed character drama. It's subject matter is too horrible for the general drama audience to welcome, but at the same time its serious approach makes it too straight for the entertainment market. By that I mean the Hannibal Lecter/Seven audience, who prefer their serial killer tales abstracted (and therefore made safe) by the presence of movie stars. Dahmer is more akin to Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer in being low budget, filled with unfamiliar faces, and focussed so much on the killer that there is no awareness of the authorities or justice in the story. There is no hero cop or FBI agent in pursuit. Dahmer is very unlike McNaughton's infamous film because, as already mentioned, it's low on violence, but also because it's a technically better-executed piece of work. The photography and editing, the use of music, the already-mentioned acting and writing, make this a surprisingly good-quality film considering the expectations stacked against it. One technical achievement I find worth noting is how well it recreates period. Sequences set in the 80's have a visual authenticity that puts big budget studio attempts to shame. Obviously, you know what kind of film you like. If what I've said above sounds interesting to you, then I recommend giving it a look. I repeat that you will not see much in the way of gore or violence. There are plenty of films with more graphic content dressed more commercially. Dahmer won't make you feel good. It isn't a fun movie. But if you are looking for something with more substance you may find it.

Let's face it: people who will watch this to see violence or some of the acts of the most notorious serial killer, Jeffrey Dahmer, will be disappointed. The reason? That's because the film doesn't at all emphasize in Dahmers sadism or cruelty - it's a human look into the mind of an inhuman psycho. Well, I suppose the film is trying to be objective. Not to merely shock, but then again there's too few of Dahmer's unspeakable acts, that one might wonder what the writer/director was trying to do? Anyway, watch this if you like serial killer films, but don't expect too much. Give it a try, it's quite decent and serious film.

"Dahmer" is, by and far, one of the best films I have ever seen. Like it or not, the famous and infamous are inevitably mythologized. They become ciphers for the human dilemmas and attributes which compel them to commit the acts that grant them their notoriety. Serial killers such as Jeffrey Dahmer are no exception. For better or for ill, they take their place in the pantheon of popular culture. How, then, to handle this? It is easy to turn a figure like Dahmer into a devil, a monster who embodies the most violent and irrational of human impulses. This, sadly, is far from productive or enlightening. It says nothing of the human condition besides the depths to which it can sink. Do we really need another film to learn this? The capacity for human evil is made more than apparent by the atrocities one encounters when reading a history book. The makers of this film attempted something different. Dahmer becomes a sort of avatar of human loneliness, of alienation and the terrible force of sexual frustration and the wrath it inspires. We are shown a lonely man who craves the affection of others but is incapable of attaining it in the normal fashion. The Dahmer of this film employs drugs and violence to subdue those he desires and transform them into living dolls. The viewer gets the sense that, as he cuddles with the comatose body of his victim, he wants nothing more than a body beside his own as he struggles through his nightmarish sleep. Renner, the actor who portrays Dahmer in this film, says more by the contented look on his face as he holds his victims than any philosopher has ever written about the nature of the relation of Self to Other. The acting is superb in this film. The soundtrack, especially its use of Siren's haunting "Blue Theme," does wonders to capture the type of loneliness which the makers of this film have used Dahmer to symbolize. Most impressive, perhaps, is the use of image as narrative. There are far too many examples to cite, of course. However, one stands out clearly in my mind. Flashing back to Jeffrey's younger days, he is shown attending a party he holds at his own home. Wandering about alone, he happens upon a couple engaged in amorous play. After watching for a few moments, he leaves the home and commends himself to the night. Unable to touch the Other, we inevitably delve deeper into the Self. "Dahmer" shows us what happens when such a descent brings us into darkness. God help us when we finally glimpse the soul and come to the realization that it is not spirit, but an abyss.

Based on real-life serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer, who was active primarily in Wisconsin in the 1980s, this film focuses on a few key episodes in Dahmer's life. If you're at all familiar with the facts about Jeffrey Dahmer--and probably a hefty percentage of people interested in the film are familiar with Dahmer to some extent--it's difficult to watch this film without strong expectations. The problem is that under those expectations, Dahmer isn't likely to be the film you want it to be. It might work better if you're unfamiliar with the background material, but on the other hand, it might be too disjointed to work in that case. You need a familiarity with Dahmer's life to piece the film together as you watch it. That's not to say that the film is a complete failure. In fact, I gave it a 7 out of 10. Jeremy Renner, who plays Dahmer, is fantastic. Bruce Davison, as Dahmer's father, and Artel Kayaru, as Rodney, also turn in great performances. Writer/director David Jacobson chose to make the film a psychological portrait, rather than a chronological retelling of Dahmer's misdeeds, and rather than focusing on the lurid details of the crimes. After the first 20 minutes or so, the film becomes non-sequential, and links together a number of events that provide clues (as much of a clue as we can have, at least) into Dahmer's behavior. We see Dahmer interacting with his family (primarily his grandmother and father) in a peculiar, distanced way. We see him discovering and trying to come to terms with his homosexuality in a twisted way. We see his desire for intimacy. We see actions taken by the police that would be unbelievable if we didn't know that they actually happened that way, more or less. We see him constantly drinking alcohol through most of these events. This makes up the bulk of the film. In fact, we only see Dahmer kill two humans during the course of the film, and both are relatively not graphic, and relatively quick events. All of this was intriguing to me, but I wanted the lurid details to be explored more. Dahmer was a man who conducted experiments on his victims, trying to turn some of them into lobotomized, robot-like companions. He kept vats of acid in his apartment to dispose of body parts. He had a severed head in his refrigerator. He cannibalized victims and engaged in necrophilia. To make a film about Dahmer where these things are not explored not only downplays the severity of his crimes, but it also leaves out fairly essential aspects of Dahmer's character, if this is to be a character study. I found myself regularly checking the running time, wondering how and when Jacobson was going to get to this other material before the film had to end. And for someone unfamiliar with Dahmer, they probably would spend a lot of time trying to figure out why the film keeps jumping from one event to another, frequently going back and forth with the same events. The bottom line is that while this film is more than worthwhile as a kind of extended footnote, a much better film about Dahmer needs to be made. Let's just hope that we can get someone as gifted in the role as Renner to be in that film.