The Boston Strangler (DVD)

== THE BOSTON STRANGLER ==


This is a ‘Film Only’ review of the film – ‘The Boston Strangler’ released in 1968.There is what could be called a spoiler in this review, but when you watch the film, you realise that I am not spoiling anything for you, it will become fairly self explanatory.


Somehow I had never seen the film starring Henry Fonda, Tony Curtis and George Kennedy. I was a bit of a wimp back then ...
...another case of ‘nothing on the telly’, left me looking through Sky Anytime for something to watch and decided to give the old film a watch.


When the film was first released it was very controversial. It was directed by Richard Fleischer and produced by Richard F. Zanuck for Fox. It was one of the first R rated films in America - the same as our 18 .By today’s standards it would certainly be no higher than a 15, it contains ... more

THE BOSTON STRANGLER

This is a ‘Film Only’ review of the film – ‘The Boston Strangler’ released in 1968.There is what could be called a spoiler in this review, but when you watch the film, you realise that I am not spoiling anything for you, it will become fairly self explanatory.

Somehow I had never seen the film starring Henry Fonda, Tony Curtis and George Kennedy. I was a bit of a wimp back then and probably thought that the 18 rating meant that it would be a violent film.
Last night, another case of ‘nothing on the telly’, left me looking through Sky Anytime for something to watch and decided to give the old film a watch.

When the film was first released it was very controversial. It was directed by Richard Fleischer and produced by Richard F. Zanuck for Fox. It was one of the first R rated films in America - the same as our 18 .By today’s standards it would certainly be no higher than a 15, it contains a tiny bit of nudity, some rough language and of course a pretty horrific subject matter. But I’ve seen far worse on the News at Ten!!

So, is the film worth taking the time to watch in the 21st century?
My opinion is that if you would like to watch some really constant and good performances from Henry Fonda, Tony Curtis and George Kennedy it is well worth a watch. You probably however want to rent and not buy the DVD – or, better still, like me, watch it on Sky
It’s not a film imploring you to watch it again.

The film was based on the book written by Gerold Frank, that told the true story of the 1963/1964 Boston Strangler case. This case saw 13 women in suburbs of Boston brutally strangled, stabbed and usually sexually assaulted.
It presents the story first from the viewpoint of the police who investigate the murders and then shows in suspense-thriller style how the murderer kills his victims and then how he is caught and interrogated.

Most of the film is really basic police routine. The first half of the film shows the killings and the feeble police manhunt to catch the Strangler. These proceedings are led by Henry Fonda and George Kennedy.
The director tried to make it more interesting by using a split screen technique – rather like is done in today’s Trial and Retribution. Through the split screens, we see the victims, then the discovery of the bodies of brutally murdered women (well usually just their feet!!)

In 1963, when three bodies are discovered an FBI director (William Marshall) picks State Attorney Joseph Bottomly (Henry Fonda) to be in charge of the case. He will supervise the Boston Police efforts in capturing the serial killer the press has christened The Boston Strangler.
During their investigation the police interview every known sexual deviant on their records , there is even a little humour in this section.

It is around half way through the film that we first see Tony Curtis as Albert De Salvo watching the 1963 funeral of President John F. Kennedy with his two young children and wife.
This is a 42-year-old Curtis playing a decent hard-working husband and father (but also one who occasionally turns into a brutal sadistic serial killer.)
I was really surprised by the solid performance that Curtis gave.It was a performance completely different to what he normally gives. I found that as I am more used to a suave or funny Tony Curtis seeing him in this role gave the character a lot more edge.
This film isn’t about suspense—audiences in the 60’s and now knew that the murderer was caught and that Tony Curtis was playing the bad guy. The intensitity in the film is the how and when and the final interrigation.
Bottomly finely does catch g his man.
It is during the interigation scenes that Curtis really delivers a powerful performance.

Will any of the victims live through their ordeals ?
How will the police catch the Strangler?
How will De Salvo cope with interigation?

As the film ends, you are told that DeSalvo never stood trial for the murders but was institutionalised and was still alive.

The true facts on DeSalvo are that he was sentenced to life in prison in 1967. The next day he gave himself up and was transferred to the maximum security Walpole State Prison where he was found murdered six years later in the infirmary. He had been stabbed. The killer or killers were never identified
.

BOTTOM LINE

The film was rather dated with regards to cars, clothes, attitudes etc but you soon got used to that.
I found the film to be strangely gripping despite its odd structure. It's hardly a whodunit, since De Salvo barely appears until the second half, and then it's immediately clear that he is the Strangler.
I did enjoy the film, and for a fourty year old film it wasn’t too bad at all.
As I said earlier I wouldn’t recommend buying it, but certainly worth hiring.

3/5 stars for this film
 

...less