Bundy: A Legacy Of Evil (2008)

MAY 20, 2009


Having already watched Ted Bundy, I wasn’t really expecting much out of Bundy: A Legacy Of Evil. I knew the story, read one of the books, plus I had seen the ORIGINAL Bundy film, Deliberate Stranger, when I was a kid. But surprisingly, Bundy is actually above average in the land of DTV serial killer movies, with a great lead performance from Corin Nemec to boot.

Now, I can’t recall enough about Mark Harmon’s performance to judge, or compare to Nemec’s, but I do know this: only one of these men have been voted the "Sexiest Man Alive". And the guy in Ted Bundy played him as a complete loon. Nemec, I think, perfectly nails the balance. He’s a handsome fella, but he’s a bit off, like he’s afraid to speak or trying too hard to fit in. This, as I understand from the book I read, is what Ted was like, and it’s nice to see it depicted accurately. Kane Hodder also delivers a surprisingly strong performance, though his role (a sympathetic warden) should have been thread throughout the film instead of just bookending it.

Another surprise was how non-violent the film was. There is very little on-screen violence, with only one of Ted’s attacks depicting the physical violence on the victim’s person. The others settle for Ted swinging away, but not showing the contact. Also, the “Good Samaritan” type of kills (when Ted would kill a girl who offered to help him with his books or his sailboat) are presented in a montage, again with almost zero on-screen violence. It’s refreshing.

However, the film as a whole carries the strange stigma of being inaccessible to those who aren’t familiar with the Bundy story. If you had never heard of the guy or what he did, this movie would be the last place I would start. Even Ted Bundy, with its nonsensical anachronisms and borderline comedic tone, painted a better overall picture of the guy and his crimes. Very little here seems made up or changed (though I don’t recall anything about Ted kidnapping a woman and bringing her to a deserted shack, where he would psychologically torture her), but it’s presented in a very loose manner. Here’s the time Ted escaped from jail; here’s Ted working with the future governor; here’s Ted killing the girls at the sorority, etc. I knew how all this stuff fit together, but the writer/director should not expect everyone in the audience to know those things. As a result, I’m not entirely sure what the overall point of the film is. Am I supposed to feel bad for Ted? Some scenes suggest I should. But then they also include the (true) part of Ted’s trial where he made a cop describe the murder scene in graphic detail for his own amusement, which would kill anyone’s sympathy, I would think.

But here’s the kicker. The film’s final shot faded away, and I said “OK, well, maybe once I know who wrote and/or directed this, my questions will be answered.” And then it appeared: “Written and Directed by Michael Feifer.” Feifer? The arch-nemesis of Horror Movie A Day? The man behind three of what I consider to be among the all-time worst horror films I’ve had to review? Yep, same guy. So if anything, this didn’t help at all, because now not only do I have questions about the film’s intent, I also wonder if this guy (who has several other serial killer movies on his resume) actually does have an ounce or two of talent in his body. Was this movie a fluke, or did I happen to watch his three worst movies? Or are Nemec, Hodder, the DP, the production designer (the 70s wardrobe is spot on, though they kind of botch it during a San Francisco scene, as all the extras are in modern clothing), and the composer (I LOVED the music in this movie) all so good that the lack of filmmaker talent has no effect on their respective duty? It is a mystery.

(The DVD will include Feifer’s commentary, but my screener did not have it. Maybe that some answers.)

So if you have more than a general understanding of the Ted Bundy story, this is definitely recommended. Nemec delivers a terrific performance that should not be missed. Unfortunately, if you only know Bundy by his name alone, then that performance won’t mean too much beyond “Hey, Parker Lewis can act!” (incidentally, this is Nemec’s second serial killer role - he also played Richard Speck in Chicago Massacre. Also, he played Stephen in I Know My First Name Is Stephen and appeared in another DTV movie about the Boston Strangler. Big true crime buff, I guess).

What say you?

HorrorBlips: vote it up!


  1. I think this movie was good-- it focused on some facts the other Bundy movies left out and so does a lot of books. That is the fact that Bundy revisited the bodies applying make up to some and having sex with the corpses.

  2. ...I know my first name is Stephen...sigh.

  3. I have a copy of THE DELIBERATE STRANGER which used to scare the crap out of me as a kid. We will have to get together and watch it soon.

    I like the other "TED BUNDY" (with Shepis) too! I'll check this one out eventually. :-)

  4. "This guy" is quite talented. In fact, "This guy" has a degree in architecture and was a professional graphic designer. What no one understands is that "this guy" is hired to make these movies for very little money in a very short amount of time. While making movies is my passion it's also my business. It would be much appreciated if the web critics would recognize the fact that my movies are constantly compared to multi-million dollar films even though they're made on budgets that are 100th the cost. Honestly, I consider the comparisons to be a huge compliment and achievement. If you only knew the budgets and the amount of time I have to make my movies you might respect what I do more. Also, all of my movies are released by major labels like Lionsgate. My track record of successful commercial releases cannot be matched. Finally, rather than simply delivering bloodfests and gore, I try to deliver films with more dimension by providing either a biographical history such as Chicago Massacre or Bundy or a character study such as B.T.K.

  5. And I appreciate your honesty on the matter. However, I feel that the majority of the films of yours that I have seen suffer from that sort of business-like approach to making a horror film. It's great that everyone makes money, but often the finished product is just that, a product, something that is devoid of any genuine passion for the material behind or in front of the camera.

  6. I love how this review comments on Nemec's performance, most other reviews are so hung up on the the terrible directing that they completely forget about his fantastic and very convincing performance.

  7. I too had read books about Ted Bundy but found this movie to be unevenly told (he's still with Stephanie at the halfway point?)and while I appreciated that this film didn't present Bundy in some sort of romantic way, I found Nemec's portrayal to be a little cartoon like. The real Bundy could appear charming- Nemec contorts his face into a snarl in every scene. (I really liked Nemec in The Stand, so I blame the overacting on the director). Some scenes were horrible-in one, Bundy pulls a severed head from a hatbox and the camera zooms in on it so viewers have no warning. The film seems to imply Bundy had a handful of victims instead of the over 100 as claimed by Bundy himself, so viewers may not understand the scope of his crimes or of the terror felt by the public. My biggest complaint is that after Bundy is put to death, the final image we see is that of a happy seeming Ted walking down a road and then raising his arms up in victory. I couldn't understand what this was supposed to mean. He didn't appear to be in Hell...are we supposed to think he's in Heaven? What a strange message. This was a poorly told story and it wasted the talent of Nemec. Horrible movie.

  8. It was better than BTK I'll give it that. I can't believe directors want to change the stories of serial killers so much instead of giving an accurate portrayal of what happened. Why cast ppl who are awful choices in lead roles as serial killers?? One guy cast Antonio sabato Jr. as Henry Lee Lucas , then cast David freaking Faustino as the Boston strangler smh. Nemic is the closest he's come to casting an actor who could pull off a mild resemblance to the person they're portraying. David Faustino (bud Bundy) is prob shorter than Warwick Davis, yet he plays Albert desalvo who was over 6 feet tall. And looked NOTHING like him. Antonio sabato Jr. as Henry Lee Lucas was just a choice I'll NEVER understand. He was obviously an ethnic actor. Puerto Rican, Latino, whatever playing a redneck one eyed white serial killer who did NO research at all on southern accents and gave a laughable yet frustrating performance. I liked Bundy to a degree but if I hadn't already known his story inside out I would've been lost the whole time.


Movie & TV Show Preview Widget