Extremely Wicked Movie: A Misguided Portrayal of Ted Bundy [REVIEW]

The beginning of the year opened with a four-part documentary series about infamous serial killer Ted Bundy on Netflix called, Conversations with a Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes. The Netflix series created a renewed interest in his cases and the man himself, 30 years after his brutal crimes took place. Then, a film with a long title—taken from the words of the judge during his final sentencing—Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil, and Vile, premiered during Sundance, before being picked up from Netflix so they could capitalize on all of the Bundy buzz. After watching the docuseries first and now this new film, Extremely Wicked is a well-acted but lesser version of what the Ted Bundy Tapes covered already.

Interestingly enough, both pieces were directed by Joe Berlinger, a longtime true-crime aficionado at this point in his career, stemming all the way back to his Paradise Lost trilogy.  Having only a basic knowledge of Ted Bundy’s name and reputation before going into Conversations with a Killer, I was equally horrified and fascinated of the phenomenon of his crimes and subsequent trials in 1970s America. There were so many layers that Berlinger uncovered in the docuseries, from the inadequate investigative technology, the scope of his crimes that spanned many states and dozens of bodies, the media spectacle of his case (it was the first nationally televised trial), and Bundy’s charisma and intelligence that had many women convinced that he was innocent. Add that to the fact that the documentary was told through his own taped confessions before he died, and it really was a chilling and effective series.

Part of what I was excited about before going to see Extremely Wicked was that it was going to be from the perspective of his longtime girlfriend, Elizabeth Kendall, which is something the docuseries touched on but not in great detail. The initial trailers also spawned negative reactions and accusations of glorification of the serial killer by casting former child star Zac Efron. I thought the casting was a suitable choice just on the warm and charming nature of Bundy, which led to many women’s attraction to him, and it is something Efron captures well in the movie. While the film starts off from the perspective of Elizabeth or Liz (played by Lily Collins), screenwriter Michael Werwie, seems to fall victim to Bundy’s charm and the narrative quickly becomes told from his version of events. Berlinger uses a similar technique in Conversations with a Killer but provides evidence and testimonies for context, something this film does not do.  

The unfocused narrative is ultimately why the film was not successful for me, because it exposes it trying, and failing, to be three things at once. The film is simultaneously trying to cover a broken romance from Liz’s perspective, Bundy’s undying fight against (what he believes) are wrongful convictions while in jail, and a courtroom drama in the last 40 minutes of the film. To be sure, these are all valid pieces that make up Bundy’s story that are connected in the film, but the execution is faulty. For example, Liz’s desperation leads her to a downward spiral into alcoholism, but the film only shows us this through the perspective of others. Whether Bundy is calling her from jail or one of her friends coming over for moral support, she is never given a moment alone or time to develop, despite the film being based on her own book, The Phantom Prince: My Life with Ted Bundy.

I think the narrative decision to follow Bundy comes from Berlinger’s fascination with him and for much of the movie Bundy is rarely ever seen as wicked, evil or vile, which is problematic for a film about America’s most famous serial killer. Ted Bundy’s own tape recordings shared a similar fascination about himself and “a high number of serial killers are malignant narcissists,” often suffering from “delusions of grandeur.” It would be a different conversation if the film showed his narcissism and delusions in a sinister way that the audience could see, but instead the script portrays him as a sympathetic man, who is wrongfully imprisoned and in love with Liz. At one point, he even sends Liz the autobiography Papillon, as if to say that he’s just like the innocent protagonist in the book. While there are some similarities in both stories, the wrongful imprisonment is not one of them, but the viewer would not know that by just looking at a majority of the film. Almost all of his criminal acts are skimmed over, and the film skips through time quite a bit to get to the trial and see Bundy defend himself in a courtroom (Bundy was studying to be a lawyer).  

For all the movie’s faults, the courtroom scenes might be the most effective in showing Bundy’s skill as a lawyer and ability to manipulate an audience, which at the time was all of America. This could not have been done without Efron’s committed performance to the role, one where he is so in tune with Bundy’s smiles and mannerisms that after a while it’s easy to forget that he’s playing him. While I would have liked Lily Collins to have had a larger role, there’s no denying that their chemistry, and Efron’s nuanced take on Bundy is enthralling. John Malkovich as the fiery Florida judge was also fun to watch as he yelled out real televised lines like, “don’t shake your finger at me young man!” and utters out the title of the movie in an impassioned speech during sentencing.

The film’s finale saved some of its questionable decisions, by having a final reveal that wouldn’t be possible by showing police reports and tape recordings like the documentary does, but only through filmmaking, with dramatic music and intercut scenes. I imagine the reaction they want to the finale is similar an M. Night Shyamalan ending, and it somewhat succeeds on that front, just don’t expect Sixth Sense level results. Ultimately, the movie took a huge swing by telling a story that I thought was already successfully done with Berlinger’s previous series, and I wish I could say it paid off more. I question whether someone watching this film with no knowledge of Ted Bundy will have a better appreciation for it or if he made it as a companion piece to the docuseries.

Overall, I would recommend this film to people who are genuinely interested in Zac Efron’s transformative performance, and also to true crime fans who want to see the real-life story translated on screen. For those who complained about glorification, I must admit it does feel like “The Ted Bundy Show,” and if you already know the story and don’t feel like watching him charm his way through courtrooms and women, I would say to pass on this. It just proved to me what I’ve known all along about true crime in that reality is scarier than anything a movie could conjure. Nowadays we lock our doors and turn on our lights, but Extremely Wicked reminds us that sometimes the true horror could be lying in bed with us the entire time.

My Rating: 2.5 out of 4 stars