User reviews

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.

"Dahmer" tries to tell one of the most horrific stories of recent years. But the whole story of Jeffrey Dahmer does not get told in this movie. There are some shocking moments, but most of the movie gets bogged down in flashbacks (and even flashbacks-within-flashbacks). At some points, you cannot tell if you're watching another flashback or the present moment in the story. Jeremy Renner plays the title character, with an adequately creepy air. Some of his ghastly crimes are shown, while the gore is kept to a minimum. And Dahmer's homosexuality is mentioned, but much of it is kept just off-camera, as evidenced by the montage of Jeffrey's date rape drug-fueled sodomy marathons. This movie does not try to present Jeffrey Dahmer as Dr. Hannibal Lecter. (How could anyone glamorize this murderer?) But I would have preferred some kind of analysis as to why he became a killer. The strange and tragic story of Jeffrey Dahmer left a lot of people sad and wanting answers. But this movie left me wanting satisfaction.

I found Dahmer to be an interesting exploration into the mind of a serial killer. Light on exposition(flashbacks aside), it allows the viewer to fill in the gaps as to Dahmer's motivation. I think Jeremy Renner did a terrific job portraying Dahmer as a soft-spoken misfit and outsider who's just looking for love. David Jacobson explores the duality of Dahmer effectively and subtlely, as when Dahmer watches people having sex with a mixture of detachment and disdain,and then seeks out his own sexual liaisons with disastrous results. He is so full of self-loathing and shame that he must first drug, then kill his victims to avoid facing the rejection he is sure will happen. When he finally meets Artel Kayaru as Rodney, he has met his alter-ego...someone carefree and uninhibited and it's apparent Dahmer is experiencing conflicting emotions and perhaps some kind of revelation. But it's too late to save him. Low on gore and violence, which was refreshing. Cinematography was first-rate. Locations were depressingly banal and middle America, settings which seem to breed the most monstrous impulses. A lowkey and worthwhile look into the results of unchecked fear rage and shame, and an invitation to explore the little Dahmer in all of us.

The first time I viewed this film. I thought it was pure trash. But for some strange reason many moons later - I watched it again. And really liked it a lot. And that's why I recommend watching it the first time with an open mind. And not expecting a gorefest. Myself - being a big fan of the horror genre. Expected to see Jeffrey depicted as a homosexual lune - carvin/sexin' up guys left and right. I mean I had read about him some and knew there was more to him then this psycho. But I figured a movie about him would want to focus on the killings for shock value. Boy was I in for it. This movie doesn't focus on Jeffrey the killer. But Jeffrey the person. And really succeeds in doing so in my opinion. But rambling on - I want to leave reader's with this. If you're planning to watch this movie. Please do so with an open mind - and not expecting the stereotypical Jeffrey Dahmer. You'll be disappointed if you don't.

By the way: I want to give some praise to writer/director David Jacobson. Very talented guy imo. I'll definitely be looking into more of his projects. Jeremy Renner as well. Really nice job portraying Dahmer on screen. Good casting choice.

I really felt cheated after seeing this picture. It felt like I sat watching this movie 101 minutes for nothing. I don't understand what they were thinking when they made this. It hardly gets into Jeffrey Dahmer murdering and it has no ending. It felt almost like they were leaving this movie open for a sequel. It was like watching a television episode of the Sopranos. It ends suddenly, and you know there's going to be another episode next week. It also felt like I just watched part 1 to a two part movie. There are many possibilities for what went wrong here; they got lazy, they ran out of money, they didn't know the rest of the story, they wanted to make a Dahmer 2. After seeing this movie they all sound very accurate. I was watching Jeffrey Dahmer walking through the woods. All of a sudden I hear this music playing, then writing comes on the screen and says how Dahmer served 2 years of his sentence and was attacked by a fellow inmate and killed at the age of 34. Wow, he goes from a walk in the woods to his death in jail. How about showing how he got there. How about showing Dahmer's trial. How about showing some more detail. I can't even explain what happened in this movie because it jumped all over the place. I actually found myself saying in disbelief, "That's it, that's the end?" I want to conclude this review by saying there is still a good Dahmer movie yet to be made. To the filmmakers I'd like to say, if you're going to do it, do it right.

Movies based on real life serial killers tend to get a lot further under my skin than those with fictional maniacs—films like Dahmer, which details the nauseating activities of gay serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer, who drugged and dismembered his unlucky victims, concealing their body-parts in and around his home(s). The fact that these events actually happened (I can remember the discovery of Dahmer's victims in the news) and are portrayed so convincingly makes Dahmer seriously chilling viewing.

Jeremy Renner, as the titular killer, is simply superb, effectively playing the character as both a teenager and an adult. Director David Jacobson shoots in a non-linear fashion, which adds a further dimension of interest, yet he also avoids sensationalism, the gore quotient kept relatively low and other unsettling details of Dahmer's lifestyle thankfully obscured in a drug and alcohol infused haze. It's a wise move: this study of Jeffrey Dahmer's life is disturbing enough without matters getting too graphic.

This is not a pleasant viewing, although it is a plenty impressive one.

Renner (from everything I remember) looked about as close to Dahmer as anyone could, and acted very much like a young stalker/creep/lonesome/manipulative/ murderer would. I wasn't extremely impressed by anyone else in the film (not that they were bad, just not memorable),, but Renner definitely showed the beginnings of what he would be bringing to the screen in the future.

I would not watch this again,, I only wanted to see Renner's portrayal. An actor studying a more experienced actor playing a psychopath.

Watching Dahmer, even if you happen to be the one or two people in America who don't know that much about him aside from being a serial killer (as I was), I felt like something is missing. I wasn't sure if it was something in Jeffrey Dahmer's past, as the filmmaker did more than enough to emphasize that aspect of his past crimes (though whether or not he was insane from childhood or from around that mannequin incident is questionable at best), but whenever we got closer to the real dark side of Dahmer's nature, of his insecurity and homosexuality, it kind of pulled back into another plot line or something that just felt 'off'. It's not that the subtle care to Dahmer is unappreciated. It's a welcome change from past serial killer movies.

But looking up what Dahmer really did, and what he was really like, this movie didn't fully get into the potential areas of interest of who this guy was, or who people could think he was. Instead we get this tale of morbid insecurity, of a man who frequented a gay bar drugging his rape victims, and had one of his significant kills (a 'chop-up' kind of story) after he was turned down for sex. There's a hint of the really bizarre with the mannequin that appears. And there's some family repression as seen by Jeffrey's father (Bruce Davison). It's not that there is a lack of information, but it's the presentation. After hearing about what happened with that final not-quite victim (the one in the film seen as the gay black guy Dahmer brings back and gets drunk with), one would hope such an outrageous and oddly human scene could make it's way in.

Instead we get a director who is into some effective artistic choices and other times some meandering scenes with less-than-stellar music choices. Oh, there is one very good thing going on though in the film, one that makes it worth seeing, and that's Jeremy Renner. It's hard to see who else could play Dahmer with such a chill in his voice but a human need to connect with others, somehow, even in his warped and awful way of doing it. We're meant to understand him, if not of course sympathize with him, and Renner makes this more than just a possibility. He's electric and intense when he needs to be- those eyes are piercing- but he's also tender and careful with the way he moves in a room or around another guy, or how he has Dahmer contemplating a piece of flesh like the Asian guy he brings home drugs. If nothing else, you can see a great actor working at a high point of his powers. he deserves a Dahmer film that shows how flawed and damaged he was, but that something else the film can't quite get to.

Watching `Dahmer' is an upsetting experience. Not because of the movie's content, rather because of the lack thereof. The film concentrates more on Dahmer's homosexuality than his murderous nature, and though he is surely twisted, we don't really get into his mind enough to realize why, or to what extent. Renner is a great talent, and plays Dahmer to eerie perfection, but he cannot create what was never there - a compelling story. For two hours we bounce back and forth between Dahmer's adolescence and young adulthood, watching him prey upon innocent males, and then the movie ends without climax or resolution. One is struck with a sense of loss at what the movie could have been.

It has been a long time since I have been this disappointed in a movie. There is so much to offer in a good depiction of the gruesome true life story of the cannibalistic serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer. There is torture, murder, cannibalism and homosexuality to deal with and this movie poorly addresses anything that just might be interesting. This drag ass movie is as thrilling as a zombie relay. Jeremy Renner portrays Dahmer as if in a high school play. Veteran actor Bruce Davison even comes across lame. Surely another director, writer and producer could make the Dahmer story with the thrills and horror of reality this movie lacks.

Extremely well acted, particularly by the lead. Appropriately creepy and atmospheric -- as well as poignant and introspective. Makes a character out of a "monster". Examines Dahmer's struggle with his homosexuality and that struggle's basis for his sickness. Doesn't focus on the violence, and doesn't explore the cannibalism at all. Flashback structure works well. Liked the comparisions of his banal teenage years to the horrific current years. Would have liked a little bit more of an acknowledgement of how totally out of control this guy became. Cinematography is excellent at times -- but is bedeviled by some sloppy focus work. Again, the lead actor is topnotch. This is a work to be proud of.

Not a documentary or even a docudrama. However, offers an interesting look into how society might churn out a serial killer. Definitely worth seeing. Jeremy Renner does an admirable job of presenting an inside look at a lost soul. The rest of the cast is good as well. I originally feared it might be just a laundry list of victims' stories, but this is much better.

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.

We rented this in expectations of a look at one of our worst sociopaths, the things he did, how he did them, and perhaps a delving into what helped create him as well as what happened to him.

Yes, we read the box and knew it was essentially a 'fictionalized' account of things.

This is not a movie. It is perhaps at best a character study. We see encounters he has, and flashbacks to other supposedly significant instances in his past, and that's it. The flashbacks at first are a tad confusing because while it doesn't broadcast the word "FLASHBACK" at you, the first one or two will look like just another scene.

We found no real tension building up either, except perhaps towards the beginning of the movie which appears to be the encounter that got him found and captured. There are other moments where one would expect something to happen that are scuttled by the fact that a) we know the real Dahmer got away with it and 2) it just didn't build up.

"Dahmer" seems to be a cure for insomnia, and a lesson in how not to make movies at best. At least "Plan 9" is entertaining in it's bad-ness...

Telling the story of true crimes in films can be riveting and profound. Examples are In Cold Blood, Ten Rillington Place, even Bonnie and Clyde. The theatrical release of this movie is hard to research. It's likely viewers would have walked out or promptly fallen asleep. Distributors were wise to skip this one. It seemed to have no connection to the true Dahmer story. The extremely slow pace and self-conscious shots of Dahmer just sitting in a chair were enough to drag down any well-intentioned effort. Somewhere in here is the seed of a good movie -- and that's what is sad, disappointing, and downright annoying. There was an intriguing and tragic story here, but was sadly lost on this sorry, soft relating of what could have been a hard-hitting and informative film.

What can I say? The high note is that Renner as Dahmer was very good. That said...

The pacing was surprisingly bad. With all that Dahmer did you'd think 1 1/2 hours would be crammed to overflowing. But there is so little content-and it is strung together so randomly-the movie makes you yawn.

The story stops before his arrest and after any key childhood events. We see his first victim and, it is suggested, his last, but really nothing much about Dahmer or simply what Dahmer did was shown. We get two snippets from his life-his bazaar one night relationship with a potential victim, and scenes from his first murder that suggest his family life was strained. Suggest, because we don't really find out anything out about his past. Plus it moves from past to present so randomly that I was at first confused as to what was happening when-but then again, I stopped caring before long.

This movie simply frustrated me at every turn. I learned nothing and was only sparingly entertained.

*1/2 out of ****

People seem really disgusted by the film, but the only thing that disgusts me are the negative reviews. This is a very well-made film that was put together on a very low budget. Films like this always have the immediate handicap of focusing not only on an evil, psychotic main character, but focusing on an evil, psychotic main character who we all know. There weren't too many complaints about "The Talented Mr. Ripley" (a great film) focusing on a psychopath, but that's because Tom Ripley is a fictional character. Like everybody, I believe that what Jeffrey Dahmer did was wrong, and I feel sorry for all the families who lost sons and other relatives due to him. But this movie was not made to portray him as a hero, nor a villain. It's meant to portray him as a person. We all know about the crimes that Dahmer committed. But we don't know about Dahmer himself. We don't what drove Dahmer to madness, and what led up to the subsequent rapes, murders and eventual cannibalism. And the movie doesn't try to shock us with gory details of these grisly occurrences, because that's not its intention. There's no use showing us what we already know.

I found this biopic deeply fascinating. I learned a lot about Dahmer that I never knew previously. I can't say I relate to him that much, other than being lonely and an only child, but that didn't stop me from seeing how he was as a human being. While watching the film, I said to myself, "How come we don't learn much about his family life?" Maybe his family life had nothing to do with choosing to be that way. Not every serial killer commits murder because he was abused as a child. From the looks of things, he had a pretty well-to-do upbringing.

What I did get a sense of was his alienation and shyness. He felt his homosexuality served as a handicap in his society. And he wasn't brilliantly sociable, so he didn't have an easy time making friends or getting guys to go out with him, or have sex with him for that matter. But his perversions took him so far that he'd walk into a gay bar and slip roofies into guys' drinks (which is shown in an extended montage), take them to the back and have sex with them as they're helpless and passed out. It's interesting to find out this can happen among homosexuals as well. There's a long history of guys slipping roofies into women's drinks to get them in the sack, so Dahmer was no different from any horny heterosexual guy, only he took it many steps further.

One thing I must criticize is the use of flashbacks. When I first watched the film, I had the impression that the whole movie was about young Jeffrey Dahmer and the story was told in a linear fashion. But after watching the featurette and watching it a second time with the commentary, I realized that the movie was bouncing back and forth from Jeffrey in his later years to Jeffrey in his earlier years. I personally didn't think slapping facial hair on him made him look much older. He still looked like he was in his twenties, so I had no hint of his aging. Once I watched it a second time, the story became much more clear to me, but others watching it for the first time might get confused as well.

I liked the use of lighting. Jeffrey's room is lit completely red, giving it almost a hell-ish appearance. And towards the end, the lighting becomes much darker, as Dahmer becomes more evil.

The performances are good all-around. Jeremy Renner does an incredible job at playing Dahmer, expressing a laundry list of emotions with his face and body language alone. I kept trying to recall where I saw him before, since his face looked very familiar, and then I checked his filmography and found out he was in "National Lampoon's Senior Trip." Of course, this movie gave him a much better opportunity at showing off his acting abilities. Talented, underrated actor Bruce Davison makes a few appearances as Dahmer's father, also doing an incredible job the 10 minutes-or-so he's on screen.

Though I found the film fascinating and thought-provoking, I still wish I could've learned a little more about what drove Dahmer to madness. The director mentioned it wasn't his intention to give backstory on Dahmer's life, and instead make it an emotional drama, but it would've made the film more interesting. But one scene that caught me completely by surprise was when young Jeffrey cringing when cutting up one of his victim's bodies and eventually bursting into tears. I'm sure his remorse decreased over the years, but I don't ever visualize a serial killer feeling shame about his victims. I saw John Liszt (sp) in an interview once and he described his methods of mutilating his victims without batting an eye. So this is not exactly the movie's cue to have the audience feel sorry for Dahmer and cry along with him, but it's enlightening to find out that had emotions as well. He was just so driven by his psychological sicknesses that his emotions couldn't hinder him.

My score: 8 (out of 10)

So I rented this film thinking I'd see a lot of Hannibal references to cannibalism and stuff, but unfortunately, no. This film strictly tries to show where Jefferey Dahmer was coming from psychologically, uncovering his secret life in gay bars, his early secretive-childhood, his over-inspective parents, and his relationships.

The makers of this film casted a great lead actor, whom I've never seen before, and the part of his lover throughout the last half of the film did great with his character...very animated. The movie did well to show background and where he was presently, probably right before he went off the deep end and uncovered himself to the law. It had some pretty shocking scenes of him and his victims (drilling into their skulls, slicing off arms, etc) which were almost enough to show his problems in life. But he was mostly known to the media and public for the cannibalism thing, which only got touched upon. At the most, he carressed a dead victim and started to lick the face of him. Well, I guess it was enough...

I dunno, I gave it a 6. It was better than an average movie, but I found the slow pace of the film with not much to uncover in the end quite disappointing.

The first frame of the movie informs us that Dahmer was one of the most notorious killer of all time and he was sentenced to 937 years in prison!! You think that the movie will either tell you about the origin of this evil or will vividly show the kills. Alas, this is a philosophical discussion cum homoerotic dance which happens between Dahmer and one of his intended villain. Jeremy Renner is Dahmer, an unassuming guy who works in an ice cream factory. He is a homosexual. He lures guys to his home, mixes drugs in their drinks and then kills them. He likes a black guy, brings him home and the aforementioned philosophical bullshit starts. This is interspersed with scenes showing Dahmer's youth. Renner shows early hint of his awesome acting prowess but he cannot rise above the horrible script. It was as if the director chose the most boring 90 minutes of Dahmer's life to make the movie. Very disappointed. 1 out of 5 for Dahmer. This killer will bore you to death.