I love movies based in Boston, since I am from the Boston area I have high expectations. This looked good but wasn't. The acting was not good also many plot holes. All around disappointment. Will not be watching this again.

there have been a few movies about the boston strangler, but the other movies have been portrayed as albert desalvo bieng convicted of and bieng the boston strangler, even though it's widely known that he more than likely wasn't't and only admitted to bieng the strangler for notoriety, and money, this is what this movie is about and even if it isn't 100 percent accurate, its no lees accurate than the others, in fact this is probably still the most closest version to the truth so far. the movie isn't a masterpiece and at times the low budget is apparent, bur for the most part there is good acting, good script, and a good movie, not one of the best no, but for fans of true crime and serial killer movies, this is good stuff

David Faustino surprised me as Albert De Salvo in this low budget film. Forget Bud Bundy, he really does a great job in bringing this suspect to life on screen. Short, illiterate, and possibly had a low I.Q. Albert De Salvo took a giant leap by being labeled the Boston Strangler. Although he had a wife and two kids, Albert De Salvo was a deeply troubled man and plagued with guilt. This film tells part of the story since it's possible that he wasn't the Boston Strangler after all. This film begins with a phone call to a doctor to talk about the Boston Strangler. During the course of the film, we see the frustrated Boston police, mayor, and journalists pressured to catch a serial killer. One police man had his doubts and he had every right to wonder if he had placed an innocent man in prison. Although De Salvo wasn't innocent entirely, this film depicts a man who would have been tortured by his conscience and guilt of other crimes. This film highlights Faustino's dramatic abilities. The story of this film has some holes and nobody in the cast is recognizable perhaps Corin Nemec who played the lawyer, Stuart Whitmore. There are still lots of questions about the Boston Strangular. But I'll leave it up to the audience. It's not a bad film but it's a low budget film.

Boston Strangler: The Untold Story has been told. Not by this movie. It has been told by numerous docs and news shows. This movie is another example of low rent studios try to cash in on serial killer exploits no matter if it is a bad movie. Spike Lee showed with Son of Sam how to make a great movie based on a serial killer that has been covered from head to toe by docs and news shows. Nothing was shown that grabbed me by my collar. No tension existed. Either who ever made this didn't know how to build up to the murders or didn't care. They collected their money from the studio. They don't care what people think. I am pleading directly to the director and studio chief of this movie to stop this. Planet earth is over run with waste. We as a people do not need to add to it with this sorry movie. Where do disappointed people write to get a refund? Who is with me?