Ted K (2021) Poster

(2021)

User Reviews

Review this title
48 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Copley shines, but as a monster
ferguson-617 February 2022
Greetings again from the darkness. It's been more than 25 years since The Unabomber was arrested. The composite sketch of Theodore John Kaczynski wearing sunglasses and a hoodie became an iconic image on its own, and he was the target of the longest and most expensive manhunt in the history of the FBI. There have already been two crime series focused on Kaczynski. Netflix aired "Unabomber: In His Own Words" (2020) and Discovery had "Manhunt: Unabomber" (2017). Do we need to know more about this monster whose bombs killed 3 people and injured 22 others over a 17-year period? Well, writer-director Tony Stone and co-writers Gaddy Davis and John Rosenthal believe so.

A prologue with text details most of what we already know - Kaczynski was a Harvard educated math genius who dropped out of society and moved to the Rocky Mountains in Montana. Following that, the opening sequence sets the stage as we see Kaczynski hiding in the forest eyeing a family zipping around on snow mobiles. This is all accompanied by Blanck Mass music that falls into the category I call 'doom-droning'. It's ominous music so blatant that no one could possibly think anything good is about to happen. And of course, nothing good does happen.

Sharlto Copley (DISTRICT 9, 2009) stars as Kaczynski, and if there is a complaint to be made against this movie, it's that Copley's performance is so strong that we begin to see this monster as a human being. Living 25 years in a ten by twelve-foot backwoods cabin he built with his brother, Kaczynski doesn't make the case for nature vs nurture, but rather nature vs tech intrusions. He seems mostly fine in his isolation until disturbed by the seasonal snow mobiles, four-wheelers, jet noise, or ongoing lumber harvesting. Of course, he was never really fine. He was a sexually frustrated misogynist who became a dysfunctional and delusional and dangerous man. In a voiceover, he states, "I act merely for my desire for revenge."

Much of the film is pulled directly from the 25,000 pages of coded journals found in the cabin. The deluded thoughts of a man who considered modern technology to be evil and used a hit list to identify the targets for his homemade bombs ... bombs that often injured unintended victims. Copley plays him as a wide-eyed guy with the expected undercurrent of intelligence masked by one so unhinged he personally delivers his complaint letter to the customer service desk of the phone company - over a few dimes and quarters lost over time.

The film was shot on location on the Montana land owned by Kaczynski. The cabin has been expertly recreated and cinematographer Nathan Corbin does a terrific job in catching the beauty of nature, as well as the elements that so bothered Kaczynski. Frequently wearing sunglasses and riding his bicycle into town to visit the library, we also see him listening to classical music on the radio - and begging his mother and brother (the one who tipped off the FBI) for money (to finance his bombing trips). The film is well written, professionally directed, expertly photographed, and well performed. However, I can't shake the uneasiness over whether we really want to see one of our most unconscionable monsters humanized to this degree.

In theaters and On Demand beginning February 18, 2022.
64 out of 108 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Good but not enough
portal179018 February 2022
Being a true crime fan and having seen several documentaries about the unabomber I was looking forward to seeing this movie. After the opening credits, and given the initial approach I thought I would be in the presence of an intimate film. An "Author's Film". And this biography has everything to make that happen. But in my opinion the film falls into too many elements that have little to do with the nature of Ted himself as well as his odyssey. Even chronologically. I think the film would be more effective if it had an unknown actor. Although technically the film is excellent, highlighting the photography, although the soundtrack is also very adequate, the truth is that seeing the film as a whole, one gets the feeling that in reality, this could have been another film that "could have been" . Anyway good but not excellent.
18 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
RUBBISH
jamiegates-2847122 February 2022
Tries to protray the man as a pervert and a climate activist, absolute rubbish. Wouldn't waste my time on this propoganda. Just more historical distortion to fit the narrative of today. Try actually reading books before watching this awful representation.
24 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
7 only because of Copley
stevelivesey679 March 2022
Great acting piece from Copley who carries the entire film on his own.

If anyone else was in the lead role this movie would be a 5.

The unabomber story is better told elsewhere but not as well acted.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Its two hour run-time is at least one hour too long.
Top_Dawg_Critic25 August 2022
The screenplay was terrible - it felt like it got lost trying to figure out if it wants to be a documentary or a movie. Tony Stone's directing made matters worse with very little substance and a whole lot of filler to fill in the run-time. The endless NatGeo scenes of nature, animals and wilderness just bored me and was all irrelevant to the story. Ya we get it, he's an off-grid guy. Then, all the interesting parts - the guts of Ted K's story, were weak, too short and lacked much needed insight and impact. This all could've just been condensed into a 20-30 min short docu-story. Aside from Sharlto Copley's decent performance, this film was a boring sloth and rather pointless.
8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Visuals and Copleys acting made me score so high
urema-120 March 2022
"Modern technology is the worst thing to happen to the world. And to promote its progress is nothing short of criminal."

The film is based on Theodore Kaczynskis, a.k.a The Unabombers criminal life. Ted (Copley) was a doctor of Mathematics who ended up living in the wilderness for 20+years, compelled to this way of life due to modern technologies impact on the earth. Ted, after seeing all the land everywhere he goes being chewed up by modern industry, decides to take personal revenge on western society.

In his campaign of revenge Ted planted 15 successful bombs from 1978 to 1995, killed 3 people and wounded dozens of others.

This is an isolationist and minimalist film through and through. The director and writer did delve here and there into Teds motivations, but in most cases they opted to show his isolation and conflicts with his family and with modern society instead.

The film has exceptionally clean visuals, but nothing special or new to create a sense of dynamism to this story. Its all laid out procedurally and linearly, heavily relying on the letters that Ted wrote himself.

The film was a touch too long in my view, and would have been a more entertaining docufilm / biography piece if it were 30mins shorter. Or if there were more portions on the victims and their struggles this would have panned this out.

Some interesting aspects were Copleys acting and the fact that they filmed on the same land where Ted lived himself.

Worth a watch for some of the clean landscape shots and Copleys acting rather than anything else.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Interesting but quirkily cheap '80s styled biopic on Ted Kacynski, aka The Unabomber
danieljfarthing1 March 2022
"Ted K" is a true-crime biopic on Ted Kacynski, aka The Unabomber, whose social awkwardness drove him from being a maths prodigy to an impoverished hermit in rural Montana where without plumbing or electricty he grew increasingly angry at technologic advances represented by planes, snow-mobiles, loggers etc disturbing his tranquility (& destroying modern life). This drove him from low-level vandalism to his infamous '78-'95 mail-bomb campaign that killed three & injured 23. Co-writer Tony Stone directs with a curious low-budget '80s style and relies heavily on Sharlto Copley's lead performance - but Copley delivers. Quirky yet interesting.
2 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
0% Intellect, 100% Sexual Frustration
leeandfong21 February 2022
The Unabomber was coming up with fascinating ideas on society from as early as the 1970's and as time goes by, those ideas become more prescient and more true. So, how does this film go about exploring these great insights into society? How does this film explore the intellect of its subject? The sad answer is, it ignores it.

Ted K, was a fantastic opportunity to do something intellectually stimulating, but for some reason, a choice was made to ignore the intelligence and make the story about a crazy hobo who lives in the forest, struggles with sexual frustration and makes mail bombs because he can't find a girlfriend.

If I were conspiratorial, I could easily imagine the powerful overlords of our society were getting so worried about people reading the Unabomber's manifesto, that they set out to destroy his character by making this film.

The film is competently produced and Sharlto Copley's performance is strong; the problem is the approach. This film didn't attempt to study Ted Kaczynski's character, they set out to assassinate it.
97 out of 141 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not much unabombing going on here
Vindelander14 August 2022
I've previously watched the excellent series Manhunt: Unabomber so felt compelled to see this through. It's factual but very very slow and light on detail about Ted K's targets and focusses far too much on his backwoodsman lifestyle imo.

Nevertheless a fascinating story about the largest manhunt in FBI history even though we get to see very little of it.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Bizarre fictional portrayal of an intelligent yet twisted man
lenahirsch4 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was super painful. I started laughing at it at parts because it was so distorted from reality. I actually started to feel bad for Ted K it was so bad, and that's saying something since I acknowledge he's an eco terrorist nutjob.

The whole movie is attempting to make Ted K look like the loseriest loser to ever exist. You could check off a bingo list of high school tier disses or just nonsense insults. Jerking off for no reason? Creep who watches people have sex? Axes through a cabin wall to destroy dirtbikes? Extreme misogyny? Lives in a cabin he built in the woods but can't debark a tree? Yells at planes?

The scenery is nice though.

BTW I'm from Montana and his neighbours said he seemed really normal if not intelligent.
11 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Uniquely insightful
Loved the veer away from the 'American cop show' approach, letting us uncomfortably live in Ted's environment. Sharlto Copeley is excellent, believable and disturbing. Arthouse style, assumes a knowledge, loved it.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not too sure about all of the psycho-sexual undertones...
Jay_Rusty2 October 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I consider myself quite versed on the Ted K lore. This movie is well made, very artistic approach with a mixture of visual styles.

It's really a 1 man show, Sharlto Copley is really good in this, and he also acts as producer, just in case you didn't know.

Re the many psycho-sexual undertones and suggestions that Ted K was massively sexually frustrated and that this somehow influenced his terroristic activities, i'm not sure if this is entirely accurate and officially documented? Not sure if it's entirely biographical or some artistic licence taken by the movie maker?

They basically say that Ted K being sent to university at the young age of 16 has massively hampered his social skills especially with the ladies. I found that scene, when Ted K confesses over the phone to his mother that the most he was able to accomplish with females was to only manage to kiss 3 women in his entire life, that scene was utterly cringe worthy and again not sure if it's based on actual events?
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
garbage
rockyandbullwinkle10 March 2022
When I see garbage like this I have to wonder what the ulterior motives are of those who wrote, produced and directed it. There is little mention of what led to this man's tormented life, specifically the mk ultra experiments that were performed on him at the very university he attended that some argue created the damaged human being we know as the unabomber. He is portrayed as an outsider in school, yet he was active in school groups. He is portrayed in this movie as a simpleton yet he was a mathematics professor and successfully evaded the FBI for 20 years while performing his acts of terrorism. What I suspect is that this is an attempt to marginalize this man to provide some form of comfort for society. I can't speak for the whole film as I was too disgusted to watch it in its entirety.
16 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
flawed portrayal of climate activist, eco-terrorist Kaczynski
random-7077825 February 2022
I would recommend people read some of the NY Times, NY Magazine, ABC News pieces looking into Kaczynski's own writings and statements to friends. This would make it clear that the simplistic analysis in this film as well as many other shallow treatments of his views/rationalizations ignore the clear evidence that Kaczynski was an anarchist, climate activism terrorist, and if classifiable at all, would be far left.

This bizarre treatment him as some kind of incel is simply not fact based.
24 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Bad directing
Sgt_Pepper110219 February 2022
It's a great story and great character, but done with a very weak approach, just terrible editing with a mix of crossfades and alternating sequences with no substance or meaning, like the classic cliché of using slow-motion for explosions. It's very repetitive with scenes showing the damage being done to the mountains and the noise pollution or the phone conversations he has with his brother. Also the music goes all over the place, it doesn't have a solid approach, only in the last part of the film it seems to stick to a synthesizer that doesn't really fit at all. I mean, in a way it builds tension, but if this is Ted's point of view (and it is because we experience his fantasies as real as he does) he would probably be against using machines to make music. All this shows there's no particular direction or sensitivity, no point of view, no depth. I think that without all these effects and post-production paraphernalia it could be a very powerful film. Sharlto Copley is amazing, but the film doesn't really let him shine. The best scene is probably when he goes to the phone company to make a complaint. Maybe a more organic and natural approach with the music and a minimalist editing or camera work could also make the film better.
14 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A nothing movie
Xavier_Stone22 February 2022
A movie should provide some sort of entertainment or if it's a documentary it should inform or educate the viewer. The director can't seem to figure out what he wants to do and it ends up giving us nothing. There are no dates or history for the viewer to follow along in the Ted K story and it just wanders aimlessly through scene after scene until it abruptly ends.

The entertainment value is really low, and if you've watched Unabomber then you know most if not all of the story and this adds nothing. Most of the film is an actor in the wilderness cursing a airplanes in the sky and loggers in the woods.

A one star review means that the film should never have been made. This is a good example. For anyone interested in the story, this gives very few details and just throws quotes at us hoping that they create mystery. For the rest of us who actually watched any of the previous shows they will be completely disappointed as this adds nothing new.

The question is, why would a director make a lackluster film about a person without any new information, 25 years after the incident? There is nothing of value here.
25 out of 75 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Great performances and atmospheres.
MK_Ultra_20 March 2022
Went in blind, no trailers or reviews, so if you can, probably the single most likeliest way to enhance your viewing.

Old enough to remember what one single person can do to disrupt daily life and a menial task in way most take for granted; going to the mailbox without fear or anxiety. How Kasinsky got there is not only important it sets the foundation, and sadly too late, for the mindset of "see something, say something"

Blanck Mass killer drones/carpenter-esque, at times--- and surrealistic psychedelica 80's filming style made this pure catnip for my mind that craves cinema like this.

It also shows the radicalization and mental health, and how it can warp perception while also reminding that terrorism is a home grown issue, no matter who says differently.

Highly recommended.
15 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
An unmitigated mess
MovieCriticOnline23 February 2022
An unmitigated mess. Seriously, it was an overly dreamy incoherent film that never really came to terms with what film it wanted to tell.

It seemed like they were more interested in getting a nomination for Sharlto Copley than to tell an engaging story that didn't make me fall sleep. This could have been done so much better.
18 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Could've been so much better
szovati21 February 2022
Warning: Spoilers
We have a historical bio about a mail bomber so lazily put together. Is any of this even chronological? There are no dates or times to help the viewer follow along. Instead, we get the main actor in the wilderness narrating, upset at jets, machinery and helicopters. Once in awhile he's building a bomb, working a job and dropping a package off at a mailbox. That's it. Finally, after about an hour, you'll wake up because one goes off in an office.
8 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
VERY Slow
pensacolacomputer28 February 2022
I am 45 minutes into the movie and barely anything has happened. I know things will eventually happen which is the only reason why I am still watching it. So if you like very slow movies in which nothing happens in nearly an hour (and who does?) then maybe you will enjoy this.

Very disappointingly slow.

Update: Just finished watching it. The movie never got more interesting, never got better. It is a bizarre film that left out all of the interesting parts and was slow from start to finish. Incredibly painful to sit through.

1/10 One of the worst movies I've seen this year.
13 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
a unique performance...
ops-5253520 February 2022
By mr copley , delving and diving deep into the caracter of ted kazynski aka the una bomber. Its made on a dime or less budget, filmed a shot in almost authentic natural environment, and gives you a gawping inclusion of a frustrated lonely on the outer edge of sanity personal tragedy that led to 3 deaths and at least 22 injured people by sending death by mail.

If you hope that this is a documentary about mr ted, then look somewhere else, this is more the hypertheoretical human genious mastermonster and a reflection over his sturdy conviction of the industrialistic nations of the world, the greedy capitalistic systems that rots and damages our natural resources, polluting water and wrecks forests and landscapes for the thrill of a dollar earned. Its also a look into the madmans manifesto that became published in media as a try to stop the mailterror.

Its a well acted, filmed and edited story that will grab your intestines if youre a tree lover and environmentalist. But even though that the grumpy old man feels that they are just grasping the surface in order to be a biopic. Anyway its a film to watch due to brilliant acts of mr copley, a recommend.
20 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A mental ilness tragedy
budmerman19 February 2022
This is the story of Kaczynski's life in the forest. Really not much to it other than some stunning acting. Its a story we don't like talking about because we can see this illness in ourselves in the worst points in our life. Its also about another problem we don't want to discuss. How some men who don't find love can become horrible and dangerous.

Edit: I watched the doc, Kaczynski: in hes own words, and had to change my rating from a 7 to a 5. This movie makes Kaczynski a character deserving of some sympathy and a little relatable. He isn't. He is of the weakest of character. He projected all his short comings on others, even the few who loved and looked out for him. Super max is too light of punishment for this worm in a mans body. I think this movie is a bit of a deception, but then if it was realistic, there wouldnt be much of a movie.
14 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Dont expect a thrilling action movie. Nothing much happens. Good leading actor, but this story is quite tedious.
imseeg28 April 2022
How to ruin a story about a terrorist? By filming him walking through the countryside, when the sun shines. Filming him when he does the dishes. When he works on a piece of wood.

Man, this movie is lacking in spark and punch. It's not the actor's fault, because his performance is really decent, but the speed of this story is so slow. There is a serious lack in drama, lack in suspense, lack in action.

We get to see a portrait of the Unabomber terrorist, how he is at home etc. NOT interesting to watch for 2 hours. Sorry.
5 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Skip it
TheOneThatYouWanted25 June 2022
Disappointing. What's his name is an outstanding actor and was born to play the role. But the producers of this film went cheap and had the film only focus on a strange old man in the woods. Plus the film seems oddly too clean.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A Unique Look Into Ted's Life
joeymignano20 February 2022
As someone who is extremely familiar with the Unabomber story and having read his manifesto, I felt this film was excellent. I have watched every documentary about the Unabomber, and they all center around his arrest, trial, and the resulting media circus that followed. Not one other film on this man detailed who he was as a person, illustrated his family dynamic in such a way, or discussed Ted's other criminal acts in a way that made the viewer understand why he did what he did. I have read many reviews that stated the viewers felt this was not a complete look at the Unabomber story, and while I agree this is true, these people are missing the point. We have all been inundated with the general details of why Ted committed these crimes, seen the media coverage of his arrest and trial, so to make yet another film containing this would be pointless. This film explores who he was emotionally, and it did an excellent job showing the viewer a side of this man we hadn't seen before.
19 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed