Women-centric thrillers are so uncommon that it is impossible to name more than 10 at a time. Adding to this scarcely populated list is the underrated Boston Strangler. The film takes us back to the swinging ’60s in Beantown through a green-tinted lens that gives very David Fincher’s “Zodiac” vibes. Picture this: Keira Knightley as a badass reporter, Carrie Coon as her partner in crime-solving, and a string of gruesome murders that will make you squint your eyes. While it has its own share of drawbacks, it’s still a rollercoaster of journalistic tenacity and courage.
Plot
Okay so daastaan ye hai ki Loretta McLaughlin (Keira Knightley) and Jean Cole (Carrie Coon) work for the newspaper Boston Record-American. Sab chillz chal raha hota hai until they stumble upon a series of murders where the victims are strangled with their own underwear tied in a bow. Yes, you read that right. Oh, and ye toh batana bhool hi gaya ki it is based on a true story. Anyway, so they’re on it like bloodhounds, exposing police incompetence, and in turn becoming targets themselves. It starts as a hunt for the Boston Strangler, but it takes a turn when it dives deep into the personal lives of our fearless reporters. What happens next, do they catch the killer, do they get out of the mess alive ye sab toh khud dekhna padega na guys.
Performances
Okay, can we take a moment to just simp on Keira Knightley????????? I’ll be honest, she was the only reason I decided to watch this movie, and boy it pays off. She is absolutely crushing it as Loretta McLaughlin, showing us what it means to be a woman on a mission. Her personal life is fcked up, but she doesn’t care– all she wants to do is catch the killer. Carrie Coon is also kaafi impressive as Jean Cole, even though her character could’ve used a bit more screen time. Alessandro Nivola is the cop who’s got their backs, Morgan Spector plays Loretta’s husband, and the whole ensemble delivers, but some of the characters feel very cliche.
Direction and Writing
Director Matt Ruskin is aiming for that newspaper noir feel, but it’s like he borrowed Fincher’s greenish hues and gloomy tone without fully embracing that darr ka mahol and suspense. The script serves up naari-shakti with added bold journalism, but it misses the mark when it comes to character development. For a movie showcasing the bravery of two women in the ’60s trying to catch a serial killer, there are no character arcs that move you. Also, while it touches on the women’s struggle in a male-dominated field, it could’ve gone deeper. Feels like they just scratched the surface just for the sake of it. Also, the transitions from immediate danger to a more personal struggle feel very sudden and shaky. Ekdum se jazbaat badal diye waali feels, you know.
Screenplay and Cinematography
The script weaves a crazy narrative, exposing the dark side of journalism and the sexist bullshiz our heroines face. But, they fck up when it comes to showing the whole “imminent danger” thing and veer into a soap opera of personal struggles. It’s like they forgot hum sab ko seats ke edge pe bhi rakhna tha, or maybe that just wasn’t the aim. The cinematography nails the retro vibes, making you want to break out the bell bottoms. The attention to detail in the newspaper-making process is so spot-on you can practically smell the ink. And let’s not forget Keira Knightley rocking those period costumes – it’s like time travel without the geeky science-y machines.
In the end, “Boston Strangler” is like that tantalizing rollercoaster that almost reaches the highest peak but doesn’t quite make it. It’s got awesome performances, especially from Knightley, and it’s a great snapshot of what it was like for women in journalism back in the day. But it loses a bit of its edge and suspense along the way. Matt Ruskin takes a swing at newspaper noir, and while he doesn’t quite hit a home run, he still delivers a decent flick worth checking out for its dose of journalistic grit and a groovy ’60s vibe. So yeah, it’s a good one-time watch if you’re craving some mystery coupled with the noir vibe!