Keira Knightley Is Back and on the Case of the 'Boston Strangler'

By Sara Clements | Film | March 17, 2023 |

By Sara Clements | Film | March 17, 2023 |

Writer-director Matt Ruskin’s film, Crown Heights, examined the true story of Colin Warner, who was wrongfully convicted of murder. Now with Boston Strangler, the filmmaker tackles the subject of a real murderer. However, this true-crime thriller about the hunt for one of the 20th century’s most notorious killers doesn’t fit the typical mold. Choosing not to focus solely on the titular subject, the spotlight is shined on the fearless female reporters who wrote about the serial stranglings and put their lives on the line by doing so. Part procedural, part character-driven drama, Ruskin takes a fresh approach to a true crime retelling by bringing to life the story of those who were really out to serve and protect the women of Boston.

The horror of the murders hits you in the film’s very first frame, as the muffled screams of a woman are heard, followed by silence. Between 1962 and 1964, more than a dozen women were killed in the Boston area, all of them strangled and posed provocatively with a bow tied around their necks. It’s a signature that went unnoticed by police, all the while a couple of female reporters were connecting the dots.

Loretta McLaughlin (Keira Knightley), a reporter for the Record American newspaper, loves cutting out crime clippings over her morning cornflakes; but crime isn’t her beat. She’s stuck on the lifestyle desk, common in the sexist newsroom culture of the time. Loretta wants to write about what matters, not about the hot new fashion or which toaster is better. Unfortunately, in a male-dominated field, she doesn’t have much choice. This isn’t to say that all women are stuck writing advice columns. When fellow journalist Jean Cole (Carrie Coon) enters the picture, she has been working undercover as a nurse investigating elder abuse in nursing homes. That’s the important stuff Loretta aspires to report on, but to her boss, she’s just a “kid” without the proper experience. However, she’s given permission to investigate a recent string of murders in her own time.

When the case becomes bigger than initially thought, investigating alone becomes a risk, so Jean is put on the story with her. Together, they uncover and report on the gruesome details of the crimes, and their words are read aloud to create a vividly detailed picture of a phantom’s gruesome work. The killer is kept in the shadows, while the fear gripping the city is put on the film’s front pages. Reporting on such a high-profile case puts a target on Loretta and Jean’s backs, not just from the cops, but also from the killer. And it could put them in danger.

Boston Strangler isn’t a true-crime film that hits Fincher heights, but it’s still an incredibly fast-paced and gripping story of tense, hard-hitting journalism. The film is as much about the crimes as it is about several different dynamics: female reporters vs. male reporters, the paper vs. the police, and work vs. family. Jean and Loretta are looked upon as “a couple of girl reporters,” and doubt is always cast on them, even when they get the big scoops. Their reporting calls out the incompetence of the police, threatening a “war” that their male editors don’t want to have. The pair are met with many setbacks, but their unwavering determination to keep the city informed and to protect Bostonian women is admirable. The film also focuses on the changing dynamic between Loretta and her husband. Her once supportive and encouraging partner turns displeased when Loretta’s work keeps her away from home. One downside of the script is that Jean’s personal life isn’t looked at in equal detail.

Ruskin, along with cinematographer Ben Kutchins and composer Paul Leonard-Morgan, prove to be masters at creating a chilling atmosphere. Each frame is muted, the colors remain fittingly lifeless throughout. The score evokes both horror and sadness. In the film’s solemness, the victims are on the mind. It’s refreshing in that way, to make this as much a piece about the victims as the titular character. They are given respect in death, as the murders aren’t seen. We hear the screams and sounds of struggle through a wall or through a crack in a slightly open door. One instance of an attack is shown, however not graphically. Perhaps Ruskin believed the audience would get bored, but it’s much more chilling when left to the imagination.

Jean and Loretta are brought to life thanks to two formidable performances. Coon gets the short end of the stick as not much time is spent with her character, but she captures Jean’s experience as she owns the room with her no-bullshit attitude. Knightley is an equally commanding presence as she carries the film. Through her performance, she embodies the fear of all Bostonian women as she gets herself into scary situations. Through her, we also see the all-consuming nature of such a case and how the obsession to solve it affects life outside of work. It takes an emotional toll on her, and thanks to fantastic supporting performances, we also see how the murders affect the family and friends of the victims.

Boston Strangler is refreshingly told through the perspective of the two female journalists who broke the story. Most events and evidence in true-crime films and tv shows are laid out by (male) detectives. In this way, the film provides both an outsider’s perspective, and one representative of the victims. As Jean and Loretta challenged the norms of the era, it turns out that they were exposing a reality that has continued. The most chilling aspect of this case turns out not to be the crimes but the fact that, as one character says, “The city can’t protect its women.”