Harmon in amazingly chilling performance..BRAVO

[deleted]

Mark Harmon's performance was much better, IMO, to that of Michael Reilly Burke in the 2002 Ted Bundy movie. Mark Harmon has that preppy front that doesn't match his inside personality as seen through his eyes. He has a sinister affect that just doesn't jibe with his cleancut outer appearance and that can be very unsettling. Although Burke gave a pretty good maniac he didn't have that duplicity that Harmon has ingrained in his visage. I also thought the story line following the police through the snowy Colorado mountains in Mark's version was exciting to watch and unfolded like a really good Columbo it was that well scripted. But I dropped my "suspension of disbelief" in accepting Mark Harmon as the real Ted Bundy. Partly because they both have such famous faces and they share that malevolent grin which Burke didn't even try to master. I've always looked at Mark Harmon slightly askew after seeing "Stranger" in 1986 when it first was released. He never again could pull off that John Ritter innocence after this for me. He was perfectly cast for Bundy. But "Stranger" showed much much much less violence than thefollow-up Buke movie. As a matter of fact the violence was almost nil in the Harmon version and considering how sick and perverted Bundy was, this has to be a shortcoming. I think the Burke version handled the sick end of it in as good taste as possible since to go into all the blood and the anal sexual violations can go too far if let loose. Witness, In Too Deep where one of "God"'s soldiers got a pool cue shoved up his colon in maybe too grqphic a depiction although the sight of his dead body in the dumpster drenched in blood with the cracked cue was rvery realistic despite the morbidity of the image.

i completely agree.i never looked at mark harmon again for many,many years without being creeped out.just in the last few years could i watch him in ncis without thinking back to his portrayal of ted bundy.