Digital Journal — Canada’s most controversial film is scary. Not in an Exorcist kind of way but in an I-can’t-believe-this-actually-happened way. Karla retells the brutal rapes and murders committed by Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo, who were later imprisoned for killing three Ontario girls. But just as the public vocalized outrage when Homolka was released from prison in July 2005 after serving 12 years, the film is raising hackles for even publicizing what many call a deranged Ken and Barbie story.
Reviewers charged the film for portraying Homolka (played by Laura Prepon, known as Donna on That ‘70s Show) as a victim. Petitioners asked Canadians to ignore Karla and Alliance Atlantis and CHUM Television pulled commercials for the film from broadcast.
“It’s disappointing but I understand the reality here,” says producer Michael Sellers of Los Angeles-based Quantum Entertainment. “People view the film differently when they have such intense emotions about the case.” On the surface, the reality is Canada’s squeamish attitude toward a true-crime film that brazenly depicted rape and strangulation scenes. But beneath the surface is an argument between exploitation (which the critics claim) and artistic expression (which the creators believe). Didn’t Summer of Sam and Monster explore similar acts of evil without facing a clamour of indignation?
The creators say they wanted to make an honest picture without injecting their perspective.
“We didn’t abandon any facts, and we looked at the decisions Homolka and Bernardo made,” Sellers says, adding the legal transcripts provided the basis for the dialogue and set detail. He believes followers of the case would appreciate a faithful reproduction of the story that unfolded before the couple was prosecuted for raping and murdering three young girls.
Canada’s fascination with anything Homolka spurred a media frenzy when Christal Films announced it would distribute Karla across Quebec and in eight major cities across Canada. Many headlines spilled ink over how the Montreal Film Festival dropped the film after the fest’s sponsor, Air Canada, threatened to pull their sponsorship money if Karla screened.
Karla‘s director is confident the U.S. will see the film differently from its northern neighbour. “To Americans, this film is about the couple next door,” says Joel Bender. “The story I’m telling is about those evil elements that lurk in our souls.”
To some critics, Karla failed to tread any new ground. The Toronto Star‘s Geoff Pevere attacked a film that “stands back and watches from a distance.” Bender responds by saying, “We wanted to show what happened through the texture as opposed to preaching.”
Reviewers nationwide also panned the film for showing Homolka as a victim. But Bender contends that both killers victimized each other. Homolka loved her husband so deeply she would do anything for him, Bender says — even help murder her own sister.
Media and public reaction to the film is coloured by the emotional impact of the crimes, Bender says. He’s right. In Canada, the Bernardo-Homolka case horrified anyone who ever thought a smiling couple kept no secrets. As hard it is to divorce those feelings from a film that aims to retell that story honestly, it has to be done. If not, artistic expression will lose to bias every time. And that hurts cultural progress as much as anything.
First Donna in That ‘70s Show and then Karla Homolka in Canada’s most controversial film, Karla. Laura Prepon is unafraid to dive into challenges. She talks about getting into the skin of a killer and discovering the real truth behind the Karla Homolka-Paul Bernardo relationship.
On researching the mindset of Karla:
“Someone like Karla is insane, and there’s no way to rationalize that. I wanted to find out who Karla was as a person and what drove her, and I found it was her obsession with Paul. Maybe I could relate to that in a weird way because I have a boyfriend who I’m totally in love with, so I found something in her that made her human.”
On obsession:
“She was obsessed with Paul. All these sick little things built up, from killing her sister to killing a strange girl. Every worse thing they did made the previous one OK. She committed crimes with Paul so she could be involved in his life. Because she was so obsessed with him, she wanted to be part of what he did with the girls, but Karla wanted to be the sexy one with him.”
Is Karla a victim?
“I don’t think so. She’s too smart. I think she got herself in a terrible situation, and fell for wrong guy and let it build up until it was a huge bomb. She knew what she was doing. As an actor when I first read the script, I was trying to comprehend how she could get to that point. It’s one of the reasons people like the movie — they wonder how two normal kids end up like that.”
On the challenge of taking the role:
“The main surprise is I’ve never done a movie like this before. When you’ve done a sitcom like I have, you try to do things different than your day job. When I read the script, I thought there’d be nothing more of a challenge than going from Donna to Karla. I never played that kind of role so it’s against my grain, and that was surprising to me.
After all, I come from a show where everyone jokes around, like recently when Wilmer Valderrama [Fez] was making fart noises and everyone was laughing. It’s a blast. Then I go to this, where I play a character written on real-life crimes and getting into the mind of this killer. After a take, the cast is all in a daze.”
On acting in difficult scenes:
“When acting in most movies it’s narrative fantasy. It’s something a writer wrote. But with this film, based on real life, some lines are direct from legal transcripts. You think: ‘How did this person come up with this and do this?’ You have to figure out how to grasp who this person is because she’s not realistic to you.”
