| Genre: | Crime Drama |
| Story: | Irv Roud |
| Director: | John Herzfeld |
| Starring: | Danny Aiello William Baldwin Lara Flynn Boyle |
| Theme Music Composer: | Chris Isaak Simon Rogers |
| Country: | United States |
| Language: | English |
| Executive Producer: | Jack Grossbart |
| Producer: | Sydell Albert Paul Pompian |
| Location: | Los Angeles New York City |
| Editor: | Janet Bartels-Vandagriff |
| Cinematography: | Steven Shaw |
| Runtime: | 100 minutes |
| Company: | Jack Grossbart Productions |
| Network: | ABC |
The Preppie Murder is an American television film directed by John Herzfeld, written by Herzfeld and Irv Roud, and starring William Baldwin as Robert Chambers and Lara Flynn Boyle as Jennifer Levin. The film aired on ABC in 1989. It was based on the events of a murder committed by Robert Chambers, nicknamed the "Preppie Killer". The film co-stars Danny Aiello, Joanna Kerns, and William Devane.
The film reenacts Robert Chambers' murder of Jennifer Levin. Robert Chambers, a man who attended prep schools on a scholarship, kills Jennifer Levin, who herself was of a privileged background after they leave a trendy Manhattan bar together. When Detective Mike Sheehan arrests him, Chambers claims that he killed her in self-defense after rough sex got out of hand. In the ensuing trial, Chambers' attorney, Jack Litman, attacks Levin's personal history. Chambers eventually pleads guilty to a lesser charge of manslaughter.
The film was shot mostly in Los Angeles, but some exterior shots took place in New York City. Mike Sheehan, who investigated the case, served as a consultant. Jennifer Levin's parents declined involvement; her father called it "exploitative". Linda Fairstein and Jack Litman also declined involvement.[1] Director John Herzfeld wanted to tell Jennifer Levin's story and "clear a little of the mud off her".[2]
The Preppie Murder aired September 24, 1989, on ABC.[2] It was released on home video in November 1993.[3]
Howard Rosenberg of the Los Angeles Times called it "vexing, powerful and heartbreaking—yet strangely enigmatic".[2] John Leonard of New York called it "pointless" and compared it negatively to Linda Wolfe's book, .[4] John J. O'Connor of The New York Times wrote that the film's denunciation of the press as exploitative was ironic, as it "merely warms up the old headlines it pretends to abhor."[5]