User Reviews

Dot.kill, Digital Jesus? Couldn't find this one as it was rented under the title Digital Killer. Many aliases give away it's a B-movie.

After many internet related movies, killings through wires, addicted cop-movies there wasn't really any surprise in the story. Armand was acting over the top, I didn't feel any sympathy, rather irritation.

How this one got 5 out of 10, rather than number 5 of worst movies is unclear to me. Straight to the sell out bin with this one, don't rent it unless you're not annoyed with quite simple story lines.

(spoiling bit) Why does a cop not check for cameras when after every killing he is portrayed at the crime scene on the television? Couldn't these cameras be followed to a destination? Is the cop's son really that stupid, that he doesn't warn his father earlier on?

First of all, it got one brilliant factor. It's where the killer is the partner. Very unpredictable I must admit.

Another, yet half-brilliant, factor. The characterization of the lead. It's unusual, catchy, and sad. However with no serious shadows, or dramatic justification. I mean, yes, Armand brought some of the Assante magic to it, made it believable and special, but - for instance - why he was dying?? The answer of this question could be something high and meaningful, like being poisoned by the modern civilization, that created such a maniac and advanced killer as well, or maybe he's dying because the ethics are anyway. Well, sure any answer would have completed it as whole brilliant.

The real bad factor is the killer's motive. It's bad because it's nonexistent. They succeeded in making him unpredictable, but forgot anything else. As if it's enough motive to chuckle crazily in front of a computer!

Another, yet slight, bad factor. Which's Armand Assante's dark contact lens. They forced the guy to put them to look weary. But that was pretty exposed. You can see them clear when he was lying on the couch of the prostitute. The fake black points in them were moving as his eyes. It was unnecessary and cheap move; just like his endless cough too!

So, as you see, the brilliance wasn't that much available. Nonetheless, it is still "something else" amongst the other V nonsense that looks meaningless and senseless in comparison. And generally it is a good attempt to make what's different in the new genre of catch-the-serial-killer that became in fashion since (The Silence of the Lambs - 1991). But why it stopped at being just an attempt?? Anyway, the weak links will be stronger, and the brilliant factors more complete, 3 years later in (Untraceable) which seems, somewhat, like a refined remake.

I believe the only love to kill in here is the movie's love to kill itself!

How is it possible to freshen up a story like this? Here is this New York homicide detective, Armand Assante, who is part of a team trying to trace a serial killer with a penchant for broadcasting his murders on the internet. The murders are always done live but at a distance. Eg., the broadcast begins only when the victim is already tied to a post and is being drowned by the rising tide. We've already got the cop at odds with his boss. We've already got the internet involved.

Well, you can make the detective a terminal case of lung cancer, who keeps his medical status from his wife and adolescent boy and from everybody else except the young blond ex-hooker who serves as his heroin connection. Yes, he's an addict too. How's that for originality? The writers seem to have thrown up their hands in despair. The well is dry. There is nothing else to pull into the plot. And what there is, isn't especially well written. The first scene introduces us to Assante, his wife, and his young boy seated around the breakfast table. Assante's wife, Clare Holman, is trying to keep her husband healthy. In pursuit of this unattainable goal, she has dunked a pack of his cigarettes in his morning coffee and has fed him toast with no butter. Her determination, up against Assante's frustration, is supposed to be amusing in a sit-com manner, but the way in which it's directed and played suggests not agape but anger. In fact, nobody ever laughs. Except once or twice, Assante does, but then he laughs at a meeting, after making an unamusing comment, so the affect is inappropriate and he sounds a little schizo.

Assante, however, can be a very good actor and he occasionally does more than hit the mark. He's like Al Pacino in "Insomnia" but with a bit more bounce left in the coil. And the locations are good, too, not spectacular, mostly distinguished by their uniform, ghoulish green grubbiness. There's garbage all over the place. Rotting boards and hulks of detritus slap against bridge pilings. If you're going to explode yourself and the killer, as Assante does, this is the place to do it.

Man, it's depressing. And it's confusing too. I have no idea how Assante, a cyber "dinosaur", ever managed to figure out the location of the final attempt at murder. And the villainy seems to be pinned arbitrarily on anti-global terrorists, which is a little like blaming war on pacifists. And the script makes the murderer an Indian geek. Give me a good, old-fashioned, self-righteous, well-acted psychopath any day, along the lines of Kevin Spacey in "Seven." There is one good scene. Armand Assante emerging from the Christopher Street subway entrance, but I'm among the very few people for whom this will have resonance.

If you like marginalized cops and serial murderers, this may be your cup of tea. But I would guess that just about everyone by now must admit that the pattern is exhausted.

So, this evening my boyfriend and I decided to spend the night relaxing at home and rented this movie off our COMCAST on DEMAND.

Yes, the movie, which would be better described as 'fecal matter', cost us a whopping $3.99 too damn much.

Aside from having little or no suspense, bad acting, and weak effects, the only thing really missing from making this a complete waste of time and money was the flashing neon arrow hovering over the 'handicapped killer' in the scenes of which he rolled past.

I would like to know what teenage youth group wrote this piece of 'work'? Or perhaps who gave a monkey a type writer? My 3 year old nephew could keep a secret longer than this film took to reveal the killer.

Go ahead, waste your money, waste your time, hell this movie is a complete and total waste and if that is what you have in mind for 'having a good time' then this is the perfect movie for you.

An aging Armand Assante stars as a grumpy, disgruntled, temperamental detective Charlie Daines, eaten up with cancer, trying desperately to fight thru his pain to solve a difficult case concerning a serial killing Master Hacker whose murdering Big Company CEOs for a live on-line audience, while also capturing the cops working the crime scene through hidden cameras displaying them for millions to witness. Embittered and hard-nosed, Daines is just too stubborn to check into a hospital, receiving morphine from an ex-addict he helped get off junk, just so he can cope with the agony of his disease. But, the NYC police must cooperate with the feds who have hired a cyber-specialist, Adam(Raffaello Degruttola)to assist in finding the psycho while "dinosaur" Daines continues to pursue leads using his instincts and nose through good old fashioned police work. Here's the rub..how does a sickly detective, combating coughing fits and exhaustion, find a killer of supreme intelligence?

While, I'll be the first to admit that this film is indeed derivative of other films regarding cyber-psychos and the pursuit of their capture, I think what makes "Dot.Kill" work is Assante's effective performance as the detective contemplating life, trying to enjoy the time left with his wife and son(..keeping his disease secret from them out of love), while doping up as he bickers with his superiors and partner over tackling the case his way as they demand his cooperation with Adam, whose knowledge(..and language) of the cyberspace is of importance. The cat-and-mouse, as one would expect, soon involves Daines because(..isn't it always obvious?)he's the man tracking his identity and whereabouts. The twist on who the killer really is might work on some, but I feel that viewers who have adapted to these kind of thrillers will figure it out before it is revealed 75 minutes in. Couple the "colorful" cop talk from one to another(..little profane insults towards one another and plenty of f-bombs to go around)with having to watch a slowly dying man looking worse and worse as the film continues, might be a difficult watch for some. As usual in these kind of cop-psycho thrillers, Daines travels through seedy locales on the street to get info(..and morphine)and we see that a few of the wealthy targets engage in carnal activities. It's also a challenge to root for Daines, who is rugged, foul-mouthed, easily annoyed, and speaks his mind whether you like what he has to say or not. But, as we watch during the film, he's a good cop whose "flaws" make the character so interesting and rich. Assante is in practically every scene and the whole show. I'd recommend checking this out for his performance, even if the film itself feels old-hat and familiar.

This is a crime thriller with just a dash of noir. The story centers around detective Charlie Daines (Armand Assante). He is an old school detective with soldier's disease. He is working on a case of a man who live broadcasts his killings on the Internet. This are not just any killings, but of top CEOs. He is in competition with Adam (Raffaello Degruttola) a new school cop who is savvy with computers. Charlie's boss (Stanley Townsend) calls him a dinosaur. Charlie has an understanding wife (Clare Holman) who makes him live healthy.

The story centers around Charlie to the exclusion of everyone else. This is not a horror story as one might think looking at the DVD cover. I imagine it is a who-dun-it mystery, although you are not really engaged in figuring out who-dun-it as you are trying to dissect Charlie's life of "my wife, mu kid, my work."

The film is mildly engaging, although I got really tired of listening to Charlie cough up a lung.

F-bomb, no sex, stripper nudity (Happy Bob's dancers)

Armand Asanti, an accomplished fine actor, with a style and appearance that always get him cast in heavy alpha male tough-guy roles, still plays a tough guy here, in this detective, crime genre film. But he's not playing it larger then life. He's a good guy this time, with cancer, with a galloping addiction to morphine, who has to solve a complicated crime and keep a family together. He knows he's a "dinosaur" at tech...an ironically recurring theme, that finally recurs in the last moments of the film that should evoke memories of the end of the Fantastic Blade Runner. and this is a superficially tech oriented crime series.....so he's fighting off a department bedazzled by the wonders of tech....but he sees what he sees , and puts it together... He's old school, and the story, with modern elements, is an old school plot, and it all holds together really well...like an old Raymond Chandler story ..........Armand has never been better in my opinion, revealing these truly mortal vulnerabilities I never recall him doing before, making them very believable , but still within the context of a tough detective trying to finish this one final, and he knows it's the end, job, that has become deeply personal to him. The motives are all plausible, the editing and filming are gritty and documentary in some ways.... I saw it a long time ago and just found it today again, and it holds up fine....like White heat with James Cagney from the 1940s holds up. Great performance does not age, and I think this is this actors's best performance in a better then average crime drama. The ending probably deserves a few sentences because it has an odd symmetry and poetry that give it a sort of perfection. It is hard to end some movies...different alternates are explored etc. Like I recently resaw Birdie and thought they found just the right note from so many possibilities and the same here, and now that I think of it, my reference to White heat comes up again in an inverted sort of way........... A 4.8 is a ludicrous undervaluation and it is a spectacular buy at that rating "price."