The Perfect Witness (2007) User Reviews

It didn't suck, but I probably wouldn't recommend it

[sioenroux · 6/10 · 9 December 2007]

Unlike the other posters so far, I'm not falling over in my seat at how amazing and awesome this movie was -- because it wasn't. Don't be fooled by the fanboy stylings of earlier posts, this is not the latest "Henry." To its credit, it wants to be a movie that good, but it falls short on a variety of levels. The acting is pretty good, but there are no star turns here, except perhaps for the always under-appreciated Beth Grant, in a small role at the end. The story is so-so, but it is filled with logical holes and strains credulity many times.

But the biggest problem for me was depth. The movie wants to be weighing in on the way in which the filmmaker ends up behaving like the killer, but the plot doesn't slow down long enough to really explore it. It just keeps plowing ahead into new unlikely turn after turn, with no time left for a real reckoning for anyone.

At the end, I'm not sorry I watched it, but it wasn't all that great.

6.5 really

[scoup · 6/10 · 15 March 2012]

Good serial killer flick.

Production values were not stellar, but it might have been the director's aim to go "real" looking.

Both male leads were good. The beginning was somewhat slow and you have to suspend some reality to imagine that a serial killer would just sit there and have a conversation.

What keeps the movie going is the viewer's desire to see who's going to turn on the other first. There are several plot twists which were interesting.

Ending - I liked.

If you are looking for an above average horror movie take a peek.

Proof that getting the little things right can be crucial to a film

[MBunge · 6/10 · 14 June 2011]

It's usually easy to notice the big things that go wrong with a film. One of the lead actors might as well be carved out of stone or the director has no idea how to end a scene or the script wanders about the countryside like a lost little girl. A lot of times, though, it's getting the little things right that elevate a movie from run-of-the-mill schlock to something worthwhile. The Perfect Witness gets just enough of those little things right to make this a decent flick, even though it gets its one big thing slightly wrong.

Mickey Gravatski (Wes Bentley) is a recovering drug addict who's been reduced to living with his aged mother. He has pretensions of being a filmmaker and has been obsessively pursuing a morally unorthodox way of getting his big break in show business. Mickey has been tracking a local serial killer and when he finally catches him on video killing a girl, he threatens to turn the tape over to the police unless the killer lets Mickey make a documentary about him. The murderer, James Lemac (Mark Borkowski), reluctantly consents and lets Mickey into his world…but only long enough to kidnap Mickey's aged mother. That's when James makes it clear that a documentary will be done, but only on his terms and Mickey is forced to scramble for a way to save his mother and himself.

The Perfect Witness has much in common with many mediocre to bad films out there. The dialog is pedestrian, the camera work is mostly just okay and plot doesn't have much flow or pace to it. However, it consistently gets so many little moments absolutely right to distract you from its weaknesses and that starts from the very beginning. The movie opens with Mickey in a dark alley. He has his camera sees a woman burst out of a doorway, trying to escape from Lemac. Mickey is dozens of yards away and films Lemac stabbing the girl to death, then barely escaping with his life when Lemac sees him and chases after him.

Here's how filmmakers Thomas Dunn and Mark Borkowski get it right. Mickey's plan to blackmail a serial killer into doing a documentary is repellent and brutally selfish. He's really a terrible person for thinking of something like that, let alone trying to go through with it. But the audience doesn't know that when we first see Mickey in that alley. We don't know who he is or why he's in that alley, only that he witnesses a murder and then flees from the killer. Not only does that lead the viewer to empathize with Mickey, but you naturally classify him as "the good guy" because he's presented in uncompromised contrast to the bad guy. Even the way the scene is staged, Mickey is far enough away from the killing that you don't judge him for not trying to stop it. That opening scene is then followed up by some relatively subtle business that establishes both Mickey's down-on-his-luck circumstances and his desperate desire to make something of himself.

So, a connection is formed between the audience and Mickey. They're led to see him as "the hero" and then given the context of his life and what he's trying to do about it. That's when we find out about Mickey's awful agenda but by then, we're invested enough in the character to care. This story could have easily begun in a different way that didn't engage the viewer at all. It could have started with Mickey getting the idea of his serial killer documentary or dropped us into the midst of Mickey's efforts to track the killer or his planning of how to get him on film to blackmail him. The problem is that my reaction, and I think the reaction of others, to that would be…"Why should I give a damn what happens to this horrible Mickey guy?"

These filmmakers understand that what Mickey is planning to do is awful and he's an awful person for doing it, so they need to get the viewer to engage with Mickey and care about him, even if in only a shallow way, before revealing his plan. I have seen so many pathetic excuses of motion pictures where the people involved have obviously never considered the nature of their story or the need to appeal to the audience. They're clearly caught up in how "edgy" and "cool" they think they are and just as clearly expect the audience to almost feel privileged to be able to see their cinematic masterpiece. The Perfect Witness never does any of that. It's always hitting the correct note in the right way to get and keep the audience's attention.

With all those little things just right, it becomes easy to forgive the film for kind of floundering for a point. This thing does not have the pace or plot to be a thriller and instead is going for more of a character-driven drama, setting up Mickey and Lemac as mirror image addicts with mother issues. But I don't think these filmmakers ever quite figured out what the point of that reflection was supposed to be and where it was going to lead to. That sort of confusion is usually fatal to a movie, but so much else about The Perfect Witness works so well that here, it's a minor annoyance.

The people who made this film are people who should make films for a living. That may sound like faint praise, but with all the filmmakers out there who should really be cleaning out septic tanks and doing land surveying for the local zoning board, it isn't.

An Amazing Thriller

[kitrosen · 27 February 2008]

I thought this movie was outstanding. It explored the mind of a compulsive killer, without holding anything back. It explored his childhood and abuse; the flame which lit his compulsion. I was on the edge of my seat from start to finish. Wes Bentley was amazing as the desperate, drug addicted film maker who set out to do the documentary on the killer. Also, the supporting cast made it a great ensemble piece. I recognized Kenny Johnson from "The Shield" and Beth Grant from "No Country for Old Men". Mark Borkowski, who played the killer, gave an honest and intense portrayal of Bentley's tortured subject. I can't understand why this film didn't get a theatrical release. I know it toured the festivals this year but, man, it would be great to see this film on the big screen. I highly recommend it.

Absolute Garbage

[aliasme · 1/10 · 4 December 2007]

Having just wasted a couple of hours watching this and for 80% of that time in complete disbelief, I can give this garbage the turkey of the year award, no problem. To say the plot was unbelievable is some big understatement. Frankly I am lost for words to describe this utter tripe. Not only are the characters completely and utterly without any semblance of originality (this sort of stuff has been done much better in dozens of 'serial killer flicks')but the acting was dire. For those who pay to see this, I hope you get your money back, for those who were paid to do this, I hope you GIVE your money back. Believe me folks there are many new releases out there that are much, much better. Go see.

Interview with a serial killer

[sol1218 · 7/10 · 19 October 2008]

**SPOILERS** Disturbing and scary insight of what make a serial killer tick in that he, like almost all his type, has both a good as well as murderous side to him. Which makes him more dangerous in that he's not that easy to identify by both the police and his unsuspecting victims.

In the movie recovering alcoholic and armature film maker Mickey "Mick" Garvatski,Wes Bently, catches on video tape serial killer James Lemac, Mark Borowski, in the act as he brutally murders a young women in a dark alley. Instead of turning the tape over to the police Mick decides to blackmail James in giving him the story behind his actions and later, if James is either caught or killed by the police, releasing the video as a TV documentary. To make sure that James doesn't include him as one of his victims Mick has a number of copies made of the tape by his friend Gino, Albert Lopez-Murtra, just in case James decides not to cooperate with him.

Having no choice but in going along with Mick's unusual plan James starts to manipulate him into being an accomplice in a future murder of his that will, if Mick decides to turn James over to the police, make him just as guilty of first degree murder as James is! To get Mick even more under his control James tracks down his somewhat not too mentally stable mother Klara, Maria Haufrecht, and kidnaps her to doubly make sure that Mick doesn't rat him out to the police.

As Mick starts to get closer to what's behind James murderous impulses he starts to realizes that it all started when he was six years old. Abused by his mother Emma Lemac, Beth Grant, who not only mistreated him but his kid sister Megan, Joanna Baron, as well had James when he reached adulthood strike out at society. Starting his career as a heartless killer by torturing and killing cats James graduated in doing the same to young women who he, in James sick mind, substituted for his hated and deceased mother!

****SPOILER ALERT**** It's towards the end of the movie that James comes to realize that the person-his mother-that initiated his extreme hatred is in fact alive not dead like he was lead to believe all these years! It's then that the cool clam and collective James Lemac for the first time in the movie loses it. With that shocking revelation a mentally and emotionally destroyed Mick is driven, by circumstances beyond his control, to do what even the cold blooded serial killer James Lumac couldn't! And that leads to the horrific bloodbath that breaks out, in a major Philadelphia hospital no less, at the end of the film!

Despite the films many inconsistencies it does make it's point in what's the reasons behind the actions of serial killer James Lemac. The big surprise in the film is how someone like Mick Gravatski could let himself be taken in by the clever and ruthless killer. Not being all there, in him being a recovering alcoholic and drug abuser, to begin with Mick completely underestimated James ability to short-circuit his mindless plan to use him to his advantage. And it was that what lead Mick to end up doing something so bloody and outrageous that even the mindless psycho killer James was incapable of doing!

Bad Pick for a Defect from the Neo-Star System

[jkhuysmans0 · 4/10 · 30 March 2008]

I had a recent spectator experience with The Perfect Witness (2007) because the NetFlix computer recommendation engine suggested I watch this film. Apparently, at some point, I told it how much I liked Michael Haneke's, Benny's Video. I don't know about you, but this parallel being drawn provoked in me a maelstrom of emotion and excitement over Thomas C. Dunn's film and made the allocation of my time toward it virtually impossible to refuse. Just this kind of recommendation from the NetFlix computer intelligence, for me, had the aesthetic/moral movie bar set to level so high that, upon reflection, it represented something pretty much unaccomplished in every film produced in the year 2007.

Having prefaced my response to the film that way, I'm going to proceed in knocking this picture down as poorly executed and banal; and I really hate to do that because I think our boy, Wes Bentley, happens to be not only one of the most interesting young faces in contemporary cinema, but also one its most overlooked and underrated screenacting talents in the US. I'm more than moderately concerned that the poor guy's going to miss the fame ship if he keeps fiddling around with first time movie directors like this.

The Perfect Witness is about Micky (Wes Bentley), who, about thirty, still lives with Mom ("You're not drinkin' again area ya's?"), but he's a "filmmaker" or at the very least some kind of street-level voyeur with a pension for shooting would-be Johns in the seedy back alleys of Philadelphia with his DVX 100B. Out there, doing his private investigator-like drills, Micky "inadvertently" video-tapes a brutal murder on a hapless early-twenty-ish coed with his hand held camcorder. Baring the notion in mind that snuff and movies as cultural currency can be his equated with his ticket out of the white urban ghetto (and not to the debts of his unwitting friends and relatives who put up the money for his atrocious films), Micky approaches the assailant, James LeMac (Mark Borkowski: also takes a writing credit) or "Mac the Knife" –whichever- and blackmails the killer into making a documentary about his murder impulses, holding this found footage over the attacker with threats of the police.

The problem with this movie is not that no interesting ideas exist because they do. While both the writing and direction are amateurish, that alone doesn't make a film bad. It's that these guys commit a rather poor assumption that what they are presenting is shocking in the context of a culture in which just about any person in the free world with access to a private computer can log-on to the web and catch the veracity of the action of a beheading on their little Mac or PC. No film relies on shock value alone any more (unless of course, ironically, it's a film about torture on animals) and therefore cinematic images of violence (real or fake) have less and less cultural capital with each year that passes. Also, we've got this astounding actor-talent in the lead all styled-up, real hip guy: his two inch beard and skull cap with the little bill on it, backwards, just like the dork from high school who craved after the potential services of my primary love interest –same guy who just now calls himself a "poet."

Spare me. "I'm an artist," "I'm a filmmaker." Okay. Please do, carry on with that shtick, Cronnie. Seems to have bought you a lot of expensive 35mm stock. And go ahead, you can wear all the accrutements of a "creative" but don't expect us top respond to you, to follow your below average character through your two hour movie while you take down Wes Bentley's career. Why don't we just let history speak to the merits of what you do, filmmaker guy. My guess is history will eventually have say something about that –like, probably that's in not is good as you think it is. And yeah, odds are you'll be laying the blame on your dear ole ma, end up like our man Micky here in The Perfect Witness; hooked on smack and covered in your buddy's blood with a video camera in your hand. Great.

Quick comment

[jessex_xy · 7/10 · 26 February 2008]

on this one. If Atonement can be even made. If No Country For Old Men can win awards, than this was a great movie. Drop that and this movie was good. I wouldn't recommend heading to a theatre for something like this but then I wouldn't recommend even watching the former two movies. I would encourage a rental of this one. I was more than surprised that the acting was so solid. I can't quite say what it was about this one but it had an independent body while delivering a higher budget soul. For those that have written reviews instead of adding comments here, thanks, but please do suspend belief when doing so; you're watching fiction. Not all fiction meets all film school 101 criteria (in fact, for your type of people, do rent Dead Poets Society and pay attention to what Robin William's character teaches then come back and re-write your reviews). For the rest of you pondering watching this one, again, this didn't meet the 101 but it was entertaining. And I generally detest anything low budget _and_ anything with knives a'slashing away.

Good story - bad film

[nickpedersen · 4/10 · 27 May 2020]

I dont get it... There is so many good stories becomming very bad films! This is another one of those. It could be a really good movie, but somehow it aint. Wes Bentley is an okay actor but he cant save it. When you watch the movie you think in every scene; Why didnt they do this, why didnt they have this approach, and why did they instruct it like that... Its so sad. All these good stories go down the drain!

The mother of all interviews.

[parry_na · 7/10 · 6 February 2021]

'The UnGodly' is ostensibly about two men, is co-written by, and stars, Mark Borkowski. Small-time, wannabe film-maker Mickey, played by Wes Bentley, teams up with extremely shady James Lemac (Borkowski) to conduct an interview, hoping to explore the workings of the mind of a psychopath. What transpires is a tale of two flawed men trying to gain the upper hand in a deadly relationship based on fascination and revulsion.

To ease the dark tone, there are moments of natural humour, in dialogue and relationships which helps to add an extra dose of reality the volatile situation.

The style favoured by director Thomas Dunn is that of unglamorous television documentary, while making good use of the run-down parts of various chosen locations. Mickey is drawn into the world of a serial killer, and really this is a showcase for two very good actors. The supporting cast are all terrific too, even down to smaller roles like that of unfortunate Polish waitress, whose brief scenes are memorable.

As an examination of manipulation and violence, I found this deliberately unspectacular film an enjoyable way to spend 100 minutes. My score is 7 out of 10.

Already taken

[raulfaust · 4/10 · 4 November 2012]

"The Ungodly" has an original story, involving a serial killer and a filmmaker that films everything he does, in order to make a daring documentary. Things don't happen as planned-- of course-, and filmmaker seems himself in a big trouble once the killer involves his mother. One thing I have to ask-- is it that easy to get away with murder in the USA? I mean, he kills lots of people and simply walks away, with no police after him or anything like that. I really don't know what went wrong with this picture, but I found the first half hour very boring and uninteresting. Maybe because the plot is too simple; maybe because we're tired of movie with people filming everything, or maybe because it just plains bad. Nothing bad-- or good- to say about acting, directing and development. It's just an ordinary movie, but didn't entertain nor pleased me. Just pass it.

Let the godless kill...

[Vomitron_G · 9/10 · 22 April 2007]

Now which movie-lover doesn't love the following: You walk into a theater having absolutely no expectations whatsoever concerning the film you're about to watch. Then you walk out, approximately 90 minutes later, deeply impressed about what you've just seen on the big screen. Shamefully, I have to admit that my case was even a bit worse (and therefore the experience was even a bit better): I already had some expectations walking into that theater, and they weren't very optimistic. I assumed a film with a premise like THE UNGODLY could be either very good or it would just suck big-time. Nothing in-between. Just to be on the safe side, I was betting on the latter. Never was I so foolishly wrong. THE UNGODLY can easily be considered as one of the best movies about a serial killer to come out over the last 20 years (or even longer, if you take in consideration excellent movies like DERANGED and HENRY: A PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER).

Actor Wes Bentley (the teenager with the cam-corder in American BEAUTY) is allowed to play with a bigger camera this time. He portrays Mickey Gravitski, a struggling filmmaker with no job and a severe alcohol & drug addiction. One night, he coincidentally succeeds in recording a murder committed by a notorious serial killer. However, it turns out that it wasn't all that of a coincidence that Mickey was at the right place at the right time the night of the murder. Mickey gets in touch with serial killer James Lemac and uses his footage to blackmail him. He wants Lemac to be the subject of his documentary.

Being from Belgium myself (and after having read the synopsis) I couldn't help but thinking about our own Belgian little movie (our national cinematographic pride & joy, if you will) with the same subject matter released in 1992: C'EST ARRIVÉ PRÈS DE CHEZ VOUS (AKA MAN BITES DOG). And that was also the reason for my distrust: A movie with the same shaky documentary-style camera, without the outrageous black humor but with lame semi-philosophical twaddle instead? Wrong! Director Thomas Dunn indeed keeps the camera close to the actors' skin and the cinematography is often dark, gritty and depressing. But it always feels like a real film. The two most stellar elements of THE UNGODLY are the two leading actors and the plot. I don't know if Wes Bentley also might have any hidden comedian talents, but he sure can put down very believable, serious characters with rough edges. The young man simply looks tormented throughout the whole movie. But the most positive surprise definitely was newcomer writer/actor Mark Borkowski. He's not even a very young guy anymore, so where has he been all of his life? The way he shuffles around on screen, his (figuratively) scarred character-face, his sudden violent outbursts and especially his Brooklyn accent made me think a lot about Harvey Keitel. And I'm even convinced our dear Harvey couldn't have portrayed James Lemac in a better fashion.

And then I also mentioned the plot, right? Well, instead of just registering Lemac's deeds & commentary and following him with a camera (much like the aforementioned MAN BITES DOG and HENRY did), THE UNGODLY manages to tell an intriguing story that even takes a few curves into the unexpected. The psychological cat & mouse power-plays between Mickey and James (who's blackmailing who actually?) are finger-licking good. And then there's the ultimate cliché that every killer somehow has to be traumatized by a tyrannical mother during his child-years. Well this movie actually does something with that concept. I was grinning and shocked at the same time when that subplot unfolded on the screen.

It all adds up to THE UNGODLY being one of the most pleasant theatrical surprises I've encountered in a long time. I'll try to temper my enthusiasm and keep myself from rating it a 10/10 yet. But to me THE UNGODLY already earned its place in my personal "Serial Killer Hall Of Fame". And now please let the godless keep on killing... It produces great cinema!

Pretty clever film

[larawoolley · 7/10 · 9 August 2012]

This was shown on the Horror Channel one night, and I recorded it based on the title. It turns out that the film is more of a thriller (as described on this site) rather than a horror, which initially really disappointed me. However, I will review this film on the fact that it is a thriller. I felt that this film was quick to capture my attention in the fist few scenes, the characters were strong and the acting was excellent - however I think the story line needed a bit more work because I felt that sometimes the audience was left guessing - there were parts when I was wondering why things were happening, but pushed through them. The story line is a little far fetched - a film maker blackmailing a serial killer in to making a documentary, only then to seem to befriend him and help him - however if you can get over the slightly unbelievable part of blackmailing a killer, then I think you will really enjoy the film. It plays with your mind, the way the characters develop is interesting and believable; and what I like a lot about this, is that I began to empathise with the killer. I like films that make me think that way. Not my usual type of film, but I watched it through to the end and really enjoyed it.

More boring low budget crap.

[poolandrews · 2/10 · 17 August 2010]

The Ungodly starts as amateur filmmaker Mickey Gravatski (Wes Bentley) shoots serial killer James Lamac (Mark Borkowski) on camera killing a woman, Mickey wants to use his power over James to his advantage & blackmails James into being the star of a documentary about real life serial killers. At first Mickey thinks that he has a strong hold over James but James isn't stupid & manages to find out where Mickey lives & kidnaps his mother. With the life of his mother in the balance Mickey has to do exactly what James wants & is forced to film his horrendous crimes, Mickey can't take it anymore & decides to use his wits to corner James more & regain the upper hand in the ever increasingly twisted relationship...

This Spanish American co-production was executive produced, co-written & directed by Thomas Dunn, more widely known in the US under the title The Perfect Witness it really doesn't matter what title you see it under as it's crap. I guess the makers were going for an edgy little crime thriller in a very gritty, documentary style which I just found as dull as dishwater & throughly boring. Far too predictable with some gaping logic holes like when Mickey eventually turned his tape over to the police didn't he realise he would get into trouble for not handing it over sooner? What did he intend to do with the footage that he shot of James? As a serial killer wouldn't Mickey have been in trouble for not turning him in? What about the other people James murdered? The script portrays Mickey as a caring guy who loves his mother & wants to do the right thing but surely hiding evidence & letting a serial killer walk around free is a direct contradiction? Also why does James let Mickey get so close? If James is so careful why introduce Mickey to his family? Why does James make Mickey film his crimes? Anyone? Can anyone say that the script deals with this fundamental questions? The script takes itself very seriously & you get the feeling the makers were deadly serious about the whole affair but it just didn't work for me, the character's are poor, the whole thing is predictable, it's boring & at one hour & forty minutes long it outstays it's welcome long before the final credits roll. I suspect that the makers attempted to try & get inside the mind of a serial killer but it's all clichéd stuff & not that interesting, James was abused as a child & has lots of little prophetic sayings but very little else, no menace, no personality & no believability for me.

Certainly not a horror film The Ungodly is much more of a gritty thriller that is neither gritty nor thrilling. At all. What is up with the bizarre totally random scene in the elevator? There's no proper special effects of gore, like most recent low budget flicks just some blood splatter on the floor or on people's faces or on the wall or, well, you know what I mean.

Apparently filmed in Philadelphia in Pennsylvania, it looks sort of cheap although, again, I think because of the documentary style I think it was intentional & an artistic choice. The acting is bad, I didn't buy anyone for a single second. James needed a much stronger actor while Mickey was very middle of the road & neither her nor there.

The Ungodly is crap as far as I am concerned, it doesn't get into the mind of a serial killer & is totally boring & lacks any excitement or blood or gore or intrigue or mystery. You know what? Just watch something else instead.

More serial killer realism

[Leofwine_draca · 4/10 · 3 October 2015]

THE UNGODLY is another film in the recent trend for found-footage style serial killer films, a la THE LAST HORROR MOVIE and others. The granddaddy of all these is the seminal '80s film HENRY: PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER, with its unremitting bleakness and harsh realism that enhanced the grisly sights the film had to offer.

I'll admit that THE UNGODLY is a little better than the usual barrel-scraping stuff that fills the genre these days (including the horrendous Spanish film, H6: DIARY OF A SERIAL KILLER, and the Uwe Boll-made SEED). The production values are pretty good, and the director elicits two solid central performances: Mark Borkowski has the relatively straightforward role of the killer, while Wes Bentley (AMERICAN BEAUTY) shines as the film-making student who finds himself drawn into an incredibly dark world.

Thankfully, THE UNGODLY is better plotted than other serial killer movies I've seen, and it retains your interest throughout. It's also thankfully not as gruesome as others I've mentioned, although the material is still more than disturbing. I can't say I enjoy watching films like this, but I can appreciate what the director and writer were trying to achieve.

Better than I expected, but don't pay for it

[ForVirg · 5/10 · 13 January 2012]

Let me comment on the comparisons of this movie to "Mr. Brooks" or "Henry." This one is not in the league of those two very well-done films.

Unlike "Mr. Brooks," this one does not give more insight to the mind of a serial killer (or even to the interaction of other people with the killer) than an average "48 Hours" episode would. In my opinion, the characters here are flat or, at best, two-dimensional, while "Mr. Brooks" is amazingly written to provide real character depth. So if you're looking for a psychological thriller that *could* be real life, go rent "Mr. Brooks" instead, because you won't find that here.

But if you've already seen "Mr. Brooks" and have nothing better to do, AND you can watch this for free, then it's entertaining for a night. I especially enjoyed the last 1/2 hour or so, and it is there that this film finally becomes somewhat worthwhile.

On a whole, I was pleasantly surprised by some of the interaction and some of the surprises. But caveat emptor -- if you are a fan of depth of character and intelligent, probing writing and acting, don't expect this to be the 10-star movie some reviewers here seem to think it is.

The difference between a Pro and an Amateur

[dpbartee · 5/10 · 27 March 2020]

The name of the movie is The Perfect Witness. This movie listed incorrectly. It's amazing how people see themselves and it's normally NOT how they are in real life. An amateur videographer, Nick Gravatski, who sees himself as a Ken Burns quality documentary filmaker, has been on the trail if a serial killer for several years. One night, in a dark alley, he's waiting for the killer to come out of a bar, and he starts filming just as the killer starts stabbing the girl he's pulled into the alley with him. Instead of going to the police, he contacts the killer and tells him he's making a documentary film of him! Care to project how the movie moves along? It's a predictable, but not boring, Friday night drive-in movie.

Amazing and Visceral!

[abigailsea11 · 10/10 · 22 February 2008]

Wow!!! This is what Indie films should be. I didn't know what to expect going in but was totally on the edge of my seat the whole way through! It was sort of disturbing but in a very real, can't look away, can't wait for what will happen next sense. The two main characters, Mickey (Wes Bentley) and James Lemac (newcomer Mark Borkowski) are locked in a psychological cat and mouse as Mickey, a documentary filmmaker, hatches a crazy plan to blackmail and film James, a serial killer, for just a few days and then turn him into the police. One of the coolest things is that we don't really see the police in this film. We know they must be out there searching but we stay with the two main characters and just keep delving deeper and deeper into their psychology, morality and obsession. Every time you think you get to breathe, the air gets sucked right back out of you and there's a new crazy plot twist. The acting was really subtle (with Borkowski capable of erupting at a moment's notice) and the dark, edgy feel to the cinematography/directing made it really stand out as a risk-taking, no holds barred independent film. One particular murder scene was one of the most emotionally disturbing and visceral 5 minutes I've watched in a long time...wouldn't be surprised if this was a love/hate film for people because it gets under your skin and takes so many chances but I'm firmly on the side of loving it! It was clear the filmmakers wanted to be relentless with their audience so be prepared...

Great Cult Classic

[billellis13 · 10/10 · 21 March 2008]

This will definitely become a cult classic! It's non-stop tension, which makes it a great thriller, but it also has strong philosophical messages. It poses questions, makes us think. The script is so well thought out that you have to go back and watch the film a few times to realize all the intricate layers that writers Dunn and Borkowski have woven in. It's a disturbing emotional and psychological journey that gives incredible depth to its characters. The film draws us in, makes us questions ourselves – 'what would we do in this situation?' I was thinking about it long after it ended and how many movies do this, especially on the independent level? Witty, smart dialogue, great acting, interesting direction (and one of my favorite character actors in Beth Grant)…Not only will this film hold up over time, but I think people will look back and appreciate it even more as Dunn/Borkowski go on to make bigger films...

A riveting motion picture!

[dkrazen · 10/10 · 27 February 2008]

How do you take a serial killer movie and make it original? It seems every plot, twist and turn has been exhausted already. Not so for this film. Without spoiling the story for anyone, the characters and plot were totally unpredictable and unlike anything I had ever seen. First of all, it was shot very realistically, in a documentary style, which more then added to its suspense. You felt like you were really with these people. The subject matter that it explored, especially the child abuse, was in-depth and helped us understand this horrible killer. Wes Bentley was incredible. I never saw him play a character like this. And his co-star, Mark Borkowski, was riveting as the killer. What made him most terrifying was the duality he created in his character. He was very likable in a role that I, as the viewer, was supposed to hate. It's one of those films you have to watch more then once because it offers more and more each time you view it. It's got layers. On one level, sure, its a "serial killer" movie but on another, its an exploration and even a philosophical analysis of two men and their compulsions.

A Killer Film with a Message

[shingka · 10/10 · 10 March 2008]

Finally, a "serial killer" film that carries a message and not just a knife. At first, I thought it was another "Mr. Brooks"-- but within moments, especially after seeing Mark (the killer) Borkowski's opening scene-- I knew that this is what Mr. Brooks should have been! It actually reminded me of an Abel Ferrera film; it was shot documentary style with a rich texture filled with severe earth tones. This film geek really appreciated what Thomas Dunn was trying to do. He was taking the "villian" to whole new level in making him a piece of all of us. "Personal Accountability" is the essence and message of this movie. I'm just afraid its going to be caught up in the "slasher" genre and it is so NOT that at all. And where did Mark Borkowski come from? I have to research him and find out what rock he has been hiding under. He was the best (and most human) serial killer I have ever seen in a movie. Oh, and don't blink, you'll miss Kenny Johnson (from The Shield). Wild, seeing Kenny in such an inner city, Ferrera-esquire film. Watch it. And don't blink!

Just a good movie

[2nd-life-film · 10/10 · 30 March 2008]

There are a lot good and bad comments, - so heavy to add something new to, but i try.

(1) It's heavy for one indie to pay a star ! (2) But we also need to make the good films, so we do our best. (3) This film is total different to all "sample", what folks here try to related with, it's unique and fresh in mind. (4) There no "copy" in plot to anything else ! (5) It's totally ORIGINALLY ! (6) Perfect acting ! (7) Super editing in picture and sound, of course cinematography as well... (8) The director make his best to show the roots of a the psychopath-killer...

and I guess, (but not sure) the director try to claim someone outside of that pure guy, the serial killer,

By the way abuse is not that seldom, as well in US and outside, so the MESSAGE is arrive everyone, who thing with brain, and not with his cock,

Resume: - ALL GREAT IN THAT MOVIE, Congratulations, Thomas to succeeded film!

to all other: tip : - go make your one, if u don't like others works.... ;-))

Best Serial Killer Movie!

[vikes1965-1 · 10/10 · 7 May 2009]

I can't believe all the junk movies out there that get a 6 stars or above! This movie deserves at the least an 8... So I will give the movie a 10 to make up for the morons that gave the movie less than 5 stars! Does not hurt that Mark Borkowski was a neighbor & good friend of my sister ;o) Give the movie a chance & I'm sure you will come to the same conclusion! Not only will this film hold up over time, but I think people will look back and appreciate it even more as Mark Borkowski goes on to make bigger and better films. Also glad to see a neighborhood guy make it! Mark keep making great films & keep making the films in PHILLY!

Twisty Serial Killer Flick

[kylelejames · 10/10 · 9 May 2018]

Just got DVD. Loved it. Good story with a lot of twists. A serial killer you sympathize with but that only makes him more dangerous!