| In this movie. The
serial killer manages to completely hose Lieutenant Richie Valens with
about 11 different scams.
- She leads ol' Richie to about six
different theories, and gets him to believe each one in turn,
thereby completely destroying his credibility with the department
in case he ever figures it out for real.
- She has an accomplice commit one
of the murders in a hotel room next to where Richie is at the
time, and allows him to hear the sounds coming from the next room.
(He thinks it's a couple having noisy sex)
- Oh, yeah, that same room - guess
whose name it was rented in? The name of the Lieutenant!
- She bugs police headquarters, so
that she or her accomplices can call in and know every single
thing the police are doing, and even which cop is doing it.
- She tricks the Lieutenant into
arresting a guy who was actually with the Lieutenant at the time
of the second murder. This is a marvelous play on the old court
and crime story cliché of "where were you on the night of
Wednesday, June 13th?". Obviously, nobody can answer
questions like that without fixing the date by certain events or
reference points, to the point where even the lieutenant can't
remember where he was that day. Pretty funny, when you think
about it. The cop asks - "where were you at the time
of the murder?" ... "Oh, I was with you"
- She commits one of the murders in
the basement of police headquarters while she is sitting in a room
with the cops, and her accomplice is behind bars for another one of
the murders. (Too complicated to explain)
- She gets Richie into such deep
doo-doo that he actually has to apologize to the psychopath he
arrested (who really was the accomplice!)
- She gets an inexperienced cop to
follow around an old lady, thinking it was someone else.
- She manages to get away with
everything at the end, and the police (except Richie) are
completely satisfied that they have the case wrapped up. Richie
knows she did it, but is powerless to do anything about it. In
fact, based on some procedural errors he was goaded into, he's
lucky to be out of jail himself. He beat up a suspect who told him
to "fuck off", even though he hadn't arrested the guy
for a crime, and hadn't read the guy his rights. Then, after he
beat him up, he threw him in jail for "resisting
arrest". It was kinda embarrassing when the guy's lawyer
asked publicly, "resisting an arrest on what charge,
exactly?" Oops! Needless to say, the lawyer made him crawl
around on all fours for a while, since he was actually tricked
into admitting a criminal assault on the guy.
DVD info from Amazon.
The usual bios, trailers, TV ads, and a music video
|So the movie is definitely not your
run-of-the-mill cop story. It's much close to a comic book story,
substituting this brilliant psychologist for Dr. Doom.
The title, by the way, related to the
children's game of hangman. The killer plays the game with live
victims. The police have to solve the word or phrase on their
computers within a certain time limit, as they hear the terrified
screams of the victim in a live streaming feed.
I would have scored it higher, except
that Richie didn't sing La Bamba, yet again.
- With their
votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters
score it 5.6, Apollo users only 33/100.
guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of
excellence, about like three and a half stars
from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm
watchability, about like two and a half stars
from the critics. The fives are generally not
worthwhile unless they are really your kind of
material, about like two stars from the critics.
Films under five are generally awful even if you
like that kind of film, equivalent to about one
and a half stars from the critics or less,
depending on just how far below five the rating
guideline: A means the movie is so good it
will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not
good enough to win you over if you hate the
genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an
open mind about this type of film. C means it will only
appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover
appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you
like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if
you love the genre. F means that the film is not only
unappealing across-the-board, but technically
inept as well.
Based on this
description, I will
score this a C+. Something different - a clever zero budget
made-for-cable film. Not The Bicycle Thief, probably
no crossover appeal, but a solid genre picture.