I Know Who Killed Me


by Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)


With a serial killer on the loose, a promising young female student (Lindsay Lohan) is kidnapped after a high school football game. The police find her in a remote field some two weeks later, alive but missing some limbs. Or do they?

The girl they find looks exactly like the missing girl, but insists she is not. She claims she is a crackhead and stripper named Dakota. More and more evidence piles up showing that she really is the girl kidnapped by the killer: (1) her injuries are identical in every way to the pattern established earlier by the killer, down to details never released to the public; (2) the two girls have have the same DNA; (3) her mother still has her ultrasound exam, showing only one baby in the womb, so a twin is ruled out; (4) even if there were a missing twin, both girls could not have identical injuries; (5) the missing girl's password on her Mac, previously known only to her, is "dakota," obviously indicating that the missing girl's subconscious fabricated the second personality. Despite all that evidence, Dakota insists that she is a different person, and that her injuries just sort of happened to her out of mid-air, having been done by nobody.

It sounds at least mildly intriguing, but it isn't. It's a "reverse Hitchcock" thriller. By that I mean that Hitchcock's films often seemed to have some irrational or supernatural elements which turned out to have perfectly logical explanations. If you keep your head in the game, assume that the laws of the natural universe have to apply, and try to think through Vertigo, for example, you have a reasonable chance to solve the mystery before the protagonist. In the reverse Hitchcock plot, on the other hand, the mystery at first seems to be explicable by a combination of natural science and psychology, but later turns out to be some preposterous supernatural mumbo-jumbo. In this case, Dakota must be the missing girl, but with a traumatic post-stress disorder of some kind. But she isn't. The writer's decision to confound the audience by piling on the surprises eventually paints the plot into a corner, whereupon the script has no choice but to resort to a bullshit supernatural explanation which could not possibly be true, and therefore could not be guessed by anyone playing along at home unless they are prepped with the same information I am now giving you, which is that when all the possible explanations have been exhausted, the solution must be something impossible. If you want to guess along, just go for the craziest possible explanation.

Actually, the full explication requires not one but two "groaners."

First, the missing girl and Dakota are two different girls and they are twin sisters, despite the ultrasound. How could that be? That particular ultrasound actually showed a third girl - a baby who died at birth. The father never told the mother that her baby died. He just acquired one of two twin sisters born at the same time by buying the girl from a whore who didn't want her babies. The other baby was raised by someone else. Yes, that's right, it's the ol' unknown twin trick! Even given the existence of the twin, consider the remaining problems: how could the two girls have exactly identical injuries, and how could Dakota's injuries have happened without her knowing about them? In this case the explanation is not merely preposterous but completely impossible! I will not spoil for you in case you want to watch this.

You may be wondering, "Why couldn't the investigators immediately ascertain that the two girls were different people?" Well, you are correct to ask that. They could have. Dakota was a real person who lived on the earth and left many footprints upon it. Real FBI agents would have figured that out in a matter of minutes. But these were movie FBI agents. I think it was Roger Ebert who pointed out that bad thrillers require everyone to be as stupid as possible at all times, because if the characters were as smart as the audience, the film would be over too quickly. That's precisely what happens here. The FBI seems to have about half of its personnel assigned to this investigation, and the entire case hinges on whether "Dakota" is telling the truth or not, but every single agent completely ignores the fact that there was a perfectly simple way for them to check out her story: just ask her which strip club she worked at, and take her down there to meet her boss. If the place doesn't exist or if nobody there has ever seen her, the Dakota personality is imaginary, and the girl might even realize that and snap back to her "other" personality. On the other hand, if it turns out that she is telling the truth, then the feds would immediately realize that Dakota and the missing girl are in fact two different girls and, since they have matching DNA, must be identical twins. (And remember that the father could have confirmed this!) Despite all the law enforcement personnel assigned to the case, including a psychologist, nobody ever says simply, "Which strip club did you work at?" Hell, they wouldn't even have had to go to the club. They probably could have figured out everything they needed with a short phone call. On the other hand, that would have made for a mystery movie without its central mystery, so their stupidity was required for the plot.

That wasn't the only case of the characters having to be as dense as possible. Once Dakota and her twin's adoptive father determine the killer's identity, they drive off to his torture lair by themselves, without informing the police, because they have "no time" to call the cops. What the ... ? How much time does it take for the passenger of a car to dial 911 on a cell phone while the driver continues driving? And what made them think that a suburban dad and a girl with one arm and one leg would even be capable of overcoming a psychopath with a house full of blades and saws and other weapons?

I have a few more items like that down in my notes, but I can't see any sense in turning this essay into a litany of similar items. I think you already have the idea. The one plot-related item I want to add is something that you may have already wondered about as you read the summary above. The missing girl's father knew all along that he had purchased one of two twin girls, and therefore must have known that Dakota very well could have been the twin sister he knew his daughter to have. He chose to remain silent on the matter until Dakota forced his hand, even though revealing this information could have helped save his daughter. Remember that the feds stopped the hunt for the missing girl because they thought she was found, so the father's silence was condemning his daughter to death. On the other hand, if Dakota was known to be a twin, then his daughter was still missing and might be alive, and the search for her needed to resume.

Is the film redeemed by guilty pleasures? No, not unless you like torture, in which case there is some occasional gore for your entertainment. If your pleasures incline more toward seeing Lohan naked, you can forget it. The film's got nothin' except some vivid red and blue imagery. I Know Who Killed Me is basically a typical straight-to-vid film and would have been just that if the star had not been the controversial Lohan, whose media-grabbing antics guaranteed some publicity for the film. By having snuck into the metroplexes, it's a contender for the dishonor of being the worst theatrical film of 2007.


* widescreen anamorphic

* Alternate Ending

* Alternate Opening

* Blooper Reel

* Extended Strip Dance Scene




1 James Berardinelli (of 4 stars)
5 Rotten Tomatoes  (% positive)
  0% from the major critics
16 Metacritic.com (of 100)






4.5 IMDB summary (of 10)
D Yahoo Movies

That's about as low as Yahoo's softball ratings ever get. In comparison, Deuce Bigalow, European Gigolo is a C.






Box Office Mojo. It grossed about $7 million in about 1300 theaters. It opened in 9th place, then dropped a precipitous 67% in its second weekend.





  • Although Lindsay Lohan has three strip scenes while drugged and boozed up in a hell-hole of a sleaze joint, she dances fully clothed. The most you will ever see is the bottom half of her butt. She also has a sex scene with her boyfriend, and again manages to stay dressed. Oh, yeah, and a shower scene - with no flesh other than her head, shoulders and fingers. That modesty is all rather astounding since (1) the film was already a hard R for language, torture, and drug abuse; (2) other female characters in the film are naked; and (3) everyone in the Western world has already seen all the details of Lohan's genitalia in graphic close-up, so the lack of flesh here can't be chalked up to the actress's prudish and maidenly airs.
  • Two strippers provide background breasts.
  • There is a photograph of a nude female corpse.




Web www.scoopy.com

Our Grade:

If you are not familiar with our grading system, you need to read the explanation, because the grading is not linear. For example, by our definition, a C is solid and a C+ is a VERY good movie. There are very few Bs and As. Based on our descriptive system, this film is a:


Not recommended. Substandard thriller which fails both in terms of interesting narrative and in terms of guilty pleasures. It would have gone straight-to-vid with any other star.