Movies-TV

this "documentary" scrapes the bottom of the barrel

From frame 1, I had a premonition that "Nightstalker" would be another completely worthless addition to the inexplicably popular subgenre of direct-to-video pseudo-documentaries of serial killers ("Ed Gein," "Ted Bundy," "Dahmer," "Speck," "Gacy," etc.), and I was absolutely right. After about 30 minutes, I found myself fast-forwarding through this muck in search of something of interest, but found nothing. Skimming the other comments posted here, I'm glad I'm not the only one who raised an eyebrow at the Latino female empowerment plot fronting as a would-be expose on Richard Ramirez--it's more the tale of one woman's (trite, trite, trite) oppression by society because of her ethnicity, and how she overcomes it to reel in a psycho (please, sell it to Lifetime). Not that there'd be anything wrong with this revisionist history if the characters were well-developed and made to deliver strong dialogue, but no--the director utilizes the tried-and-true gimmick of the talentless--known as 'the music-video edit'--to stand in for character development and suspense; godawful death-metal plays over rapid-fire cuts of white demons, crack pipes, and rape scenes, which translates into annoyance, not menace. Pathetic, subpar acting puts the final nail in the coffin of this garbage. Avoid at all costs.zero/10

The WORST movie i have ever seen!

Being a true crime fanatic, i was very much looking forward to this film. I suffered the entire length of this movie and could not have been more disappointed.

Firstly, on the back of the DVD, it refers to the killer as 'robert ramirez' not Richard Ramirez. That alone should have prepared me for the levels of authenticity! it is packed to the gills with fiction and the directors/producers/screen writers should have their fingers removed.

who ever called "gigli" as the worst movie ever made had obviously never seen this steaming pile of CRAP!

terrible

this might be the worst movie i have ever seen. almost everything is shown in really fast motion and people randomly have these head-spasms like the exorcist. everyone seems to be on crack or cocaine, even the police. the parts that arent at a super-fast speed are incredibly boring. also, this is not scary, not even one bit. and i scare easily. this was too stupid to be scary.

Highly-fictionalized , badly-acted , MTV-influenced crap

Why can't they do a "night stalker" movie that doesn't suck? Richard Ramirez is the most terrifying serial murderer of all time. His 14-month, 1984-85 L.A. terror spree changed the world. Your very home was a potentially deadly chamber of horrors if he came around. Ramirez worshiped Satan, and presented cops with the most horrific crime scenes ever. If EVIL exists, RR was it's personification. A great film about the case is possible. 2 crap films have been made about the case-and this is one of them. This movie really sucks. If it weren't for the lovely Roselyn Sanchez; this movie would be totally UN-watchable. TRUTH:Ramirez didn't smoke crack.He shot coke. Ramirez disposed of the guy first. This film ignores that aspect. Ramirez wasn't a white guy, he was Hispanic. Ramirez dressed in black, but didn't emulate Trent Reznor's "Downward Spiral" look. Ramirez was never wounded by his victims. The cops didn't catch Ramirez....They saved Ramirez. Nerds. The filmmakers know the facts of the case(according to the DVD's commentary track), but just chose to distract us with some lame fiction.This film quickly becomes a weak cop-movie. Ramirez is just an incidental character. The demon-flash crap is just a lazy offense to the audience; a short-cut to actual story-telling. The filmmakers "based" this film on "true events", but ignored many fascinating, real events-turning the film into a boring story about a pretty cop experiencing sexual harassment. What's the point of all this? I don't know.This film couldn't have missed the mark any further. As for 1985 period-detail, well, forget it. You get about 5 characters, 4 cars, and 3 settings. This is kid's stuff.

Extremely good film; very unusual, too.

This film is excellent. Forget about the actual real-life case. This is loosely based on it. It is a really good film with serious, no-nonsense acting. The cinematography is complex and adds to the plot, which it is supposed to do. Everything in the film is not what you usually see or expect. The female officer is harassed in a sexual way by a fellow officer, but she ignores it. This is not political correctness. Far from it. The drug use by the stalker and then by officers of the law is an interesting comparison magnified by the special effects after each inhalation. The same thing is done before a killing by stalker and by officers. This is not a simple film, and it's done well. The ending! I really liked this film alot. It's excellent. 10

docudrama plays more like mockudrama

This movie is based on a True Story<<--i used capitol letters, wow. However, it is not from the real world that i know of and really is a "slasher" with three conflicting tones or more like formulas, maybe even four: the brutal realism of a docudrama, the "slasher" horror flick, feminist pic a la "silence of the lambs" and then fourth, even a thriller. All have loose ends.


Roselyn Sanchez and Frank Luis both competently play partners in the LAPD who arrive at the first murder scene where a victims eyeball was taken out found by Sanchez in the fridge. Then their dialogue suspiciously seemed a bit too light to the whole situation--Luis decides to one-up a homicide detective in his own way as they leave the scene and they seem to want to just get some donuts afterwards. Then they arrive at more crimes and even Sanchez religious mother seems to have been saved by her godly aura from the killer as he breaks in her house. Meanwhile, in between barfing at crime scenes, Sanchez at first seems to have a knack for catching homicidal killers. Then, of course having little to no reaction AGAIN as she did at first crime scene, she does nothing at numerous inappropriately sexist advances during her new "promotion" to homicide. She does nothing apparently because she may get fired.


Surprisingly, all these things i pointed out are the only good things in this movie and would have worked if it werent for this director trying to add in all these other tones. All these things would be okay if this were a docudrama. We learn nothing about Richard Ramirez except that he hides his face with his long hair and needs streetwise prostitutes for company before saying never mind and killing and raping them and everyone else that seems more helpless. All these things are intercut with the killer's perspective as he kills and kills and kills hiding his face from anyone who looks at it, yes, even his victims are not allowed to look which is why they say her eyes were cut out at the first scene.



I should have known immediately, as another Amazon review pointed out, that the music the killer listens to is modern satanic rock that couldnt have existed at his time. That should have immediately told me that this film is lacking in its realistic docudrama portrayal. And everytime we see him we also see flashes of a devil demonic guy that jumps around like well, a modern satanic rocker would with vampire teeth and white painted skin. This is supposed to show us the killer's mindset which we find out is more of a satanic ritual--he paints things like devil and pentagrams in blood at various murders.




So, the movie turns into a "slasher" after all. The movie portrays Richard Ramirez as some plot marker just like everyone else in the movie. Sanchez is religious at home, but lets her partner sniff coke while in police car with her. Then being chased by an imaginary killer(slashers do that, uh, oh, its a cat), and then the actual killer. She also allows herself to be sexually harassed numerous times just so she can stay as homicide detective to catch the killer and oh, yea, its personal because her mother was almost killed and now she is almost killed after all that.

Surreal Kinetics

If your looking for great interesting plot, its not its strength. What you get is psycho murders people-cops hunt-cops find-psycho goes to jail....But I felt that after seeing most of the current wave of serial killer DVD's out that this was one of the strongest. The camera work / editing was the star of the show. Even though we've seen bits of this style before, I found the wild, surreal kinetics to be truly entertaining. Yes if you liked the movies styles of Jacob's Ladder, Nat Born Killers, Spun & Requiem for a dream...you'll love this. Watch it for the editing, not for the storyline..... I bought my copy and am not unsatisfied at all.

Not a detailed or fully true account of Richard Ramirez.

A full complete story of killer Richard Ramirez and all of his "Night Stalker" killings has yet to be told. This film is not the one. This is a very poorly-made drama and badly filmed project. The sexual acts and the murders are all shown in a very fast speed. Subliminal quick shots. It goes by too fast for the naked eye to see every frame. You will have to slow down, "step" or frame by frame your DVD playing to see what is going on. Not a very detailed and not much insightful information given in this one. The makers were too carried away with the special effects. This version of Richard Ramirez is all wrong. Even the capture of Ramirez is wrong. He actually was caught in the daytime by one man and the rest of the neighborhood chased after him. This film does not portray that. The special effects of the evilness of Ramirez (the evil spirit shown in special effect) is probably accurate, I mean it sets the tone of what Ramirez is. DVD includes in special features, two deleted scenes. The best version I can recommend to you is MANHUNT: SEARCH FOR THE NIGHT STALKER (1989-TV).

Annoying killer/thriller/horror film.

Nightstalker starts in 'Los Angeles 1985' where one fateful night a man (Bret Roberts) has a bad foot fetish experience with a prostitute named Cherry (Roxanne Day) so he decides to don some black leather gloves & kill a couple of Hispanic people in they're own home. The next morning & Hispanic cops Officer's Gabriella Martinez (Roselyn Sanchez) & Frank Luis (Danny Trejo) are called to the house when relatives become worried, the two Officer's enter the house & find the mutilated & violated corpses. The killer seems to target the Hispanic community in Los Angeles & as more of them are brutally murdered Officer Martinez is promoted to homicide detective, more to appease to & calm the Hispanic community down than for her actual detective skills but what she doesn't know won't hurt her, right? The senseless & brutal murders continue, can Martinez make a useful contribution to the case & prove her male counterparts wrong? I'll give you three guesses & the first two don't count... (not that you'll need them anyway!)Written, co-produced & directed by Chris Fisher Nightstalker is the latest in a long line of low budget crap that I've sat through recently, honestly sometimes I wonder why I even bother I really do. Anyway, never let it be said I don't give a film a chance & I did at least make it all way through it. Even though his name is never mentioned Nightstalker is apparently based on the crimes of serial killer Robert Ramirez who killed members of the Los Angeles Hispanic community back in the 80's, having lived in England all my life I have never heard of Ramirez or his crimes so I really can't say how accurately this depicts them. The script throws in a bald headed demon that 'tells' the nightstalker to kill, the fictional cop Martinez to try & have a central character & add a few melodramatics to the proceedings & by all accounts has very little to do with the real Ramirez & has no real regard or intent for factual recreation. I can understand filmmakers wanting to change a few things around & spice things up a bit but in this case Nightstalker just comes across like a really bad cheapo low budget horror. It moves along at a fair pace & I didn't fall asleep (it was quite late too) so I have to give it that but overall I can't exactly heap praise on Nightstalker as it's simply not very good & ultimately that's the bottom line I'm afraid. I also take offence at the notion that he killed because of his foot fetish, even if it was unintentional they show him acting out a fantasy with a prostitute just before he kills his first victims which clearly sends some sort of message out, doesn't it?Director Fisher turns in one of the most annoying film to watch I've sat through, his use of gimmicky editing & MTV style editing & manipulation is irritating to say the least. From stupid time-lapse photography, fast forward, hi-speed, low-speed, blurriness, jerky hand held camera shots & constant drab low level lighting set to the most awful rock tracks you have a film which may literally give it's audience a head ache. These annoying flashy sequences are really unnecessary as proved by the fact the films most effective scene is when these processes aren't used. Forget about any decent violence, a few blood stained murder scenes & a couple of eyeballs in a box, that's it.Technically Nightstalker is OK apart from those annoying editing tricks, according to the IMDb Nightstalker was edited in the editor's living room & that it was shot in a mere 16 days. Neither of these revelations come as any real surprise to me & 16 days? What took them so long!? The acting was OK but did anyone else notice Trejo's moustache? The one side is fine but one half of the other half was shaved off, he literally only had three quarters of his moustache! Is this a fashion thing? Pay close attention when he & Sanchez are talking outside her house near the end, you'll see what I mean...Nightstalker is a pretty bad film when all said & done, it's as simple & straight forward as that. There are much better films out there although as I said at least it kept me watching to the bitter end which is something I suppose.

Drop dead boring!!

This film made me feel travel sick from the start. I was expecting horror, gore and action i got neither!! The story only covered about 4 days of his life and hardly featured anything of any real importance at all it didn't give any background on him and it didn't show any detective work in detail.Waste of my time!!

This movie is based on a True Story--wow, i used capitol letters.

There is no truth to be found in this movie, however, based on it that it may be. Only the acting by the movies two main characters is anything close to truth. Too bad the writing and directing strive for too much.This movie is a slasher with an odd twist (besides the "based on true story" riff raff), that is it shows a man hopping around too modern heavy metal dressed like demon in rocker's clothing. This is an insane devil man, so i guess that means the main character is too. He doesn't ever let his victims or us see his face because he has body-dysmorphic disorder. He needs a prostitute friend in the beginning then decides to kill her and everyone in the neighborhood while demon man hops around in his head as he smokes crack. Roselyn Sanchez plays the lead and her role is just as confusing as everyone else in the movie. She has a knack for finding the killer. Screws up in during her new promotion to homicide leaking clues on the TV news. And there is a scene where she gets the bad guy...the end.

Not the worst ever, or even bad at all.

If you're like me and you love a good arty film and could care less about what pleases the masses, than you should have no problem enjoying this film. The inventive camera work alone is worth the purchase. True it's similar to jacobs ladder, but it is used for it's own purpose and it serves the film well. Those who can't handle creative cinematography, stop now and save yourself the headache. Those of us with a taste for the surreal have a lot to chew on. The only real drawbacks of the film are that Ramirez, in life was a real character. He wasn't just a loon, he was an interesting person. It would have been nice to see that side of him expressed in the film. Also, the Sandra Bullock lookalike as the police woman who catches Ramirez. Nice plastic surgery babe. And lastly, the plot didn't stick completely to the facts. However, the essence and the overall story is true. Also the film is sick and disturbing as it should be. You're a hardened person if you can watch this movie without being even remotely disturbed. I did enjoy how the filmmakers portrayed Ramirez's relationship with his demon. A spiritual entity who possesses him and who commands him to kill, but later betrays him and leaves him to be caught. I also loved the Industrial and Death Metal soundtrack which added to the frantic approach. Overall I found it to be a very entertaining film, giving us a glimpse at the psychosis and spiritual struggle within Ramirez rather than a more digestable and "normal" approach. It was wonderfully demented and a good movie. It would have been better if they stuck closer to the facts however.

I couldn't watch it

This film is absolutely a true pain to watch. Literally!The other comments have covered all the problems with this movie already, so I will just agree with them. But, it is the painful camera work and editing that truly made me look away from the tv. I understand they were setting the mood for the killer's issues and demons, but they should have let it go after the beginning. It hurt my eyes and I found myself getting more and more disinterested in the actual film premise, which is way off, because of the annoying camera.And Danny Trejo? God, he was horrible in this. I realize he is not normally academy award material, but c'mon, this was so labored and corny.Al in all, I would avoid this at all costs. 1 out of 10 rating.

innovative, powerful, original -- true crime told as horror film/religious parable.

As other reviewers have noted, NIGHTSTALKER doesn't follow the Richard Ramirez serial killer facts too closely. But that's not what this film is about.

This is history told as a horror film. Indeed, as a religious parable.

We see Ramirez's killings through his own eyes. He stalks and kills his victims while an albino Satan with a blood-stained mouth flashes about him, head shaking quickly. Ramirez himself flashes about the scene. It's a series of killings seen through the eyes of an insane drug addict. It sets the mood of Evil. It works.


(Although the fast head shaking was first used in JACOB'S LADDER, it may be that this film's albino Satan later inspired THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST.)

Evil is the theme, to the point of religious parable. Ramirez not only sees Satan, he orders his victims, "Say you love Satan!" He tells Satan, "I did it for you!" Naturally, his apartment abounds in upturned pentagrams, written in blood.

Ramirez's nemesis is Rosalyn Sanchez, who plays an East L.A. cop--who's also a devout Catholic. She prays ferverently every night, the camera hovering in extreme closeup about her quivering lips, her tightly clutched rosary, focusing in and out at the aged crucifx she prays before.

Sanchez (Detective Martinez) is surrounded by encroaching evil. Her black police lieutanent boss sexually harrasses her. His head shakes quickly (as does Satan's head), thus linking him to Evil. Sanchez's Latino partner snorts coke in the squad car, his head shaking quickly. Sanchez's white partner turns vigilante, his head shaking quickly. The Evil is everywhere, in all races.

All three men behave in a mostly decent (if roughshod) manner throughout the film. None of their indescretions are followed up plotwise. Rather, the Evil just lurks there, surfacing on occassion, but always beneath the surface of those Sanchez might trust.

The Evil lurks in women too. Sanchez is betrayed by a gal reporter, who uses Sanchez as a source, then breaks confidence, exposing Sanchez as her source. Sanchez had given a police sketch of Ramirez to the reporter, hoping it would save lives. Sanchez's motives were pure, but the reporter didn't care about saving lives, only making a name for herself; exposing Sanchez saved no one, but made the story juicier. The reporter also snorts coke, her head shaking quickly.

Sanchez has other problems. Her aging mother is senile, a burden on Sanchez, who's turned down better job offers to stay in East L.A. and care for her mother. These problems are additional crosses for Sanchez to bear as she prays to Jesus.

The Evil is everywhere. The film is set in 1985, and TV sets throughout the film carry newscasts of crises in the mideast, the poison plant leakage in India, US support of Iraq, and the Ramirez killings.

No, this is not a "true crime" film. It's shot in the aesthetic style of a horror film, and it's about a devoutly Catholic woman seeking divine help in her fight against Evil. Sanchez is the moral core of this darkening universe as Evil encroches on her from all directions.

I can see that many true crime fans were disappointed. I don't think horror fans would be upset. The cinematography is beautiful. (And yes, so is Sanchez.)

worst true serial killer movie ever

To enjoy this movie you better be on ACID or some other drug, because the movie is very disturbing; not in the scenes or anything like that, but in the way the films was shot; everyone seems to be on booze or drugs in this movie, and when they use it their heads keep spinning and twisting, and it's all very fast, flickering images, and death metal music; it just doesn't make sense. The movie itself, the remaining 45 minutes if you scratch all the head shaking flickering mambo-jumbo, portrays Richard Ramirez, but only concentrates on a few of the murders he committed. The previous comment states that it was overdone and probably was less terrible in real life, well, newsflash, it was WAY worse. this movie only shows a tiny bit of what Ramirez was capable of and only few of his murders. Not at all has been concentrated on his worship of Satan )apart from some pentagrams found on the murder scenes), and you don't get a look into the mind of Ramirez either. In the movie he is just a weirdo drug addict. Also, the movie suggests his victims were all Latina ladies of a certain age, which is not true either; he killed all races, men, women, and children, his youngest victim being around 6, and his oldest I think in her 80s. All together, this movie is NOT the true story of Ramirez, and it is VERY annoying to watch with the continuously flickering images, and the non stop death metal type music. If you're on acid, as I said earlier, you might enjoy this, but if you like true horror movies and want to know what really happened back then, you'd be better off buying a book.

Think About It

Richard Ramirez was a man who raped, killed, and mutilated women, that was his goal. Instead of chronicling (and glorifying) his murders one-by-one in a "made for tv" sort of fashion, this movie attempts to tell a story about a woman who is trying to survive in the world of men. This movie is about what Ramirez' hated, not about Ramirez himself. He is clearly the antagonist, the evil, the literal and metaphorical enemy of the woman played by Roselyn Sanchez. In fact, I can't recall ever hearing or seeing the name "Richard Ramirez" in the film at all.The biggest problem I had with the film is the way in which the videobox misrepresented the story as "this is his story". It is not his story, but I doubt the producers ever intended it to be his story as it seems very clearly to be a comment on society instead of a fact-based docudrama meant to air on A&E. Like SON OF SAM, this movie uses a true to life serial killer to engage other issues.That said, is the film entirely successful? No, it has it's share of problems, but is nevertheless an interesting and challenging piece of work. Some of the problems are... The plot doesn't flow at times and the film feels longer than it actually is. The police work is not accurate enough to give a sense of gritty, police-reality.However, there are many positive elements... The hyper-active editing and sound design succeed in portraying Ramirez' schizophrenic, epileptic, drugged out nature, but they do make the film hard to watch at times. However, this stylistic choice is form following function and you really feel like you are riding along with the killer. The use of real life footage chronicling catastrophic events of the 80's adds an impending sense of doom. The acting is generally believable and Roselyn Sanchez really shines.

Complete and Utter Crap

So far ive seen Dahmer, Bundy, Ed Gein and Gacy. The first 3 were great low budget realistic true to life accounts of the serial killers and their lives. The fourth which was Gacy was true to life but sucked. I never thought this would be worse than Gacy , but this takes the cake.


I dont think ive ever seen a film this bad. This film is based on serial killer satanist Richard Ramirez '' The Nightstalker''. A psychotic drug addict possessed by demons who spends his night looking for blood. To sum up the film, half of it is spent showing Richard Ramirez in his car from the face down, We dont even get to see his face until the end. Hes in his car having crazy drug trips, flashing lights , heads shaking back and forth, psychedelic trips, Idiot cops trying to find him. The plot is horrible. The other serial killer movies are at least ''true to life'' and based on real events. Most of this film isnt even true to life.


All I can say is go buy Ed Gein, Bundy, Dahmer. They were good movies with good actors. This is truly one of the worst ive ever seen, If i were you I wouldnt even pay a penny for it.

"The devil killed someone again last night."

Nightstalker is one of those movies that could have been so much more.
Fangoria called it "a first-rate house of horrors" and it was an official Sundance selection. I guess I missed something. The first ten minutes of the film is nothing but rapid, frenzied "crack montages" shot over speed metal. It's cool, but it's too much. Every time we spend screen time with the killer, it's in this fashion. You see these so much that you become dulled to them and it just becomes headache inducing. The style is almost too chaotic. At the same time, it's the only thing I will remember about the movie. One scene in particular that I did like was when the Nightstalker is walking up to a house and it's accompanied by a very cool effect. I'm not real sure how they accomplished this. Incidentally, the flick was produced by its co-star Danny Trejo. In the end, it's nothing special and will disappear into the void of the based-on-a-real-killer sub-genre.

Very Interesting treatment of the Night Stalker story

Has little to do with the real history of the case, but the actor looks a LOT like RR. Voice not deep enough. RR did not kill Hispanics. The creative editing is very good. Music too modern. Killings were in the 80's. I liked it as a fantasy spin off on the Night Stalker legend. Amazon was great in quickly sending the product in good condition.

the nightstalker movie review

THIS WAS ONE OF THE WORST MOVIES ON A SERIAL KILLER THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN. THE ONLY TRUE FACT ABOUT THIS MOVIE WAS THAT HE WAS A DRUG USER. WHY IS IT THAT PEOPLE TRY TO MAKE AN ART-SY STATEMENT, INSTEAD OF TELLING A TRUE STORY ABOUT SOME ONE LIKE THIS. DO YOURSELF A FAVOR AND RENT THE MADE-FOR-TV-MOVIE "MANHUNT".