MovieChat Forums > Nightstalker (2002) Discussion > I thought this movie was kick@ss because...

I thought this movie was kick@ss because...

posted 17 years ago by bishonen_neko_yasha
9 replies | jump to latest

-The visual effects were so trippy, surreal, creepy and just downright cool, while fitting with the story.

-There were several levels of tension that were well-maintained, and very edge-of-the-seat. I wanted to know what happened next all through the movie.

-The characters were interesting, not-too-badly acted, and very human. My only complaint would be that we never go in-depth about the night stalker (who, in my opinion, is NOT Richard Ramirez--they never say his name, and there are a lot of differences.)

-Even though the music was anachronistic, it served its purpose, and added to the atmosphere of the movie.

-For crying out loud, the cover of the box is SO COOL...I want a poster.

Note--These are just my opinions, I'm not saying you should love it, but I thought I'd sound off.

It's never too late to live your life
The time is now
It's do or die
--Papa Roach

[–] mrhgibs 17 years ago

wow you're really cool

[–] Jaythestingray 17 years ago

I agree, it was a really cool movie. Not breaking new ground or winning awards but nice visual effects.

[–] global_threat 17 years ago

this was one stupid ass movie. first off, most of it, if not all of it, was completely false. there was no rogue cop tracking down richard ramirez nor did the police kill him. what a let down. this movie's cover made me buy it. a much better version of the attacks is in a 1987 movie of the same name.

[–] graemeh 17 years ago

theree's even a disclaimer at the end of the credits (I'm paraphrasing here)- all characters apart from richard ramirez are fictitious, all events are fictitious

so they took a real -life serial killer and made up some junk backstory about a rookie detective like something out of cagney and lacey

stick to the real story or use a fictitious killer

[–] Skankbreath 16 years ago

This movie blows and all of your a granted your opinions on why it's great but to me;

-The effects that are done are over drawn, I can understand at the beginning of the movie ok!, but constantly?...it just gave me a headache.

-The true night stalker story can become a great movie if done in the same sort of way as Zodiac, but the only difference showing Richards side more. This rouge cop thing just made me want to vomit.

-The acting is terrible, terrible and terrible! Not one person had a good performance, I seen porn scenes better acted then this movie

and last but not least, the background noises. I was irritated at all the back ground noise. The scenes in the police station pissed me off the most. If I have to hear another phone constantly ringing again in my life it would be too soon.

[–] stevegamica 16 years ago

THIS IS QUITE POSSIBLY THE WORST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN............THE STORY ISN'T EVEN CLOSE TO THE TRUTH

[–] chalmerslee 16 years ago

Ummm.... are you insane? There is no possible way any sentient being could extract the slightest smattering of enjoyment, or even interest, from this steaming pile of crud.

Actually, on second thoughts I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're a perfectly sane individual who was unfortunate enough to have suffered some form of head trauma from attempting to follow the camera as it wildly thrashed around EVERY FIVE MINUTES.

Either that or a full frontal lobotomy, possibly self-administered while trying to shave your stubble with a lawnmower or something.

Seriously folks, bishonen_neko_yasha must be an absolute moron. Please do not believe one word of his 'review'. This film is truly awful.

'Nightstalker' is, and I am not normally one for hyperbole, the WORST movie I have ever ejected after ten minutes. It is actually painful to watch, and doesn't even have any of the redeeming features of those 'so bad it's funny' b-movies I love so much: you know, the ones that have obviously been put together for £2,500 and involve a level of admirable ingenuity on the part of the director.

'Nightstalker' is cheap, but also pretentious, dumb, in turns inaudible and deafening, ugly, and excruciatingly dull. If you enjoy anything about it, you are stupid.

If you like movies, DO NOT WATCH THIS ONE!

[–] brucebowen 15 years ago

i gave it a 10/10 to be nice i would give it a 6 out of ten cos it wos kool lol

[–] ravenlll 15 years ago

did we watch the same movie?!?