IMDb-BEWERTUNG
5,9/10
2000
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuTwo Los Angeles police detectives, cynical veteran Malloy and cocky rookie Dietz, hunt for a serial killer, an ex-cop named Taylor, who randomly chooses his victims from a phone directory.Two Los Angeles police detectives, cynical veteran Malloy and cocky rookie Dietz, hunt for a serial killer, an ex-cop named Taylor, who randomly chooses his victims from a phone directory.Two Los Angeles police detectives, cynical veteran Malloy and cocky rookie Dietz, hunt for a serial killer, an ex-cop named Taylor, who randomly chooses his victims from a phone directory.
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I am a really big fan of Judd Nelson and he ruled in this movie. He's so good at being the bad guy. Judd plays Buck Taylor, a demented serial killer who picks his victims from a phone book and calls them before he enters their house and kills them. And the victims' names resemble his. And he tears the pages out with the victims' names underlined in red with messages like "catch me if you can" that he leaves on the dead bodies for the police. Buck does these horrid things because his father was abusive and he kills to show his dad that he's good at something. I really enjoyed this movie and it showed how good of an actor Judd is. Great film!
A demented serial killer is wrecking havoc on the streets of L.A. It's up to a rookie and a veteran cop to stop him.
Sound familiar? You bet. Yet this film seems to creep up above most other films of the similar genre, thanks in most parts to an unusually effective performance from Judd Nelson. Most of the times I don't particularly like him, but here he fits the bill perfectly.
The supporting performances are also quite good. Robert Loggia plays it straight as the veteran cop and Leo Rossi has never been as appealing as here. Director William Lustic creates a reasonable amount of suspense and keeps things moving at an adequate pace. But mostly, this film will be remembered (by me anyway) as the best Judd Nelson film, and his best performance. He plays a psychopath to a tee.
Sound familiar? You bet. Yet this film seems to creep up above most other films of the similar genre, thanks in most parts to an unusually effective performance from Judd Nelson. Most of the times I don't particularly like him, but here he fits the bill perfectly.
The supporting performances are also quite good. Robert Loggia plays it straight as the veteran cop and Leo Rossi has never been as appealing as here. Director William Lustic creates a reasonable amount of suspense and keeps things moving at an adequate pace. But mostly, this film will be remembered (by me anyway) as the best Judd Nelson film, and his best performance. He plays a psychopath to a tee.
This crime story has some scary scenes, with an especially memorable one early on with a woman hiding in a clothes dryer. In fact, the first half of this is excellent but it peters out that point with two typical Hollywood clichés of crime movies of the period.
They are: 1 - the good cop (Leo Rossi as "Sam Dietz") going it alone despite the orders of his superior; 2 - the killer going to the good cop's house to kill his family. Too bad it stooped to these obvious story lines because this could have been an outstanding serial-killer movie. As it is, it would up being slightly better- than-average. By the way, what's with Meg Foster's eyes? It looks like they have no pupils. It's eerie to look at that woman's face.
This movie spawned several sequels and the sequels were better and better as they went along.
They are: 1 - the good cop (Leo Rossi as "Sam Dietz") going it alone despite the orders of his superior; 2 - the killer going to the good cop's house to kill his family. Too bad it stooped to these obvious story lines because this could have been an outstanding serial-killer movie. As it is, it would up being slightly better- than-average. By the way, what's with Meg Foster's eyes? It looks like they have no pupils. It's eerie to look at that woman's face.
This movie spawned several sequels and the sequels were better and better as they went along.
What at first seems like yet another bleak cop drama/vigilante thriller from William ("earth tones and unappealing locations ONLY, please!") Lustig gradually turns into a fine little sleeper. "Relentless" is robotically assembled in certain aspects (killer strikes; cops consult; quality time with wife and kid (repeat), but the sharp script (by Phil Alden Robinson under a pseudonym), excellent performances, and steady pace help redeem the more trite elements. Leo Rossi and Robert Loggia are two cops assigned to a rash of murders committed by Judd Nelson, the son of a deranged 'hero' cop (played in flashback by Beau Starr), who has just been rejected from the Police Academy on--you guessed it--psychological grounds. There is a definite snap to the banter shared between Rossi and Loggia (the rookie and the jaded veteran), and certain touches, like the high-strung police captain, lend much to the film's intentional humor; the scenes with Rossi and his wife and son are well-handled; and the killer's contrast is appropriately oppressive (Nelson's performance is more about body language and facial expressions than dialog). Lustig once again tries to ape William Friedkin's tough-guy, action-oriented style (Rossi even gets a chance to race against traffic in the third act), and the result is quite successful--"Relentless" is seriously worth a look.
There have been a million wackos on the loose with two determined cops on his trial type of movies, but this one at least tries something new with the murders. They are your standard knifed or strangled variety but the killer doesn't just do it. He makes the victim help out somewhat, by putting the knife, piano wire, etc. into their hands and then forcing them to effectively off themselves.
Judd Nelson rules in this flick. I'm surprised nobody seems to know about this one. If you see in the store, give it a try. I think you'll be entertained. Rossi is pretty good in this too. His banter with Loggia is straight out of a buddy-cop movie encyclopedia, but it works.
The first entry in this series is mediocre. Although it's okay to watch if you have nothing else to do or watch, it really isn't more than that. Resembles a made-for-tv movie.
Give this movie a go, its a pretty good one.
8/10
Judd Nelson rules in this flick. I'm surprised nobody seems to know about this one. If you see in the store, give it a try. I think you'll be entertained. Rossi is pretty good in this too. His banter with Loggia is straight out of a buddy-cop movie encyclopedia, but it works.
The first entry in this series is mediocre. Although it's okay to watch if you have nothing else to do or watch, it really isn't more than that. Resembles a made-for-tv movie.
Give this movie a go, its a pretty good one.
8/10
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesWilliam Lustig was originally going to direct True Romance (1993) before Tony Scott. During that period, Quentin Tarantino and Lustig discussed Tarantino writing Relentless 2 and Tarantino was excited. The two thought they would be like Scorsese and Schrader writing Taxi Driver (1976) together. However, the relationship soured when Lustig demanded rewrites on True Romance.
- VerbindungenFeatured in Sunset Killer 2 (1992)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Relentless?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Relentless
- Drehorte
- 884 Palm Avenue, Hollywood, Los Angeles, Kalifornien, USA(Ken Lerner's Apartment)
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 4.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 6.985.999 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 2.838.177 $
- 4. Sept. 1989
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 6.985.999 $
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
Oberste Lücke
By what name was Der Sunset Killer (1989) officially released in India in English?
Antwort