Jagdgründe des Verbrechens

Dark( and I mean dark) as in 0 lighting, but that only adds to the murky places of your mind this film will lead you. Superbly acted and totally believable, Olmos's voice carries you though his subconscious journey of self doubt and pain throughout this marvelous little one camara shoot. Using special effects no bigger then your old cam corder, the director does his job showing

what obsession can do a person who is just trying to do his job. George Dzunda is worth his weight in pure tonnange and acting ability. You will be mesmerized and totally shocked at the surprise ending. No, not a mainstream blockbuster, just a little film that will leave you shouting at the end.

This movie is obviously low-budget & filmed in British Columbia,Canada. The obstacles that had to be overcome to make this movie convincing(set in California & late 60's-80's)were well conceived.I believe this is the best & most accurate version of the Zodiac killings that plagued the town of Vallejo & the Bay area from 1968-19? (he was never caught).Edward James Olmos(Det. Dave Toschi) & George Dzundza(Zodiac-at the time believed to be Arthur Leigh Allen, since cleared by DNA & fingerprints)play a game of cat & mouse re-visiting crime scenes together, each one trying to trigger the other into an emotional revelation.Olmos dying from some type of terminal disease & knowing Dzundza did it,still totally obsessed to the point of losing his family & becoming a full blown alcoholic along the way.Dzundza totally oblivious & self absorbed(like all serial killers) to the carnage left in his wake.The only disappointment was the"over the top" ending otherwise pretty accurate.If you tire of the typical Hollywood fluff or have an interest in the Zodiac case,check it out.

First of all, I would just like to say to everyone who has seen this movie, that the actor who played the "Transvestite" Is one of my friends, his name is Robert Dugdale, he's a terrific actor, although it doesn't say much about his filmography, he's been in several plays and musicals. He is currently residing in Terrace B.C. that is where I am from, he comes over to our house almost every saturday *laughs* Okay, now about the movie, I wouldn't recomend this to anyone who HASN'T seen it, for it is not a movie worth watching, the main reason I found it to be a bad movie is it never stays in place, it keeps bouncing back between time, so kinda hard to follow at some points, and second, its really boring *laughs* Although the acting is great, the movie just doesn't compare.

this is a movie for people who watch a good amount of movies. it is a decent movie, but it may not be for people who are used to the more mainstream flick. it has okay acting, okay plot, okay cinematography, but nothing real outstanding. the unique thing may be the way the two main characters interact throughout the whole movie. it was kind of bizarre and i really liked it. however, i am afraid to say that the whole movie is very predictable. as it goes, the movie something new to an old recipe.

I usually steer clear of TV movies because of the many ways you know that it's TV movies five seconds into the picture. This one got my attention because of the unusual title and its gloomy, well-crafted mood that is established from the very start. While the ever present rain confirmed my suspicions of a misplaced story (even if claiming to be set in California the movie was largely shot around a stormy Vancouver, B.C.), the dark and oppressive outdoors beautifully complement Olmos' excellent acting.