Sniper - Der Heckenschütze von Washington

Now, some may say this movie is controversial due to its subject matter, and the fact that it's been only a year since the horrific blood-lusting rampage that John Lee Malvo and John Muhammad had gone on to terrorize America.

Let's break down the analysis in to a few parts.

Acting - There was some pretty good acting, Charles Dutton did a great job at portraying Detective Moose.

The actors that played Malvo and Muhammad also did very good jobs. They had a great mix of emotion, and non emotion. As soon as they knew they were in trouble, you could just sense that Muhammad new they were in deep crap and wouldn't be able to escape.

Cinematography - This film had EXCELLENT cinematography. I loved the camera use in this tv movie. It was fantastic. Plus, the dark blue, and grey really sets the tone for such a case, as it gives the movie a "grimey" feel to it.

Plot/Storyline - It's based on true facts, so there isn't much to judge on. The director did an excellent job of translating these true events to an actual event on screen.

My grade - B+ (for TV movies.)

I've seen better, and oh God, I've seen FAR MORE worse. This is a must see if you like Phone Booth. A good popcorn movie to pass the time.

Although you may disagree, (since I live here in California and weren't in danger of the snipers), please, just enjoy the movie for what it is, a movie.

The shocking case of the so-called "Beltway sniper" is dramatized in such a manner that you never really feel too connected to any of the main characters, but you do get a sense of the urgency for the investigators and the indescribable horror it must have been for the people in the area.

In the case of 'Charles Moose' (Charles S. Dutton) I wish we could have gotten more under the skin of this very complex and fascinating chief of police. In real life, I remember watching him deliver all those press-conferences when it all happened, and how he gave an impression of being a very dedicated law-officer who truly lived up to the line "to protect and serve". Naturally I therefore hoped this film would give a better understanding of what makes this man tick, but it didn't really. This is no fault on Charles S. Dutton, a very fine actor, but more on the writers.

On the other hand, the fact that we never get to know what makes the main characters act as they do, makes the portrayal of the two snipers even scarier. It's like Alfred Hitchcock's "The Birds", the movie ends without us knowing what triggered all the bird attacks, and the fact that we don't get the answers we so desperately seek, add to the horror. Especially when the crimes in question are so horrific as they are here. Here we have two human-beings who really act like the world was their personal playground and the taking of human lives nothing worse than the actions in a video game. We will probably never get any real answer from the "lead" sniper John Allen Muhammad, as he was sentenced to death earlier this year, and considering the horror he bestowed upon America, it is not likely he will spend time on death row long enough to help give us an answer to the mystery.

This movie dramatizes these perverse killings and it's grand-scale investigation in a straight-forward-manner that works, mostly thanks to the fact that this case is so dramatic to begin with that the film-makers really couldn't mess it up in the first place. As a matter of fact it is so harrowing that the movie itself leaves the viewer more disturbed than "entertained".

Nice world we live in, huh?

Good performances, direction and interesting camerawork struggle with an indifferent script that lends little insight to this just-the-fact-ma'am handling of the DC Sniper. Dutton is little short of superb, but he can't do much with the material. The fisheye lenswork and overly crisp definition are, at first interesting, but after a while simply emphasis the emptiness of the story, and the musix is annoying from the start.

How sick has the media become these days? If the USA network were actually serious about making a movie to ACCURATLY tell the story of the sniper shootings, and not to make higher ratings I wouldn't have a problem. But its quite clear to every mind in the United States and abroad, that the purpose of this movie is to make lots of money over a terrible event that is too close to be immoralized in a movie. USA cannot tell an accurate account of the events when these events are not even over. The two suspects have not even went to trial and this movie has been made. WHY?!

I encourage people to not watch this movie. USA dosen't care if you don't like it. If you watch it you are supporting it. So don't watch it. It is a story that needs time to become history.

This movie was definitely made too soon, especially since the trial of the two suspects is going on right now (messing up the jury pool???). Also, we have NO idea which parts of the movie were fictionalized, dramatized, or whatever. But, it WAS very well acted and Charles Dutton did a good job portraying Chief Moose. And the movie definitely reminds me of the horror of that time. You do sit there and cringe at every killing that is committed, feel angry at Malvo and Muhammed, feel frustrated with the investigation missteps, and the relief of the two being captured. But they really should have waited like a few years AFTER the convictions in court to make this movie.