Peter

"Peter: Portrait of a Killer" is a psychological study of "Yorkshire Ripper" Peter Sutcliffe who from 1969 to 1981 killed 13 women and assaulted 7 others in and around Yorkshire, England.

The movie interlaces actual media footage from the time with surrealistic and dreamy artistry to give an interpretation of Peter's psychological condition. The actual media footage contains interviews with Peter's father, media reports from TV networks, and interviews with police officers.

The movie has a vibrant, intense, and surreal mood throughout and refrains, to the movie's benefit, from ever portraying the vulgarity of the crimes or violence of any kind. The movie generally uses Christian motifs as a foundation for the psychological interpretation and balances it out with some modern psychoanalytical ideas.

Part of the impressiveness of the movie is its lack of any type of bias against Peter or clichéd psychoanalysis that you would normally expect from a movie like this. The movie at times tends to even glorify Peter as a sort of crucified Christ figure and sides against the police and the modern community, a fact that will probably upset a lot of people but something that makes for a more interesting and fair movie.

While it is clear the budget for this film was small, it ends up being a very visually impressive movie anyway. While the writing does not stun you with its depth of thinking, it has enough depth and originality to leave you intellectually satisfied.

Overall a very well done movie that is worth watching mainly for the uniquely surrealistic moods and the colorfully intense visual artistry you see in it. 8 out of 10 stars.

"Peter" moves from one scene to the next with no narrative thread and few guideposts as to what each scene is. Is it a real event from Sutcliffe's life? Is it a story he's fabricated for others? For himself? Is it something from his dreams? From his disturbed mind? Aside from actual news footage and what to appear to be reenactments of interviews, the film gives almost no guidance.

"Peter" tells the story of Sutcliffe only in scattered pieces too small to form a whole. The rest, presumably meant to be a window into his psyche, also fails because we are given no cues to what is real, what is imagination, what is fantasy. I'm baffled as to how anyone approved "Peter" for broadcast. It was certainly a waste of my time.

Like most of us we seem to want to watch films like this, yeah I know it is about one very sick son of a bitch! or should that be son of a pro! anyway I had sort of forgotten about hammer head Pete, and was looking forward to this film, it uses actual news and interview footage from the case at the time, and it adds a realistic feel to the story being told, but I think they could have done a whole lot better when it came to the script, there are a few holes in it, and it sort of jumps from one bit to another with out really giving inside why or how.

Overall not a bad take on Pete's story, but if you are after a blood feast this will not quench your thirst, as it is more of an inside to what made him tick, and don't ever forget there is a bit of Pete in all of us, right time right place and well you know the rest.

8 out of 10 and was great to hear that great song again by Frankie goes to Hollywood.