Opiniones de usuarios

It's watchable and sure keeps you attached to it when viewing it. It's a movie which can be seen from two viewpoints:

-1- The (dramatical) story of the main character, his live and whats happening to him. -2- Who's doing all the killing, showing it live on the internet and how will they get them or him/her and who's behind this all?

However there are many inconsistencies in the story and logic errors. That's ashame, if they weren't there I would rated it an 7 or even 8.

They are not all too disturbing if you just continue watching and don't make a big deal about these, but I can imagine some people would be irritated by them. I wasn't cause I just viewed it without too much thinking and all together it's very watchable.

OK, no special effects, please see Star Wars 3 or something. OK, no well thought out Drama. OK, no real action.

But altogether better than many other movies.....

Give it a try if you have the time.

I was kind of surprised to find a straight to video police thriller by a mainstream director, John Irvin, and starring a mainstream actor, Armand Assante. What didn't surprise me at all was its weak disjointed story with very little sense guiding the cops' actions in finding the killer.

A couple things were done alright. The locations of the crimes (which are all shown live on the internet, hence the title) are always cool derelict industrial settings. None of them are used to very good effect, but they are good locations. Armand Assante brings a lot to the unfortunately underwritten role of the morphine addict detective. The sad part is that this addiction was a lazy screenwriter's device to take the place of character development, punctuate almost every scene (Assante faithfully coughs away any plot-related dialogue), and generate "suspense" in later scenes. Although, the dimension of his character, as a supposedly obsolete detective matching wits with a high-tech criminal, is still a good idea.

The identity of the killer is not very hard to guess. In fact the central plot of the picture is a bleeding cliché, surrounded by the window dressing of would-be character development, seemingly as a distraction. This was obviously a low budget picture, but it wasn't the budget that holds the movie back from its potential, it's the weak script and the failure on the part of the director, cinematographer, editor, to create a harmoniously atmospheric thriller out of this routine cop-vs-bad-guy movie.

"Dot.Kill" is pretty obviously trying to do some of what "Se7en" did so well and that "Fear dot com" tried to do. However, it just doesn't have the same freshness that "Se7en" had (and really hasn't lost) nor does it have the atmosphere and aesthetic grace. I can't say I'm surprised, but I'm always upset when I see missed potential. Just go watch any David Fincher movie instead.

I saw dot.kill on Showtime the other night; and, while I thought the title was totally lame, I watched it because is starred Armand Assante.

His filmography is hit or miss for me; but, I have to give him credit on this one. His passion within the role really makes this film. He was absolutely convincing as a detective who's health, family life, and career are crumbling.

Charlie is an old-school detective who relies on instinct, not high-tech. He is alternately hard-core, abrasive (particularly to co-workers and his son), and tender (towards a former addict, whom he saved from a life on the streets).

The twist at the end, as to the identity of the killer was great, even though it really wasn't hard to guess, with the heavy foreshadowing used by the director.

It could have been better; but, a pretty good movie nonetheless.

One movie, different names... Dot.kill, Digital Reaper, Digital Killer here..... pfff seen that before, probably a bad B-movie... Well I was surprised, in a good way. Assante produced this one and I must say, it's not bad at all. I'm not a real fan of Assante, but he does a good job. You can look at it in different ways, finding the bad guy came for me in second place, Assante's struggle was for me more interesting. A movie with 2 stories, if you want to see a good b-movie with a human story to tell watch it. I wasn't bored during the movie and that says something. I've seen better movies but there are a lot worse than this one.

I only watched about 30 minutes of this movie.

The music and sound effects were louder than the people talking. I got tired of trying to make out what was being said. The actors seemed to be doing an awesome job from what I could tell. The story line seemed interesting from what I could tell.

I kept thinking that maybe the sound would improve somehow. I kept using the remote to change volume to see if I brought volume down some it would help in hearing the actors speak. No it did no. Still all I could hear is music and sound effects. I tried turning the volume up but No. The music and sound effects just roared and couldn't hear the actors any better. Why is it so imp

ortant to make the music and sound effects soo loud you can't hear the talking? I don't know about the rest of the audience but I CANT READ LIPS!!!

One of those movies that you select at Blockbuster when most of the viewing choices are unappetizing. Armande Assante delivers a strong performance as a police detective, with a bad smoking habit, trying to run down a creative killer. In this moody, urban film all the acting is above average and the story is well paced. The number of characters in the story is substantial but the lead actors (wife, son, buddy, snitch, computer-geek) are easy to follow. The killer selects each of his victims from diverse backgrounds and then proceeds to murder them in unusual - but appalling ways. If you're tired of the animated animals (exception: Ice Age) and/or the non-funny slapstick comedies populating video stores, try Dot.Kill.

Dot.Kill is unfortunately not a very original film. It suffers from taking to many ideas from other films from the past 10 years. It is no surprise as this is just one of many films like this that is simply a product of its time. Of course, if you are into this type of thing you might find some enjoyment as Armand Assante gives a solid performance as usual. But even he couldn't carry the film as a whole on his back.

Assante plays a detective named Charlie. Charlie is a sick man who appears to be dying and as a result is heavily addicted to morphine. The story unfolds with a serial killer murdering people through the internet and posting it in real time for millions of people to see. As the case starts to unravel, Charlie becomes sicker and sicker.

Basically, this movie is a cross between Seven and Fear.Com and that's not a good thing. There is nothing supernatural about the movie like Fear.Com but the whole thing with posting the murders online is a similar concept. And the relation to Seven is the direction the movie attempts to take. But let's face it, Seven was a hundred times better then this or any other movie that came out in the genre for the past 15 years.

I will admit that the first 30 minutes of the movie was a bit intriguing as Assante is a fun actor to watch in just about anything he is in, but, the movie loses its muster halfway through and things become predictable and boring. The ending is rather anticlimactic, I might add.

Overall, it wasn't a good movie but it really wasn't a bad movie either. I think the only reason to watch the movie is if you are a Armand Assante fan. 6/10

Armand Assante was OK, as usual, even if he looked like a grandfather. The movie itself was a TV quality script, with low budget and a predictable story. I wish there was more to say, but there really isn't.

The plot revolves around a cop trying to catch a murderer who kills people live on the Internet. If you watched Criminal Minds you would certainly see the "Angel of Death" pattern and quickly realize who the killer is.

Bottom line: do not rent, do not see at cinema, only watch it on TV when you're really tired.

On the surface, "Dot.Kill" doesn't have a lot going for it. First, there's the title, which is ridiculous. So many lame jokes can be made from it. ("www.itsucks.com"), or "Dot.Kill Me Now"... then I realized the movie had different titles like "Digital Reaper" and "Digital Jesus" which make no sense. I was ready for the worst...

Thankfully, "Dot.Kill" is an entertaining mystery. Charlie Daines (Assante) is a morphine-addicted cop on the edge, who doesn't have much time to live. Daines has his own demons, but a serial killer is on the loose, killing people over the internet. Can he stop him in time before his next fix?

The best part of the movie is Assante's performance. He goes over the top and back. At one point he is confronted by one of his partners about his drug addiction. Daines starts going insane. He picks up a hot poker (which comes out of nowhere) and says "Do you want to BURN me!?!??!" The drawbacks to "Dot.Kill" are the similarities to "Fear Dot.Com" and the ending. But if you like Assante's work, you'll have a fun time.

For more insanity, please check out: comeuppancereviews.com

I saw a rough preview of this about a year ago in the UK and now am desperately looking for a DVD of it. Does anyone have any idea what happened with it or where it was released,how I can find it, etc? By the way, I actually thought it was a neat film. Great idea for a thriller, just wished it had more money behind it. Assante does a really great job in it and some of the other characters, Sonny Marinelli and Morven Christie especially, really impressed me. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think anyone else has made a film about a killer who puts his killings on the web...? An interesting comment on modern society. Anyway, would really like to see the finished product if anyone has any leads. Cheers!

At at glance, I noticed the reviewers mostly gave this movie a higher ranking than the hoi polloi. While this isn't the best movie you could watch, I don't think it belongs below a 5 rating.

Speaking broadly about movies and TV shows that feature net related activity, the bigger budget movies go with computer effects that defy any reality (think "Jurassic Park" and the line by a child "ooh! this is Unix. I know this.") while less self-obsessed low budget films are stuck with using stuff the rest of us actually use from day to day... and are therefore more realistic.

This isn't academy award material, but it's not as bad as the couple pathetic reviewers make it out to be. Any reviewer who gives a 1-2 star rating for a properly produced film should be doomed to watch "Manos" or Justin Bieber movies for life. Netflix popped it up as an average selection for me and it was some good filler time while I got some work done. It beat the heck out of old "X-File reruns."