The Limbic Region

THE LIMBIC REGION (TV Movie 1996)

BASIC PLOT: Jon Lucca (Edward James Olmos) is an ex-cop on the edge. His obsessions have robbed him of everything, his job, his family, and they will soon rob him of his life. He's been diagnosed with cancer, and he's got nothing left to lose. Lucca's been chasing a serial killer, called "The Scorekeeper," for years. Ages ago, the killer began shooting teenagers on lover's lanes, and sending letters to the cops. Lucca is sure it's a man named Lloyd Warden (George Dzundza). No one else believes this, and Lucca is forced into retirement. But after his cancer diagnosis, he doesn't care what anyone thinks anymore. He's determined to get Warden, one way or the other. Is he strong enough for the final confrontation, or will his demons consume him, once and for all?

WHAT WORKS: *QUALITY PERFORMANCES FROM THE TWO LEADS The performances of Edward James Olmos, and George Dzundza as Jon Lucca and Lloyd Warden, are first rate. They make the movie worth watching, and elevate it above the standard made-for-tv movie faire.

*IT MAKES A FUN DRINKING GAME The ancillary characters are mainly actors and actress that appeared on X-Files (1993). Since they only used quality talent on X-Files (1993), you get that same quality from the side characters here. It also makes for a fun drinking game, everytime you see an actor from X-Files (1993), take a drink! Roger Cross, Gwynyth Walsh, Tom McBeath, Brent Stait, Stephen E. Miller, Carly McKillip, Don MacKay, Campbell Lane, Mikal Dughi, Larry Musser, William B. Davis, Doug Abrahams, Andrew Airlie, Mitchell Kosterman, Jonathan Palis, Pat Bermel, Matt Hill, Alf Humphreys, Don Thompson, Jason Griffith, and Cameron K. Smith all appeared on X-Files (1993).

WHAT DOESN'T WORK: *THE ENDING SUCKS!

The last three minutes of this movie is terrible, and not very realistic. It should have ended at the bridge, not the police station. If it had ended on a lonely bridge, in the rain, that would have been a perfect noir ending. But it doesn't, and it taints the whole movie. The last three minutes cost it a whole star.

TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: *If you like fatalistic, dark, slow burns, you'll probably like this. Edward James Olmos and George Dzundza's performances make this worth a watch. Even if you're not a fan of any of those things, you've still got the X-Files (1993) drinking game.

CLOSING NOTES: *This is a made-for-tv movie, please keep that in mind before you watch\rate it. TV movies have a much lower budget, and so your expectations should be adjusted.

*I have no connection to the film, or production in ANY way. I am just an honest viewer, who wishes for more straight forward reviews. Hope I helped you out.

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.

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 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.