D.C. Sniper

D.C. Sniper (2010)

** (out of 4)

If the title of the movie you're watching in some way, shape or form mentions a recent serial killer then more than likely you're viewing an Ulli Lommel flick. This time out he takes on the sniper shootings that terrorized the D.C. area and we have horror legend Ken Foree (DAWN OF THE DEAD) playing the man guy behind the killings. If you're looking for a history lesson of the actual events then it's best to look somewhere else because this film is just like all the others in this non-stop cycle of "real event" films coming from Lommel. Apparently they're doing well on DVD so I guess we shouldn't expect any of them to stop anytime soon. This film, co-written by Lommel and Foree, is actually a step up from many of the previous films for a couple reasons. The first is that it appears Lommel was actually trying to make a movie instead of just swinging the camera around for no apparent reason. The film is still shot on a digital camera but it looks a lot more professional than earlier films. Another major plus is that the editing is also pretty good and the sniper killings contain some mild tension. Another reason this film works is because of the performance by Foree. It's not Oscar-worthy material but he fits the role nicely and you can certainly tell he's giving it his all. The rest of the supporting players (including Lommel) aren't that strong but none of them are too horrible. It should also be noted that this isn't a horror movie as it actually tries to come off as a political thriller. The sniper shootings contain quite a bit of blood so that might please those coming to this for violence. We get a couple supporting characters, undercover FBI guys, and their side stories really aren't that interesting. Another negative thing is that we get a lot of dialogue, which I'm sure those familiar with the recent work of Lommel will expect. This film certainly isn't going to make Lommel any new fans but those, like myself, who continue to watch everything he releases will probably agree that this here is a step up. It's certainly not perfect and not even close to being good but we at least get to see Foree in a big role.

I came into this movie as I enjoyed the 2003 film "D.C. Sniper - 23 Days of Fear" and have been interested in the Sniper shootings ever since.

I disregarded the negative reviews on IMDb as I felt my interest in the subject matter meant I could sit through a below average film. Not so! This film is a turd. The Acting is so bad I wonder if it is intentional from the film makers to make it appear like school grade Drama class but I miss the point if it was.

The story line, gifted to the film maker by actual events, has been squandered and somehow it has become really boring. I got no understanding of the Criminals mentality - or the Cops chasing them for that matter. Within 15 minutes my mind was starting to wander.

Fortunately watching on the PC meant I was able to minimise the screen and web surf to keep interest up. Be warned if you are watching on a TV set as resorting to scratching your eyeballs out may be a better alternative than viewing the entire movie.

Like other reviewers I have joined IMDb just to vent about this film. It is the worst I have ever seen. If you enjoy watching bad movies, for no other reason than they are bad movies, I would suggest you watch something like the 2010 movie Titanic II instead.

Seeing that three consecutive reviewers gave this atrocity of a movie ten stars simply adds to the insult. I really don't know who is worse.....Uli Lommel for making it or whoever bought it for distribution. The true story of the snipers was compelling enough for the movie to have stayed true to the facts. If Lommel had wanted to make things up, he could have had a screenwriter build it from scratch. Instead he went on the cheap and exploited what was a horrible tragedy and sold it as a true account. Virginia plates on the car. No. New Jersey. A removable tail light through which Malvo shot the victims. Hardly. The snipers drove around with a visible hole cut from the trunk. Lommel never even shot any scenes outside California. And then there were the keystone cop detectives walking around the monuments (where none of the shootings occurred) watching tourists with binoculars as if that ever happened... All the while spouting patriotic drivel. This story and its victims deserved an honest movie. Lommel and the three reviewers who raved about this mess of a movie should be ashamed of themselves.

The most surprising thing about this amateur effort re-telling the true story of the Washington, D.C. shootings that were perpetrated by a guy shooting out of the tail light of his adapted car is that it was directed by Polish director Ulli Lommel, the guy who brought us THE TENDERNESS OF THE WOLVES and THE BOGEY MAN all those years ago. I had no idea that he was still working (or even still alive) and reduced to making straight-to-DVD junk these days.

The ONLY - and I mean ONLY - good thing about this film is Ken Foree, one-time star of DAWN OF THE DEAD. Foree plays the main villain of the piece and around half the running time is made up of him ranting to the camera about various facets and flaws of modern society. Sadly, the script is atrocious so a lot of what he's coming out with is absolute nonsense, but Foree is still good value and the only reason I bothered watching this rubbish to the end.

Sadly, everything around him is terrible: the supporting cast of non-actors are wooden beyond belief (including the director himself in an unwise acting role) and the direction is amateur. The various kill scenes, although gory, are robbed of any suspense or shock value thanks to the poor way in which they're conceived and shot. D.C. SNIPER isn't the worst film I've ever seen, but it's certainly very close to the bottom of the scale.

Possibly the worst movie I have ever seen. Terrible acting marred by long and tedious voice overs, cheap and shoddy camera-work and distracting and melodramatic sounds effects. Even the opening credits looked cheap and nasty. Its amazing how such a bad movie can be made about what is such a potentially interesting story. The only consolation was reading the very humorous reviews by other disappointed users on this site.

The movie could be a case study for aspiring actors and directors on how not to make a movie. It is so bad in every conceivable way that its a masterpiece of badness.