Insoupçonnable

This was a better than average TV movie (Lifetime) about the hunt for the I-5 serial killer. Its based on a true story (and book) and centers on a detective from Salem, Oregon who connected the numerous murders and sexual assaults (44 victims) along interstate 5 which runs through California, Washington and Oregon.

John Corbett plays detective Dave Kominek and does a decent enough job. I've always liked him ever since I first saw him back in Northern Exposure and then in Sex & The City.

The manhunt takes over a year, and for the first half of the movie the viewer doesn't know who the killer is. You are given a couple of suspects but just see a guy in a hoodie with a bandage over his nose going about his business of raping and shooting random women. Its violent but not graphic. Towards the end we get to see his face and then follow him as he tries to evade police. He is one sick bastard.

One of the first victims shown in the movie manages to survive her horrific ordeal with two gunshot wounds to her head. Her character plays a large role and the story focuses heavily on her relationship with the detective. She (Sara Canning) does a great job as 'Beth' and I appreciated how they took the time to show the physiological damage she faced afterwards. Ultimately Beth is instrumental in the capture of the killer.

Randomly John's real-life lady love Bo Derek is listed in the credits and given top billing but I guess I blinked and missed her. 1/6/15

haha Lifetime movie about the I-5 killer and he is helping a girl pump gas...in Portland, Oregon. Must have forgot to research...Oregon has NO self serve...never has...research people!!! And who is this Clay guy??? Read Ann Rule's book if you want to know the truth of the matter. This needs ten lines of text, But I find that there is no reason to continue to give a review for such a poorly constructed and thought out movie. Oregon Daily News??? The newspaper would have be the Oregonian. The detective is a doofus who would have been fired by the Portland Police Bureau, he hugs the victim! Comforting her in this manner would likely cause a "small" issue with a good defense attorney, can you say bias?

This is an engrossing tale about a serial killer.

"The true story of the year-long manhunt for the killer who raped and murdered his way up and down the I-5 corridor through California, Washington, and Oregon for over a year in 1981, leaving 44 victims in his wake. "

I am very impressed with this movie as it keeps the viewer engaged about the hunt for and activities of a monster.

But can they catch this mad man, whoever he is?

All the players especially the leads give first rate performances and this movie deserves at least;

7/10.

HUNT FOR THE I-5 KILLER (TV movie 2011) 2.5 out of 10 stars Time to Read: 2:03 min

BASIC PLOT: Based on Ann Rule's book, this is the story of the hunt for a serial killer who preyed on women up and down America's highways. The movie focuses on Detective Dave Kominek (John Corbett), who's put in charge of the I-5 Killer task force, intrusted with the gruesome job of catching this depraved, and monstrous killer. It also focuses on one of the victims who survived, Beth Williams (Sara Canning), and the challenges she faced after her brutal assault.

WHAT WORKS: *NOTHING WORKS AS A COHESIVE PROJECT There's some ok acting from John Corbett, Mike Dopud & Tygh Runyan, but it's not enough to carry this haphazard melange of bad filmmaking decisions.

WHAT DOESN'T WORK: *BAD FILMAKING As humans, we get up to 65% of communication from body language. We empathize, we fear, we relax, based on body language. This movie robs the actors of their basic communication tools, by shooting W-A-A-A-Y too close, and never letting them connect with the viewer. I know I'm supposed to like, and feel confident in Detective Kominek, but because I never see his body, or only the back of his head, or side of his ear as he's talking, I never connect with him. The same is true of Randy Woodfield & Clay Mackie. I know they're supposed to make me uncomfortable, but they're never shot in a way where I connect with them in a good or bad way. This style robs the actors of their needed tools, it's distracting, and makes for a boring movie.

There are also lots of shots of middle aged people that are very unflattering, and uncalled for. It's like they are trying to make their actor's look their worst. Unacceptable filmmaking choices from Allan Kroeker (director) & C. Kim Miles (cinematographer).

*BETH WILLIAMS IS NOT A SYMPATHETIC VICTIM Beth is played by Sara Canning, and she doesn't evoke any sympathy in the viewer. I don't even know if I can blame the actress, the script is bad & the shooting style atrocious.

*THERE'S CONTINUITY PROBLEMS There's a scene at the bar where Randy & Clay are having drinks. They show an outside shot of the bar, and there's cops with their lights on. But the crime hasn't happened yet, so why are cops outside? Then later, when the crime has been discovered, the same outside shot is used (except this time it makes sense as to why there are cops outside - there's been a murder). These are unacceptable mistakes from the continuity editor.

TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: *I can't recommend this movie, even though I'm a fan of Mike Dopud, Tygh Runyan & Garry Chalk (who's talents are underused and wasted here). The filmmaking styles used makes this a boring waste of an hour and a half. It feels like you're reading a bad script, instead of being entertained by quality actors. If you're looking for an engaging, and disturbing TV movie, based on serial killers, try Le déshonneur d'un colonel (2012), starring Gary Cole, Laura Harris & Rossif Sutherland. Another good one is Le sourire du tueur (2014) starring David Arquette & Gloria Reuben. Trust me, those are skillfully made films, that will leave you with an unsettled and ominous feeling. This film will not; it's just exploitative, and boring, with more wasted moments than I can count.

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. This review was NOT written in full, or in part, by a bot. I am just an honest viewer, who wishes for more straight forward reviews (less trolls and fanboys), and better entertainment. Hope I helped you out.

To the reviewer who disliked the movie because you don't pump your own gas. Although I see the point, but there have been instances where I have pumped my own gas in Oregon. I worked out in Hillsboro, Or recently and had to pump my own gas. It is a movie for goodness sake. Not to mention, it is a made-for-tv film. I so far have liked it and it keeps your attention. This is the point of a film to entertain. I get that we want it all to be completly accurate with no flaws but again it is a movie! I thought they did very well and a step up from that cheap lifetime feel of a movie. I would say 6.5 stars is where it lands for me. If you watched it to the end it served it's purpose.