Richard Ramirez being convicted as America's most feared Serial Killer since Jack the Ripper and possibly the most popular. Due to gaining myriad Media attention and worldwide fame from Male and Female Groupies than any international Rock Star in the Night Stalker trial and this movie was created to mark this event.
There are T.V. True Crime movies that can be intriguing like Ted Bundy; The Deliberate Stranger, or John Wayne Gacy; To catch a Killer. However, this T.V. movie of Manhunt: Search for the Night Stalker is very dull. It is trying too hard to be a "Chiller-Thriller" trying its best to exude feeling of suspense, but it fails to do that because of hammy performances and lack of reality in the script. This is suppose to be a Chiller of a Thriller- it's really trying to be, but the suspense is subdued due to certain scenes of some tedious moments that are unnecessary to be shown, like the cop's private lives, comprised with hammy performances and bad music score with a rip-off of Night Prowler by AC/DC. The black-clad Killer in the movie made so much noise, used too much flashlights in the dark, you would think people would wake up when he enters in their residence, when in the actual trial, the Killer is suppose to be militant and work in darkness, hence the moniker; "The Night Stalker".
The TRUE shadowed actions of the Night Stalker was that he never made a sound of slamming car doors nor using flashlights in the dark; he adjusted to work in remote darkness. As for the rare Avia tennis shoes, he suppose to have dumped them in the San Francisco river and opt for combat boots later on due to Diane Feinstein's elocution slip up, that's why cops can't see them on his feet. However the movie writers claimed Diane mentioned 'ballistics in San Francisco were the same compared to the L.A. Murders' but that was NOT the evidence that "damaged" the investigation, she was supposed to have mentioned the Avia footprints that the Night Stalker did notify to choose a more common footwear and that was not included in the film, so there was loose accounts to this movie.
The dialogue was full of terrible lines and careless errata too. One of Gil Carrillo's daughters was called "Rene" in the beginning, so why was his wife, Pearl, called the same girl "Mica" after 43 minutes into the film? Richard Jordan as an experienced detective, Frank Salerno, also in charge of the Hillside Strangler case in the 1970's but in the 1980's he relies on "his gut" now than anything else! The script was terribly careless, for example, one of Gil Carrillo's Daughters was called Rene, but 43 minutes into the movie, Gil's Wife, Pearl, called the same girl "Mica"- this erratum could have been corrected. The worst part is the rest of the dialogue, which is not convincing to match the original True Crime characters, their personal experiences and personality backgrounds from this movie, it fails to represent their personalities altogether. Richard Jordan, who plays a "seasoned" Detective, Frank Salerno always "feels things" in this case, he tells Sheriff Grimm as he proves one Serial Killer is operating the crimes "This is one Guy doing this - I can feel it" and to his Partner, Gil, "I have a funny feeling about tonight - he is going out again" and when they pursue Ramirez prior to I.D. him in the Newspapers, Jordan says " I can feel it Gill it is all over". Also Frank goes on about how "great" things are. There is a scene where Gill solemnly says "oh no! He switched guns on us! He used a .25 instead of a .22" Salerno replies "that's Great! Phil (the Forensic Scientist) can give us a positive make on the 25, if we get him with this Gun, he is nailed!" and another ridiculous scene is when a cop goes "Hey Frank! We found the shoe, it is a special shoe made by Avia and there are thirteen thousand and fifty-six distributed" and Salerno's response is "that is Great Washington! It is going to be that much easier for you to trace every bit of sale today" and Washington laughs "How do I know you are going to say that!" - this was suppose to be an amusing line, but there is no ring of truth to it. Why did Washington NOT mention there is ONLY one pair of Avia 440 modal that is size 11 and a half twelve; which is the same one at the scenes from the series of murders and just 'one' man is wearing this 'rare' shoe? The Movie Writers did miss out conspicuous details of not illustrating Diane Feinstein's elocution slip up of mentioning the rare Avia shoes of a "particular size" that made the Killer change his footwear. So there was loose research to these "True Crime" accounts of what actually happened, and lack of realism in the script. The writers probably never put their heads together to think about the "real" lives of these Detectives because when Richard was caught and put into custody, Jordan turns to Gill and says "we will be living with this for a long time!" For an experienced Detective who also worked on the Hillside Strangler case, mentions an unrealistic line - I am sure other viewers will find all lines of the script quite false in real situations. All the Actors were given unrealistic lines, the acting was bad too, especially some that Phil the Forensic Scientist stated that makes me lose that suspense, and how can he be so angry after living around the case of Charles Manson and his Cult? He was meant to be a professional mannered person.
The visage of the killer was dramatically revealed near the end. Richard Ramirez should be portrayed by a talented actor but NOT Gregory Norman Cruz, he was equally bad, and he does not resemble Ramirez. Greg had a wicked expression throughout his scenes and looked ropey. The Real Richard was Handsome as a Movie Star and worthy as a Male Supermodel; possessing a dangerously seductive streak and the combination of looking Angelic with a mysterious plutonian air - Guys and Girls flock to him. Picking Cruz was too politically correct for my taste. A better looking American Native Lakota Actor with talent could have been selected no matter how sensitive the audience may seemed at the time. The Real Richard was slovenly in appearance when caught but scary and panther-like with certain magnetism when he was apprehended by the police and was in fact seraphic looking during the trial blessed with devilishly fierce good looks and moody hypnotic charm. Gregory Norman Cruz did NOT have magnetism and kept looking at a certain angle of the camera to appear sinister whereas the real Richard was an unknown person, a tall Grand Turk due to his very high cheekboned and protruding chinned features, and a Cambodian actor who are Lakota could closely fit Richard's visage and athletic slenderman build.
It is a predictable movie with bad enactment, terrible humor and bad music score with a song that is a rip off of Night Prowler by AC/DC. Bruce Seth Green should instead produce the feel of Los Angeles in 1985, like show statistics of guns and burglar alarms sold by the hour or vast amount of people being alarmed when staying up at night and being jumpy to every a nuance of sound thinking the Stalker is there because the minds plays tricks on the people and the brutal heat did not help much that summer. The paranoia was insurmountable, the scary aura of the city at that time was absent in this film, it is not a convincing Thriller. I read Philip Carlo's book and that is miles better of accounted pulsating events and situations.
Most of all, There should be movie scenes that Habitants all over the State that stay up late in the brutal heat of the Californian Summer had their mind playing tricks on them thinking every nuance of sound IS the Stalker - this should meticulously create the convincing fearful atmosphere which the movie did not represent. The movie should be leaning to THE BOSTON STRANGLER (1968); showing the statistics demonstration of locks and guns being sold by the hour in the city to provide an epitome of the aura of Los Angeles in 1985. Unfortunately, it was vacantly provided to be unconvincing. Instead Bruce Seth Green done laconic scenes especially of Richard being a fugitive, falling on his face so audience can laugh at him like a pantomime villain, also skidding up some dust, and taking a Mustang with some mooning full figured guy hanging out the car window then being knocked unconscious and suddenly people of East L.A. came out of nowhere chasing Richard, pounced on him, and the SAME full figured guy with the Mustang was at the scene! How did he get there so fast despite his quick sleep?
This is an average sleeper; I suggest Philip Carlo's book is a better project than this fine old mess.
There are T.V. True Crime movies that can be intriguing like Ted Bundy; The Deliberate Stranger, or John Wayne Gacy; To catch a Killer. However, this T.V. movie of Manhunt: Search for the Night Stalker is very dull. It is trying too hard to be a "Chiller-Thriller" trying its best to exude feeling of suspense, but it fails to do that because of hammy performances and lack of reality in the script. This is suppose to be a Chiller of a Thriller- it's really trying to be, but the suspense is subdued due to certain scenes of some tedious moments that are unnecessary to be shown, like the cop's private lives, comprised with hammy performances and bad music score with a rip-off of Night Prowler by AC/DC. The black-clad Killer in the movie made so much noise, used too much flashlights in the dark, you would think people would wake up when he enters in their residence, when in the actual trial, the Killer is suppose to be militant and work in darkness, hence the moniker; "The Night Stalker".
The TRUE shadowed actions of the Night Stalker was that he never made a sound of slamming car doors nor using flashlights in the dark; he adjusted to work in remote darkness. As for the rare Avia tennis shoes, he suppose to have dumped them in the San Francisco river and opt for combat boots later on due to Diane Feinstein's elocution slip up, that's why cops can't see them on his feet. However the movie writers claimed Diane mentioned 'ballistics in San Francisco were the same compared to the L.A. Murders' but that was NOT the evidence that "damaged" the investigation, she was supposed to have mentioned the Avia footprints that the Night Stalker did notify to choose a more common footwear and that was not included in the film, so there was loose accounts to this movie.
The dialogue was full of terrible lines and careless errata too. One of Gil Carrillo's daughters was called "Rene" in the beginning, so why was his wife, Pearl, called the same girl "Mica" after 43 minutes into the film? Richard Jordan as an experienced detective, Frank Salerno, also in charge of the Hillside Strangler case in the 1970's but in the 1980's he relies on "his gut" now than anything else! The script was terribly careless, for example, one of Gil Carrillo's Daughters was called Rene, but 43 minutes into the movie, Gil's Wife, Pearl, called the same girl "Mica"- this erratum could have been corrected. The worst part is the rest of the dialogue, which is not convincing to match the original True Crime characters, their personal experiences and personality backgrounds from this movie, it fails to represent their personalities altogether. Richard Jordan, who plays a "seasoned" Detective, Frank Salerno always "feels things" in this case, he tells Sheriff Grimm as he proves one Serial Killer is operating the crimes "This is one Guy doing this - I can feel it" and to his Partner, Gil, "I have a funny feeling about tonight - he is going out again" and when they pursue Ramirez prior to I.D. him in the Newspapers, Jordan says " I can feel it Gill it is all over". Also Frank goes on about how "great" things are. There is a scene where Gill solemnly says "oh no! He switched guns on us! He used a .25 instead of a .22" Salerno replies "that's Great! Phil (the Forensic Scientist) can give us a positive make on the 25, if we get him with this Gun, he is nailed!" and another ridiculous scene is when a cop goes "Hey Frank! We found the shoe, it is a special shoe made by Avia and there are thirteen thousand and fifty-six distributed" and Salerno's response is "that is Great Washington! It is going to be that much easier for you to trace every bit of sale today" and Washington laughs "How do I know you are going to say that!" - this was suppose to be an amusing line, but there is no ring of truth to it. Why did Washington NOT mention there is ONLY one pair of Avia 440 modal that is size 11 and a half twelve; which is the same one at the scenes from the series of murders and just 'one' man is wearing this 'rare' shoe? The Movie Writers did miss out conspicuous details of not illustrating Diane Feinstein's elocution slip up of mentioning the rare Avia shoes of a "particular size" that made the Killer change his footwear. So there was loose research to these "True Crime" accounts of what actually happened, and lack of realism in the script. The writers probably never put their heads together to think about the "real" lives of these Detectives because when Richard was caught and put into custody, Jordan turns to Gill and says "we will be living with this for a long time!" For an experienced Detective who also worked on the Hillside Strangler case, mentions an unrealistic line - I am sure other viewers will find all lines of the script quite false in real situations. All the Actors were given unrealistic lines, the acting was bad too, especially some that Phil the Forensic Scientist stated that makes me lose that suspense, and how can he be so angry after living around the case of Charles Manson and his Cult? He was meant to be a professional mannered person.
The visage of the killer was dramatically revealed near the end. Richard Ramirez should be portrayed by a talented actor but NOT Gregory Norman Cruz, he was equally bad, and he does not resemble Ramirez. Greg had a wicked expression throughout his scenes and looked ropey. The Real Richard was Handsome as a Movie Star and worthy as a Male Supermodel; possessing a dangerously seductive streak and the combination of looking Angelic with a mysterious plutonian air - Guys and Girls flock to him. Picking Cruz was too politically correct for my taste. A better looking American Native Lakota Actor with talent could have been selected no matter how sensitive the audience may seemed at the time. The Real Richard was slovenly in appearance when caught but scary and panther-like with certain magnetism when he was apprehended by the police and was in fact seraphic looking during the trial blessed with devilishly fierce good looks and moody hypnotic charm. Gregory Norman Cruz did NOT have magnetism and kept looking at a certain angle of the camera to appear sinister whereas the real Richard was an unknown person, a tall Grand Turk due to his very high cheekboned and protruding chinned features, and a Cambodian actor who are Lakota could closely fit Richard's visage and athletic slenderman build.
It is a predictable movie with bad enactment, terrible humor and bad music score with a song that is a rip off of Night Prowler by AC/DC. Bruce Seth Green should instead produce the feel of Los Angeles in 1985, like show statistics of guns and burglar alarms sold by the hour or vast amount of people being alarmed when staying up at night and being jumpy to every a nuance of sound thinking the Stalker is there because the minds plays tricks on the people and the brutal heat did not help much that summer. The paranoia was insurmountable, the scary aura of the city at that time was absent in this film, it is not a convincing Thriller. I read Philip Carlo's book and that is miles better of accounted pulsating events and situations.
Most of all, There should be movie scenes that Habitants all over the State that stay up late in the brutal heat of the Californian Summer had their mind playing tricks on them thinking every nuance of sound IS the Stalker - this should meticulously create the convincing fearful atmosphere which the movie did not represent. The movie should be leaning to THE BOSTON STRANGLER (1968); showing the statistics demonstration of locks and guns being sold by the hour in the city to provide an epitome of the aura of Los Angeles in 1985. Unfortunately, it was vacantly provided to be unconvincing. Instead Bruce Seth Green done laconic scenes especially of Richard being a fugitive, falling on his face so audience can laugh at him like a pantomime villain, also skidding up some dust, and taking a Mustang with some mooning full figured guy hanging out the car window then being knocked unconscious and suddenly people of East L.A. came out of nowhere chasing Richard, pounced on him, and the SAME full figured guy with the Mustang was at the scene! How did he get there so fast despite his quick sleep?
This is an average sleeper; I suggest Philip Carlo's book is a better project than this fine old mess.