Chicago Massacre: Richard Speck

The horror of Richard Speck's 1966 killing spree can still be felt, especially in the Chicago area. However, Michael Feifer's seemingly unresearched script excludes many of the real story's gripping elements but does include several fraudulent cheap shots aimed at the Chicago Police Department as well as Chicago politicians. More than that, plenty of the lines the unfortunate actors have to deliver would be MS3K material if there were anything funny about the actual occurrences.

The direction and cinematography is every bit as crummy as the script. Corin Nemec's Richard Speck was an OK sort of movie psycho, even if he didn't capture the true worthlessness of the real Speck. The other actors, having even less to work with, deliver performances ranging from hammy to lifeless.

The real story of the killing spree has all the makings of a good, even great, movie such as In Cold Blood. But Michael Feifer's Chicago Massacre misses the mark by a wide margin.

Being extremely interested in true crime, I decided to watch this movie last night. It was not good. The only thing good at all about it was the fact that Corin Nemec is a great actor. However, he is the only good actor in this movie. Actually, it was so bad, I am not sure how he could have worked along side such terrible acting. We have Candyman and the Wishmaster as very unconvincing police officers. Not to mention, almost every other actor and extra was terrible.

In my opinion, If your interested in the actual case of Richard Speck, Then I suggest you spend 15-20 minutes reading about him on the internet as opposed to wasting an hour and a half watching this movie. Besides, Reading up on it will give you much more insight than this movie ever could.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

This film should have been pretty easy to make watchable. You've got an intriguing subject - a serial killer - so pretty much just telling his story, documentary-style, would be interesting enough. The film pretty much writes and directs itself.

Yet writer-director Michael Feifer manages to turn an easy win into a massive loss. The plot is absolutely dull and lifeless, performances are unconvincing, production is basic. Hardly the Mindhunter-type story I was expecting.

Avoid.

This story and the victims deserved so much better than this film. The story line jumps around without any regard for fitting the pieces together. You get small glimpses of his childhood, marriage and previous criminal behavior without ever following through and finishing connecting to why we're being shown that. The acting is absolutely terrible, the actors look nothing like the people they're portraying, the "dorm" where the murders were committed looks nothing like the true location and worst of all is the movie isn't even that accurate. Having spent some time reading up about the events that transpired it's very clear that the movie did not care at all about accuracy. It's very hard to believe that the movie won an award of any kind.

If ONLY I had bothered to look this flick up on IMDb before buying it On Demand, I could have saved myself $3.95 and 11 minutes I'll never get back....that's how long I watched before being nearly overwhelmed by a compulsion to pluck out my eyes and slam them in a hardcover edition of War and Peace to ease my pain and heighten my entertainment.

I am a true crime buff, so I took a chance on this one.... lesson learned.

Of COURSE when I started to read the comments on IMDb, the first thing I read was "Don't say I didn't warn you".... you did, it was just my bad timing...

this movie FAILS.... i mean, it's an offense to any viewer, whether you're into true crime, thrillers, acting, cinematography, directing-it's a non-discriminating disappointment for all.... the set design is pretty bland, so at least that's not AWFUL....

I'm still trying to watch it, but only because I haven't yet decided what to watch instead...

this film is DREADFUL. I haven't felt this betrayed by a movie since the Black Dahlia. and THAT was a betrayal of biblical proportions...