My wife and I always seem to be suckered in by packaging of an unpopular title. From it's cover Green River Killer looked somewhat interesting having been based on a true story about a real serial killer. The moment we saw the first scene that it was on video and not film, the lead actor's (if you can call him an actor at all) stumbling through his lines to the awful cinematography and boxy audio we knew it was a terrible stinker and realized the watch ahead would be painful and excruciating. There were flashes of scenes that looked like they spliced from another awful film, probably one that was too bad to complete so they used the bits for whatever effects they were going after. You even could hear that the gun was plastic! If there's any good in the movie it was some actual police confession footage of the real killer, even he was a better actor than the guy they got as the lead. Someone should have just used the real killer's confession video, hired Bill Kurtis and let A&E or Discovery make a decent documentary instead. I should have checked IMDb first because all of its reviews from other victims (watchers) were dead on accurate.
I have to hand it to its marketing and artwork, however I suppose that's where the entire budget was spent on and the best part of the movie but not worth the four-dollars wasted. I can't say if I've seen worse movies than this, some were at least equal, like comparing a skunk's smell to a dead fish. Even those by Ed Wood or others from B movie directors at least provided laughter, this was too bad to be funny. A film as bad as this deserves an award, its awfulness just can't go unnoticed.
