User reviews

Detective Sam Dietz (Leo Rossi, reprising his role from the first film) is trying to juggle getting over the attacks on his family from the first film & trying to catch a new serial killer (Miles O'Keefe) while teamed up with an unhelpful FBI agent and dealing with a home life that's crumbling around him due to his relentless pursuits of his job. Meg Forster also returns but is relegated to bitching at her husband most of the film.

Instead of focusing mostly on the villain like the previous Relentless did, the sequel unwisely chooses to follow Detective Dietz who comes off as a slightly pompous self-loathing windbag. The first film was (moderately) entertaining strictly because of Judd Nelson's dead-eyed portrayal of that films killer (and William Lustigs direction to a lesser extent) Where as this film gives Miles O'Keeffe's Gregor, the stone cold killer (who could've been a great character, the back story was intriguing enough) the short shift, and while this sequel is still somewhat watchable, it is definitely the lesser because of it.

My Grade: C-

DVD Extras: Trailers for In The Cut, Secret Window & Panic Room

For several years I've enjoyed the other two "Relentless" films, but for some reason I missed this one until tonight.

It's not easy to find these films on line, but it's worth the effort.

The villains in each film are well cast. They present a frightening collection of killers!

Leo Rossi does an excellent job playing a frustrated cop trying to solve a case. He doesn't get much help from superior officers, or the FBI agent with whom he's required to work.

If you're somewhat jaded you will enjoy the killing techniques used...including cable ties.

Finally, you'll see some artful shots of ice cube baths, etc.

Enjoy!

I sort of enjoyed the first one, so bought the DVD of the second to watch, wish I hadn't bothered.

Apart from the odd bit of fairly restrained violence, this plays as a bland made for TV movie type thing, and the acting is truly awful.

For me, films like this need a bit of sleaze, and there's none on offer here at all.

I'm really surprised that some people hold this one in higher regard than the first. At least director William Lustig managed to create a bit of atmosphere in the first.

Don't think I'll be bothering with 3 and 4 of the series as I can't see them being an improvement on this.

This was much better than I anticipated. I had watched the first "Relentless" movie and thought it was "fair" but this was much better, not as frightening perhaps as the original but better start-to-finish. This kept you guessing.

Once again (it's overdone in Hollywood), we see another dishonest cop or government agent (played very well, however, by Ray Sharkey). The film also has a bit too much sleazy atmosphere for what I'd like to see.

Still, it's definitely worth watching if you like these serial killer crime movies. I am shocked there is only one other review of this. I had to be somewhat popular to have the original and then two more sequels.

'Dead On' picks up mere months from where things left off. It's still very much a cop's hunt for a killer, but other elements are new. Question becomes is it enough to break up another routine story & does the cast stand out? This first sequel - two more follow - doesn't have a lofty bar to hit. I was hoping it would at least match the original's level.

Det. Sam Dietz (Leo Rossi) solving the 'Sunset Murders' damaged his family. He's separated from his wife & son (Meg Foster, Brendan Ryan) and has become much more of an obsessive detective. When random victims start showing up linked together by method of death & bloody symbols drawn on walls it appears to be another serial killer (Miles O'Keeffe) at work. This time he's teamed up with FBI Agent Vassone (Ray Sharkey) who says it's the work of a guy who already has 22 bodies to his name and is moving across the country from East to West.

There's no getting around the obvious. Dietz has gone from a cop begging to be able to do good police work & a measure of respect to being a downright A-hole. It's kinda off-putting. Especially when the hurt is shown caused to his estranged family. Meanwhile the flick is pretty face up about Vassone being deceptive so you have to play the waiting game to get the obvious reveal. Lastly the killer isn't given any personality. Only when the ending comes does he get fleshed out in back story 101 and have dialog.

'Relentless 2' is stomping pretty familiar grounds. Cops not getting along, family troubles and murder most foul. The cast is sufficient, but there's no standouts. Betrayal & political intrigue gets injected, but much isn't very good. Dietz's thinking becomes a stretch & I was left wondering how much sentiment will be irrelevant come 'Relentless 3'.

Leo Rossi reprises his role of Sam Dietz and this time he's paired up with a shady FBI agent to find a another serial killer, only this killer has a hidden agenda that isn't just about killing people.

I was actually surprised by this film, normally with sequels you get a very weak second film but this one was anything but, this sequel is actually better than the first, the killer this time is played by Miles O'Keeffe whose intense looks really does his character justice, Ray Sharkey is an actor I've never seen before or since this film but he played the role of the shady FBI agent very convincingly.

The storyline obviously is very much the same formula as the first one only unlike the first one that concentrated more on the killer, this one chooses to focus more on the character of Sam Dietz and how the incident at the end of the first film effected him and his family, as well as how his relentless pursuit of serial killers take its toll on his life and his marriage.

Not many sequels surpass their predecessor but this one is one of the few exceptions, if you're a fan of the first, you won't be disappointed with this one

The first movie was a "Maniac Cop" clone, sans the cop uniform. But all the excitement, and energy, and suspense of Part 1 is gone. This time around, it's basically just a police procedural, with the killer playing second fiddle to the plot. We don't see nearly enough of the killer, and what we do see of him is not particularly interesting. Instead, why not just resurrect the original character? I thought Judd Nelson was the ideal choice for the killer in the first movie. Hopefully, parts 3 & 4 will be a lot better.

Incidentally, doesn't Leo Rossi look a little like Robert De Niro?

** out of ****

A Very Well Thought out Masterpiece. Good Plot, Well Developed Characters, and Outstanding Acting is what Makes this Film even more Worth while. It's not jut that, Though. It's just the Simple feeling of Involvement I Get from this Movie. I Feel like I'm in the Movie, One of the Characters, etc. That is how Excellent this Script is.

I Also really Enjoyed the Action and Suspense Packed Tightly into Very Heart Racing Scenes. The ending is Very Good, also. It is Important For one to Know the Very Low and Tight Budget these Producers had to Go on. The Special Effects are nothing to Jump Up on, and the Video and Audio Quality is Terrible, but that Still can not Ruin the Movie. I also Enjoy the Fact that this Movie is not Widely Known. Why? I Don't know. It just seems to me that once I Movie is Widely Known, I Hate it. My Theory is that: When Expectations go Up, Quality goes Down! I Guess I Also like not Only this Movie, but the Whole Series.

On a Scale of 10 I'd give The Plot an 8, The Acting a 7, The Suspense a 10, The Setting a 6, and The Gore a Simple 5.

As Far as The Sequels Go: Part One was Very Good and Scary. Part 2 (This One!!!) is Good, But more Action Packed than Scary. Part Three is More of a Rambo Movie than It is of It's own Series. I Have not Yet Seen Part 4, but Hope to in The Near Future.

Good Movie, 10 out of 10

People Who Enjoyed This Might like: Tomb Raider and Puppet Master