Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

At at glance, I noticed the reviewers mostly gave this movie a higher ranking than the hoi polloi. While this isn't the best movie you could watch, I don't think it belongs below a 5 rating.Speaking broadly about movies and TV shows that feature net related activity, the bigger budget movies go with computer effects that defy any reality (think "Jurassic Park" and the line by a child "ooh! this is Unix. I know this.") while less self-obsessed low budget films are stuck with using stuff the rest of us actually use from day to day... and are therefore more realistic.This isn't academy award material, but it's not as bad as the couple pathetic reviewers make it out to be. Any reviewer who gives a 1-2 star rating for a properly produced film should be doomed to watch "Manos" or Justin Bieber movies for life. Netflix popped it up as an average selection for me and it was some good filler time while I got some work done. It beat the heck out of old "X-File reruns."

I saw dot.kill on Showtime the other night; and, while I thought the title was totally lame, I watched it because is starred Armand Assante.His filmography is hit or miss for me; but, I have to give him credit on this one. His passion within the role really makes this film. He was absolutely convincing as a detective who's health, family life, and career are crumbling.Charlie is an old-school detective who relies on instinct, not high-tech. He is alternately hard-core, abrasive (particularly to co-workers and his son), and tender (towards a former addict, whom he saved from a life on the streets).The twist at the end, as to the identity of the killer was great, even though it really wasn't hard to guess, with the heavy foreshadowing used by the director.It could have been better; but, a pretty good movie nonetheless.

An aging Armand Assante stars as a grumpy, disgruntled, temperamental detective Charlie Daines, eaten up with cancer, trying desperately to fight thru his pain to solve a difficult case concerning a serial killing Master Hacker whose murdering Big Company CEOs for a live on-line audience, while also capturing the cops working the crime scene through hidden cameras displaying them for millions to witness. Embittered and hard-nosed, Daines is just too stubborn to check into a hospital, receiving morphine from an ex-addict he helped get off junk, just so he can cope with the agony of his disease. But, the NYC police must cooperate with the feds who have hired a cyber-specialist, Adam(Raffaello Degruttola)to assist in finding the psycho while "dinosaur" Daines continues to pursue leads using his instincts and nose through good old fashioned police work. Here's the rub..how does a sickly detective, combating coughing fits and exhaustion, find a killer of supreme intelligence? While, I'll be the first to admit that this film is indeed derivative of other films regarding cyber-psychos and the pursuit of their capture, I think what makes "Dot.Kill" work is Assante's effective performance as the detective contemplating life, trying to enjoy the time left with his wife and son(..keeping his disease secret from them out of love), while doping up as he bickers with his superiors and partner over tackling the case his way as they demand his cooperation with Adam, whose knowledge(..and language) of the cyberspace is of importance. The cat-and-mouse, as one would expect, soon involves Daines because(..isn't it always obvious?)he's the man tracking his identity and whereabouts. The twist on who the killer really is might work on some, but I feel that viewers who have adapted to these kind of thrillers will figure it out before it is revealed 75 minutes in. Couple the "colorful" cop talk from one to another(..little profane insults towards one another and plenty of f-bombs to go around)with having to watch a slowly dying man looking worse and worse as the film continues, might be a difficult watch for some. As usual in these kind of cop-psycho thrillers, Daines travels through seedy locales on the street to get info(..and morphine)and we see that a few of the wealthy targets engage in carnal activities. It's also a challenge to root for Daines, who is rugged, foul-mouthed, easily annoyed, and speaks his mind whether you like what he has to say or not. But, as we watch during the film, he's a good cop whose "flaws" make the character so interesting and rich. Assante is in practically every scene and the whole show. I'd recommend checking this out for his performance, even if the film itself feels old-hat and familiar.

I was kind of surprised to find a straight to video police thriller by a mainstream director, John Irvin, and starring a mainstream actor, Armand Assante. What didn't surprise me at all was its weak disjointed story with very little sense guiding the cops' actions in finding the killer.A couple things were done alright. The locations of the crimes (which are all shown live on the internet, hence the title) are always cool derelict industrial settings. None of them are used to very good effect, but they are good locations. Armand Assante brings a lot to the unfortunately underwritten role of the morphine addict detective. The sad part is that this addiction was a lazy screenwriter's device to take the place of character development, punctuate almost every scene (Assante faithfully coughs away any plot-related dialogue), and generate "suspense" in later scenes. Although, the dimension of his character, as a supposedly obsolete detective matching wits with a high-tech criminal, is still a good idea.The identity of the killer is not very hard to guess. In fact the central plot of the picture is a bleeding cliché, surrounded by the window dressing of would-be character development, seemingly as a distraction. This was obviously a low budget picture, but it wasn't the budget that holds the movie back from its potential, it's the weak script and the failure on the part of the director, cinematographer, editor, to create a harmoniously atmospheric thriller out of this routine cop-vs-bad-guy movie."Dot.Kill" is pretty obviously trying to do some of what "Se7en" did so well and that "Fear dot com" tried to do. However, it just doesn't have the same freshness that "Se7en" had (and really hasn't lost) nor does it have the atmosphere and aesthetic grace. I can't say I'm surprised, but I'm always upset when I see missed potential. Just go watch any David Fincher movie instead.