Purely Joyful Movie!

Just what I expected

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Brian Dennehey BECOMES John Wayne Gacy, as you watch this film you can only imagine the horrible fate of the victims.The beginning starts out with Robert Piest, well portrayed, who is picked up by Gacy for construction work (this was his method of trolling for young boys). Gacy owned his own contracting company in Des Plaines, Illinois.The actress who is Piest's mother is heart-rending; as she pleads with the police to take her son's disappearance seriously. In the Chicago area a missing person is nothing new, but it was her birthday and Rob never showed up. ..." He would never run away from home... he is not that type of boy"..., she mentions, and Detective Joe Koczenczak (very well portrayed by Michael Riley) takes notice of the situation.Dennehey is superb, when the police first visit Gacy's house in Des Plaines, we can feel the menacing evil and rage simmering just below the surface. Gacy shows the police his pictures with Rosalynn Carter, his promotion as manager of Kentucky Fried Chicken, and his "commendations" for contributions to local police and firefighters (a fixation common among sociopaths; they are very high functioning, and socially enjoy manipulating authority figures).Gacy also apparently used drugs to lure young men to his house, there are several scenes where he uses Qualuudes, and the detectives are following him, realizing the extent of his social connections. What is so horrifying is that, on the surface, Gacy was a well-liked businessman who had many friends. He was not a reclusive psycho who stood out in the crowd.As Detective Koczenczack becomes more frustrated trying to mount evidence against Gacy he is thwarted many times by D.A. Meg Foster, who cannot make a case if Gacy's rights are violated. The case is interesting and disturbing all the more so because it is true. Margot Kidder also has a cameo as a psychic, who relays to Koczenzack that there are many, many more victims; this will not be an easy case.The soundtrack at the end, as they are searching for more victims, and pan out over the cemetery, is very haunting. So sad for any of the parents and young men who were affected by this monster, John Wayne Gacy, who was executed in 1994.

This movie stunk almost as bad as I imagine Gacy's crawlspace did. It was just so pathetic and I have a hard time believing half of the things that happened were true, who was that Ted guy with Gacy all the time, was that character made up or what? The scene with the psychic was so bad it had me rolling around laughing. Did Gacy really invite a kid around and cuff him while the police were watching his house? The part that was supposed to be the most entertaining bit (the discovery of the bodies in the crawlspace) was cut out completely. It was just a terrible movie I don't know why it gets good reviews on here? I rate it: 1/10

With no malice against our neighbors to the north, I must say that one reason this telefilm fails is the overwhelming "Made in Canada" quality. That is to say, it's well-made and mostly well-acted, but it's obvious throughout (even without Margot Kidder popping up) that there has been little attempt to have the Canadian locations and actors (who say things like "Juhn's nut here - he's still oot at work") simulate any kind of a Chicago feeling.Dennehy is too handsome and slick for the uber-nerd murderer John Wayne Gacy, though his acting of what he's been given to do is impeccable. Gacy wore the mask of the jolly "can-do" guy, whereas Dennehy in his leather jacket is someone you'd think twice about accepting a lift from.

In "F/X" Brian Dennehy played a cop with a knack for staying on top of criminals as if he were psychic. His body--stocky, barrel-chested, rock-like--looked like it was made to right injustices. He had the profile of an eagle and the broad face of a bulldog, and he squints with vehement incredulity at anything outside the law. He was impressive.In a turnabout as serial killer John Wayne Gacy in what could have been the performance of a lifetime, Dennehy uses his probing intelligence and menacing presence at the service of death and perversity. He's the deceiver, seeking sexual pleasure in unlawful ways, while somewhat successfully maintaining a front of decency and respectability. In "To Catch A Killer," he carries himself with the authority that is the mark of the moralist, and we are allowed fleetingly to see how far the reality misses the mark.If Dennehy falls short here, the fault is with the intent of the movie's makers. They see their work as a kind of primer for law enforcement officials on solving serial homicide. Problem is the movie's reason for being undercuts the reason the movie exists at all, namely, its subject's dark side. Dennehy compromises himself as an actor by using his steely stare to suggest murderous intent and then expecting us to accept externals to convey that he is playing a psychopath. Good psychodrama this does not make, and "To Catch A Killer" remains an only occasionally effective re-creation of already-known facts.Casting Dennehy is a mistake anyway. What it misses is how innocuous Gacy could look, how harmless he seemed. Could anyone be fooled into believing going home with a leering Dennehy could be safe? Even clown make-up cannot cover this man's ferociousness. And the lure of easy money would give the most money-starved of us pause, I suspect, if it meant getting into a car with Dennehy at the wheel.Besides, even if someone blind to this risked it, isn't the movie's primary interest in answering the question why men run scared from the idea of death at the hands of a bisexual pederast but embrace the possibility of death under other degrading circumstances? Don't we need to see what we are being asked to hate? The one opportunity we have to do just that is curtailed by police surveillance. It may be in good taste or out of respect for the dead that the filmmakers shy away from what should be the central theme of the movie, but the result is not more understanding but less. Not even incidental questions that come to mind (like why did Gacy keep articles of clothing and other possessions of his victims which any thinking person would recognize as incriminating or why he made his victims suffer when sadists on the whole seem drawn less to inflicting pain than in dominating their subjects) do they bother to address.Michael Riley plays police chief Joe Kozenczak with honorable restraint, and Martin Julien as Gacy's work supervisor Theo sweats convincingly. Beads of sweat aside, the movie adds up to the mere sum of its parts. Nabbing someone who doesn't have enough sense not to turn his crawlspace into a private gravesite and keep mementos of his conquests for convenient pick-up as forensic evidence, while a psychic (Margot Kidder is not a good choice for this.) is called upon to "psyche out" his weak-willed cohort hardly seems a challenge. It would seem police training is not so much what is needed. More likely, something on the order of providence or dumb luck or both.