This is a movie that I would say was VERY Well done. I am a Christian adult who is very interested in films that deal with Satanism, Occult, as well, as serial killers. Nightstalker deals with all three of those. As usual, the skepticism of people is what makes this movie feel so good, because as long as you expect it to be something that is terrible, you might like it. I know I did.Nightstalker was a film that was VERY messed up. Even more so than Fight Club, Donnie Darko and so forth. The beginning of the movie starts out with as someone put "Crack Montages over Speed Metal", Okay, ya, they were crack montages, but it wasn't over speed metal, it was over Grindcore/Brutal Death Metal. With the montages, this movie makes you feel kind of scared/creeped out.In a way, you could say that this is a lot like Summer Of Sam, because it revolves around a person(s) while the media talks about the killings going around. I do recommend this movie to all those who are interested in these kind of movies, BUT I WARN YOU, DO NOT EXPECT A LOT OUT OF IT AND YOU'LL LIKE IT!!!!

Well, this movie was, quite frankly, on crack. It was really jumpy (kind of like an even more drugged-out Requiem for a Dream - which says a lot.) This worked in some places, particularly when the NightStalker was, in fact, doing drugs. However, the part that has him walking up the stairs a good half-dozen times was too much.This movie in no way told the story of Richard Ramirez (or Robert Ramirez, as the summary on this website says.) The most glaring problem? Ramirez is currently awaiting execution on California's death row, for goodness sakes! I heart Danny Trejo, so that was probably this films saving grace. Even so, all I can say is: I watched it once. I would not be opposed to watching it again, but believe me, I will not be the one saying, "Hey, you know what would be GREAT to watch right now?! Nightstalker!"

Nightstalker is one of those movies that could have been so much more. Fangoria called it "a first-rate house of horrors" and it was an official Sundance selection. I guess I missed something. The first ten minutes of the film is nothing but rapid, frenzied "crack montages" shot over speed metal. It's cool, but it's too much. Every time we spend screen time with the killer, it's in this fashion. You see these so much that you become dulled to them and it just becomes headache inducing. The style is almost too chaotic. At the same time, it's the only thing I will remember about the movie. One scene in particular that I did like was when the Nightstalker is walking up to a house and it's accompanied by a very cool effect. I'm not real sure how they accomplished this. Incidentally, the flick was produced by its co-star Danny Trejo. In the end, it's nothing special and will disappear into the void of the based-on-a-real-killer sub-genre.

I have read some of the comments on this film and couldn't disagree more with the other viewers. This was an enjoyable film, although it seemed a little long (only 95 minutes though). The cinematography is nothing less than brilliant. Filming at only 3 and 6 frames per second gave the film a horrific, realistic feel. The use of camera effects has a very smash-mouth, renegade, film student feel, but this ads an amazing depth to the film. After having seen Dahmer, Gacy and a couple of other "based on a true story" films, this is by far the best. While some say the script is light, I believe that is what the director/writer/producer was going for. This is not just the story of Richard Ramirez, but of the female Latin detective who was placed on the case as a PSA to Latinos that the cops cared about their community. Finally, this film made me do something that many scary movies of the past ten years have not...it made me jump. It made me have nightmares. It made me not want to be alone at night. That's what I look for in spooky movies, not in-depth character development. I want fear to be my primary emotion, not a sense of understanding some poor soul who brutally raped, butchered and mutilated women.