In my view, this film is misleading and inaccurate. The film glosses over the real story, which is how my uncle, Detective John Falotico, was OFFICIALLY CREDITED BY THE NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT as the arresting officer of the Son of Sam. Indeed, Ed Zigo was not even present at the arrest. REPEAT: Ed Zigo was not even present at the arrest. REPEAT AGAIN: Ed Zigo was not even present at the arrest.The discovery of a parking ticket which led to the killer's vehicle was made from interviews my uncle took from witnesses at the scene of the last murder. Det. Falotico then made the arrest of the Son of Sam. Again, Det. Falotico was officially credited with the "collar" i.e., the arresting officer of the Son of Sam. Detective Zigo's role seems to be limited to searching the vehicle (without a warrant). Det. Zigo was not present at the arrest because he was getting a warrant.Interested readers should read the account from the Los Angeles Times, October 12, 1985. In it my uncle is quoted as saying,"It is my contention that this program that is being aired is like a travesty of justice," Falotico told The Times. "It's a hoax played on the public because, as you know, in any major investigation no one person is a hero."Falotico claims that Zigo was his assistant on the case and "not the major investigator in this case." Yet Falotico's name is never mentioned in "Out of the Darkness."Moreover, check out the obituary for Detective John Falotico from the New York Times in 2006. That gives an accurate version of the facts. Contrast that New York Times obituary with that of Ed Zigo from the New York Times. The New York Times gets the facts right! Don't believe the "docu-drama" . . . it is more drama than "docu". James Justus was the detective that traced the ticket to the Ford vehicle (after my uncle learned from witnesses of the parking ticket). Read the obituaries for both Falotico and Zigo from the New York Times to get a better and true idea of what really happened.

more than make up for the story line in this film, supposedly dealing with Son of Sam/David Berkowitz, but also depicting Detective Ed Zigo's private life, and work on the case.Martin Sheen seems to consistently transcend poorly written material; even in the film "The Little Girl Who Lives Down the Lane" also starring Jodi Foster, he is the standout.This film may not accurately address all the "Son of Sam" crimes, but we are probably due for a remake (now that they are producing a film about Mark David Chapman/John Lennon's assassin).Robert Trebor is very good as Berkowitz, certainly resembles him physically. Elizondo, as the local priest, has a few lines which are indelible. When they are in the NY aquarium, observing oddities of nature, he reminds Sheen: ..."" that there are people still alive, walking around, who are more dead inside""... A brilliant insight which may have been more developed.All in all, if you like Sheen or Elizondo, you will appreciate their performances. 8/10.

Pretty good for a made for T.V. Voted a 9 because of all the small parts played by actors not yet famous. Pretty neat to spot them all! Look for Eriq La Salle and Charlie Sheen to name a few. Fun to watch and a good story telling!

What could be an interesting story about a madman and the police in pursuit of him is turned into a soap-opera tragedy of the week punctuated by a few anonymous shots fired from a pistol in close up. We learn an awful lot about Detective Ed Zigo's tribulations, mainly centering about his wife's terminal illness, and very little about the key figure in the story. David Berkowitz was a paranoid schizophrenic who worked for the post office and obeyed orders given to him by a neighborhood dog, which he called "Sam." He led the police and the press a merry chase. The newspapers and TV reporters of the time were going berserk with speculation. He was an ex-policeman because he used the two-handed combat crouch that cops used. (All he had to do to learn that stance was go to a movie.) He was on the lookout for girls with long brown hair parted in the middle because of some buried trauma. (Every young woman in the United States of America had long brown hair parted in the middle.) He was an artist or an architect because of the fussily neat printing he used in his letters to journalists. (He was nothing of the sort, just a guy with neat printing.) He had some kind of cowboy complex because he used a .44 caliber weapon. (It was just convenient, he had other weapons too.) He turned out to be, not David Berkowitz, but rather "David Berkowitz," an adopted child with an Italian background. (All my Jewish friends breathed a sigh of relief.) Whatever his background he was nutty as a fruitcake. A hole in his apartment wall had a cartoon balloon over it, saying, "Hi. My name is Mr. Williams and I live in this hole." The fact that a guy so flagrantly nuts could work in an ordinary post office without detection is almost as scary as the fact that he could stalk the streets at night. The story was filled with ironies. The ol' .44 he toted was built by Charter Arms. It's a large-caliber gun. Yet, despite firing at very close range, he only managed to kill six of his 13 victims with it. Was it possible that Charter Arms' .44 pistol wasn't really as lethal as everyone had thought? A spokesman for the firm was more or less forced, in effect, to defend the product and apologize for the fact that most of the victims survived.None of this is in the film. Not that the acting is poor. Martin Sheen is quite good, as usual, especially hustling across the street to inform his partners that he has just discovered the shooter's identity after searching his car, practically dancing with excitement. But the people making this film didn't seem to know what they were aiming for. The first several shootings take place without elaboration or explanation before we meet any of the characters. The procedures involved in tracking Son of Sam down are skipped over, as if they were interruptions of the tragic drama of Zigo's life, the main subject of the movie. James Edward Olmos, a first-rate actor, is given a surfeit of screen time at the expense of the detective story. There are extended family scenes that deserve no more than footnotes. All of this detracts from the impact and suspense of a sensational story, even from our interest in it.Where did the director and the writers think they were going with this? Into Plan A, The disease of the week protocol? If you want to learn about the case, read one of the several books available about it, including a novelized version by Jimmy Breslin. Don't waste time on this misguided effort.