Your typical guy movie! Nudity, fight scenes, explosions, blood, sex, bullets flying by your head, chase scenes, fire, more explosions, and some decent acting as well. Instinct to Kill stars Tracy Ryan and Missy Crider as the eye candy. Crider is best remembered for her red-headed performance as Powder's love interest in the under appreciated, POWDER. Since then, she has lost some weight and done a number of interesting, action films. Both Crider and Ryan make the movie watchable. Started slow and ended fast, the movie has its moments. Overall, if you're up around 3am and there's nothing else to watch on cable, this movie is the best!
18 Reviews
Bottom of the B's crime/action flick
=G=19 April 2003
"Instinct to Kill" sticks a handful of B-listers in a journeyman production B-flick and lays down a hackneyed storyline which has nothing new to offer. A crime/action/drama, this flick has many deficits including bad acting and direction, gaping plotholes, predictability, obvious cost-cutting, ordinary fight sequences, etc. Pretty much a waste of time, "Instinct to Kill" makes a marginal watch even for the most macho-minded couch potato. (C-)
CRITICS knocking this movie should change professions...
iammelchizedek6 August 2003
I recently watched "INSTINCT TO KILL" for the very first time... B-List cast? Poleeeeeez...GIVE ME A BREAK! The cast, directing, storyline, and all other movie-making essentials were SUPERB- PERIOD!
Given the choice to view the CRITICALLY acclaimed movies "Titanic", "Star Wars", "Austin Powers" and "Harry Potter" (consecutively and for free), or PAY to see "INSTINCT TO KILL", I'd pay to see the latter EVERYDAY of the week! HONESTLY!
By-the-way, in America's educational system we're taught A's are better than B's. Keeping this (nationally accepted 'Institution for Higher Learning' fact) in mind, why on earth are "INSTINCT TO KILL"'s cast members B-Labeled?, while the cast members of the other aforementioned movies are A-Labeled?
PLEASE! Give me "INSTINCT TO KILL"'s (UNDULY B-Labeled) cast and you can keep your (SO CALLED) A-List wannabes!
Given the choice to view the CRITICALLY acclaimed movies "Titanic", "Star Wars", "Austin Powers" and "Harry Potter" (consecutively and for free), or PAY to see "INSTINCT TO KILL", I'd pay to see the latter EVERYDAY of the week! HONESTLY!
By-the-way, in America's educational system we're taught A's are better than B's. Keeping this (nationally accepted 'Institution for Higher Learning' fact) in mind, why on earth are "INSTINCT TO KILL"'s cast members B-Labeled?, while the cast members of the other aforementioned movies are A-Labeled?
PLEASE! Give me "INSTINCT TO KILL"'s (UNDULY B-Labeled) cast and you can keep your (SO CALLED) A-List wannabes!
are you kidding me????
ljowhit-32324 May 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This comment might be a spoiler for this dumb movie, but even I don't have the answer so I'm not really spoiling the movie then am I? The one person who was trying to save BOTH THEIR DUMB ASSES (the chick and the supposed teacher), we never get an update. If Kadeem had to die, so be it, but at least we should have gotten the chance to know. Then the end of the movie, the girl and the guy walk off happy and laughing and joking like no one else played the part of trying to kill her stupid ex-husband so she could be safe. Are you kidding me??? Are you freakin' kidding me??? "I'm gonna teach you how to relax!" Seriously!!!!! Suck it producer and director!! Kadeem, I liked your character very much in this movie, despite the dumb people you had to work with.
If you see this movie on the shelf, run away!
bth200410 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This has to be one of the worst films I have ever seen! Understand, I like Dacascos, and he's done some fairly good stuff (Drive, Only the Strong, Redemption was OK, Cradle to the Grave was OK). He's a phenomenal martial artist and is a decent actor. This was simply a choice he must have made while drunk or something.
The effects (even the film quality) were LOUSY! I have seen higher quality filming techniques and effects from 1950's film. Also (this is my personal opinion), if you have to put that much sex into a movie, that should be taken as a desperate attempt at making it worth watching, which it does not. Also, I'm simply sick and tired of seeing the hero fight the villain and get beat within an inch of his life, then the bad guy die in some absurd way (like the hero getting choked and then the villain's moron ex-wife shoots him)!
Like I said, if you ever see this on a shelf in the rental store or coming on a movie channel, RUN AWAY! You WILL HATE this film!
The effects (even the film quality) were LOUSY! I have seen higher quality filming techniques and effects from 1950's film. Also (this is my personal opinion), if you have to put that much sex into a movie, that should be taken as a desperate attempt at making it worth watching, which it does not. Also, I'm simply sick and tired of seeing the hero fight the villain and get beat within an inch of his life, then the bad guy die in some absurd way (like the hero getting choked and then the villain's moron ex-wife shoots him)!
Like I said, if you ever see this on a shelf in the rental store or coming on a movie channel, RUN AWAY! You WILL HATE this film!
Boring!
Chillseeker23 September 2001
I rented this one only because both Kadeem Hardison and Mark Dacascos where back in a movie again. The last one was Drive and it was awesome. But this one is so so boring that I almost feel asleep. Kadeem is playing a cop, Mark is now some kind of a bodyguard and we have Tim Abell as a killer who is trying to hunt down his wife. Of course she goes to Mark etc. etc. My opinion 1/10
Complete garbage can of a movie.
olyle17 January 2009
Warning: Spoilers
They should have a 0 rating choice so this movie could get what it deserves. What a complete pile of crap! Maybe I'm just a sick person who likes to torture myself by watching movies I know are going to be garbage cans, but hey... someone has to watch it right? Anyway, this is just another example of a waste of time and money. It's the same old "Murderer Husband gets busted trying to kill wife only to escape from prison and hunt her down but unaware that she hired a trainer to teach her to fight back" story. B movie from hell! Complete rip off of other movies, even going as far to rip off The Silence of the Lambs, Lector prison break scene! If you like to force yourself into clawing your eyes out because of the bad scenes and you feel like sticking nails in your ears due to lame script, then make sure you sit through this piece of trash.
This junk gives beating a dead horse new meaning... it literally is beyond belief in it's attempt to make the viewer feel for any of these characters. I could go on all day, but I won't.. I just wanted to warn you all that watching this will probably ruin your day.
This junk gives beating a dead horse new meaning... it literally is beyond belief in it's attempt to make the viewer feel for any of these characters. I could go on all day, but I won't.. I just wanted to warn you all that watching this will probably ruin your day.
A Good Basic Action Movie
excellentprovider14 September 2005
Instinct to Kill 2001
If you are just looking for an action flick with a few good fight scenes, some pretty ladies and a basic plot this movie is for you. The fight scenes are realistic for the most part. The action keeps the movie going more than the semi-plausible plot. The weakest part of the movie is how foolish and inept the cops are portrayed. Most notably, the detective in charge of the task force, Lance. The bad guy is out to kill his wife and her mother and her best friend, but for some reason revenge on his ex-partner that busted him isn't part of the plan. That seems kind of inconsistent to me. Secondly, there is one scene where Missy's character and the good guy go after the serial killer husband on their own, without the police or any back up. I got the impression that scene was just to fill in time for the movie and have another action sequence. There is another scene that is totally implausible but I don't want to include any spoilers in this. You will see it if you watch the movie. Missy Crider is her normal good actress self but she doesn't show any skin in this one. The only nude scene is a brief sexual encounter with Missy's husband (the character in the movie that is) and her best friend. As a movie for simple escapism and fun I would recommend this movie to those who enjoy the genre. My rating, given the generally low caliber of cast: 7 out of 10.
If you are just looking for an action flick with a few good fight scenes, some pretty ladies and a basic plot this movie is for you. The fight scenes are realistic for the most part. The action keeps the movie going more than the semi-plausible plot. The weakest part of the movie is how foolish and inept the cops are portrayed. Most notably, the detective in charge of the task force, Lance. The bad guy is out to kill his wife and her mother and her best friend, but for some reason revenge on his ex-partner that busted him isn't part of the plan. That seems kind of inconsistent to me. Secondly, there is one scene where Missy's character and the good guy go after the serial killer husband on their own, without the police or any back up. I got the impression that scene was just to fill in time for the movie and have another action sequence. There is another scene that is totally implausible but I don't want to include any spoilers in this. You will see it if you watch the movie. Missy Crider is her normal good actress self but she doesn't show any skin in this one. The only nude scene is a brief sexual encounter with Missy's husband (the character in the movie that is) and her best friend. As a movie for simple escapism and fun I would recommend this movie to those who enjoy the genre. My rating, given the generally low caliber of cast: 7 out of 10.
I really enjoyed this film.
rae241215 May 2002
Loosely based on the book The Perfect Husband by Lisa Gardner, Instinct to Kill puts Tim Abell and Mark Dacascos back together for the first time since The Base. Turning the story round and telling it much more from the killer's point of view gives the film advantages over the book, not least of which is the fact that we get to see more of Abell. He is the saving of the film, bringing the murderer, his character, to life in a way that Dacascos and Cryder seem unable to do with theirs. Unfortunately interesting characters have been omitted from the book which would have improved the film, but the progress of Jim Beckett reminds me a lot of the Andy Robinson character from Dirty Harry, without the totally over the top acting. It is fervently hoped that Abell does not suffer the same fate as Robinson and remain typecast as the psychotic killer, he is too good an actor for that.
Some of the make up used to disguise the murderer is a little amateurish but other special effects and the fight scenes particularly are very well done. Especially touching is the scene between Beckett and his father. What intrigued me most was Beckett's ongoing murder spree which was conducted without the expected descent into madness or raving looney tunes. He remained the same calculated, in control character throughout, who if you passed him in the street you would have thought nothing of. No rolling eyes giving the insanity away or the dishevelled appearance crying out for the men in white coats to pick him up. Abell plays it straight and it works.
Overall I really enjoyed the film and would recommend it.
Some of the make up used to disguise the murderer is a little amateurish but other special effects and the fight scenes particularly are very well done. Especially touching is the scene between Beckett and his father. What intrigued me most was Beckett's ongoing murder spree which was conducted without the expected descent into madness or raving looney tunes. He remained the same calculated, in control character throughout, who if you passed him in the street you would have thought nothing of. No rolling eyes giving the insanity away or the dishevelled appearance crying out for the men in white coats to pick him up. Abell plays it straight and it works.
Overall I really enjoyed the film and would recommend it.
A lot of action
viwa200129 November 2001
A woman hires an ex-mercenary to train her in the art of deadly combat and defense in order to protect herself from her serialkiller husband.
Tess Beckett i splaying a great role in this nice action, thriller movie. Worth watching!!!!
Tess Beckett i splaying a great role in this nice action, thriller movie. Worth watching!!!!
Same old Stuff......
d-gilbert9 April 2003
I watched the movie thinking, hmmm Mark Dacoscos, I liked him in Drive from 1996, so maybe this wont be bad, WRONG!!!!! This movie is a 100% "B" movie, and a B- at that.. I seen everything coming an hour before it occured; this story has been done to death a millions times. Every actor has a stinker now & then, this is Dacoscos stinker!!! I give it a 2.1 out of 10, pretty bad!
Painfully disappointing!!
supertom-31 May 2003
The problem with Instinct to Kill is that the basic premise, about an abusive and also murderous jilted ex-husband, is so old it is unbelievable, and the major problem with the producers doing this film is that they have done it badly.
Where this film differs from the likes of Sleeping With the Enemy, and the countless other theatrical and made for TV movies, is that this takes the action approach. It tries to take this idea that would work best with a TV stalwart as the leading lady, someone like Connie Sellecca who starred in a similar, and superior, but not that great film, called Deadly Affair. This now revolves around the abused wife getting training in self-defence and weapon handling from Martial Arts star Mark Dacascos.
For any Dacascos fan thinking that this, coming out post Brotherhood of the Wolf, is going to be good, with a good budget, and probably narrowly skipping theatrical release. Well, they would be wrong, it is not good. This was shot before the release of Brotherhood and his subsequent and much deserved catapult to bigger heights. Had Christophe Gan's not given him the part of Mani then he would probably still be doing movies like this, thankfully though he is on to brighter pastures for the time being.
The film opens with a brief and inanely edited piece of history, from the moment that Tess met her husband, Beckett, played well by Tim Abell, and shows us in a brief 5 minute history the stages of their relationship, from the ridiculously happy wedding, to the immediate next section 6 months, or so, later when he turns violent. It shows right up until she discovers that he had murdered 9 women. This is all done very hurriedly and as a simple way to get the history, and plot, out the way early on. Beckett is locked away in an Insane asylum, but of course escapes. He also happens to escape ridiculously easily, but in fairness the character points this out and gives the guard a good beating because of his ineptitude and having obviously not listened in his training classes.
Anyway the film plods along with little idea how to coherently move from A to B through good storytelling, and by placing the odd random decent moment every now and again, for instance we get some insight into why Beckett treats women the way he does, in a scene where he visits his father. Now this scene was good, actually fairly well handled, but we have no hints to it before and after. You need to hint at what his motives are before revealing, not just have it come out of the blue in one scene. Having seen a film like this so many times though, I kind of guessed from minute one that it probably stemmed from an abusive mother, it's the classic criminal motive in these sorts of movies (damn that Sigmund Freud for spawning this mother stuff in so many movies).
What they did well was the scenes when Beckett is violent towards his wife and other women, albeit one coming after an obligatory, but welcome (for some entertainment) sex scene. Abell plays the character well, he doesn't over do it, which is good for this sort of thing. The scenes of his violence towards women are very well done, they don't hold back, as a bigger studio film may have, and they get a sense of realism while successfully pitting the audience well and truly on the side of Tess and against Beckett. Abell's performance is decent, and he gets the best scenes. I definitely give credit there.
The rest of the cast are okay. Dacasco's is playing a tough guy, with a softer side, and he gets one good scene when he talks about how his wife got killed. Being a personal trainer, in self-defence, he of course is introduced to the protagonist in a bar room brawl. As a fan of Dacasco's he don't like to see him trying to play a tough man, all scowls and booming voice, because he can't. That's not him at his best. He's best as the calm and enigmatic hero, like Mani was. Mani wasn't trying to do the Arnie styled posturing and growl. Dacasco's is too much of a poster boy and lacks the bellow in his voice to do it. He needs to be action men who know they can whip someone but don't give it away, they'll show it off buy actually beating some anonymous henchman to the ground. Few guys of his size can look really tough and give off a `don't mess with me vibe', Jet Li can, he has an amazingly intense and stoney faced glare. I think Dacasco's speciality lies in playing not your typical action man, he's too good an actor, as far as action men go, to be wasted like that and it just makes him look bad. Missy Crider is okay, she's very pretty and not too bad an actress, she certainly does well, especially in the more harrowing scenes. Also Kadeem Hardison is here but he is horribly miss-cast in too straight a role. Many comical actors can't really act, so they should stick mainly to funny roles, Kadeem is such as case. I was waiting for him to do something funny but he didn't. They tried to have him do the action man scowls and bellows but he to cannot do it. It's like when they cast Dacascos and Hardison they took no note of their specialities.
The direction is bad. The best scenes work because of writing and performance. The saving grace of this film should have been the fight scenes, but they are horribly captured. The director has absolutely no talent or appreciation for making movies. He seems to have no clue how to film his scenes. The fights are fairly well choreographed but at times are difficult to make out because Stevie Wonder was doing such a stand up job behind the camera.
Another laughable point is a lot of the inane moments and stupid dialogue that the actors have to spout. It ranges from good in Beckett's violence scenes to really bad in others. When Dacascos is teaching Tess about self-defence and talks to her about using `anything around you' as a weapon, he also mentions a newspaper (yeah right, give the assailant a paper cut!) there are a lot of similarly inane bits of dialogue. Also Becketts disguises, while some are good, some are merely a stick on moustache and a prosthetic nose. He uses this to get information from people that Tess knew, and that he also knew, people who know his face because they attended his weddings and no doubt a few Sunday lunches while the marriage was still hunky dory. They do not recognise him at all! Until of course he simply removes his moustache and then all of a sudden they looked shocked and say `Jim, its you'. Now I know this film isn't the only one guilty of this, it's a piece of classic cinema cliché, Superman being a classic example, whereby Superman's disguise consists of a pair of glasses, a slight alteration in hair style and a more slouched posture, and the world is fooled. This film however makes it far more laughable, particularly because of the stupid reactions the other characters have.
Overall this is a film that must have given off bad vibes to fans of any of the cast, having been a low budget TV-movie that has been delayed for two years, a delayed TV movie! Oh my god! Enough said. This is all nonsense but it does have its moments and some genuinely harrowing scenes, in amongst the drivel. **
Where this film differs from the likes of Sleeping With the Enemy, and the countless other theatrical and made for TV movies, is that this takes the action approach. It tries to take this idea that would work best with a TV stalwart as the leading lady, someone like Connie Sellecca who starred in a similar, and superior, but not that great film, called Deadly Affair. This now revolves around the abused wife getting training in self-defence and weapon handling from Martial Arts star Mark Dacascos.
For any Dacascos fan thinking that this, coming out post Brotherhood of the Wolf, is going to be good, with a good budget, and probably narrowly skipping theatrical release. Well, they would be wrong, it is not good. This was shot before the release of Brotherhood and his subsequent and much deserved catapult to bigger heights. Had Christophe Gan's not given him the part of Mani then he would probably still be doing movies like this, thankfully though he is on to brighter pastures for the time being.
The film opens with a brief and inanely edited piece of history, from the moment that Tess met her husband, Beckett, played well by Tim Abell, and shows us in a brief 5 minute history the stages of their relationship, from the ridiculously happy wedding, to the immediate next section 6 months, or so, later when he turns violent. It shows right up until she discovers that he had murdered 9 women. This is all done very hurriedly and as a simple way to get the history, and plot, out the way early on. Beckett is locked away in an Insane asylum, but of course escapes. He also happens to escape ridiculously easily, but in fairness the character points this out and gives the guard a good beating because of his ineptitude and having obviously not listened in his training classes.
Anyway the film plods along with little idea how to coherently move from A to B through good storytelling, and by placing the odd random decent moment every now and again, for instance we get some insight into why Beckett treats women the way he does, in a scene where he visits his father. Now this scene was good, actually fairly well handled, but we have no hints to it before and after. You need to hint at what his motives are before revealing, not just have it come out of the blue in one scene. Having seen a film like this so many times though, I kind of guessed from minute one that it probably stemmed from an abusive mother, it's the classic criminal motive in these sorts of movies (damn that Sigmund Freud for spawning this mother stuff in so many movies).
What they did well was the scenes when Beckett is violent towards his wife and other women, albeit one coming after an obligatory, but welcome (for some entertainment) sex scene. Abell plays the character well, he doesn't over do it, which is good for this sort of thing. The scenes of his violence towards women are very well done, they don't hold back, as a bigger studio film may have, and they get a sense of realism while successfully pitting the audience well and truly on the side of Tess and against Beckett. Abell's performance is decent, and he gets the best scenes. I definitely give credit there.
The rest of the cast are okay. Dacasco's is playing a tough guy, with a softer side, and he gets one good scene when he talks about how his wife got killed. Being a personal trainer, in self-defence, he of course is introduced to the protagonist in a bar room brawl. As a fan of Dacasco's he don't like to see him trying to play a tough man, all scowls and booming voice, because he can't. That's not him at his best. He's best as the calm and enigmatic hero, like Mani was. Mani wasn't trying to do the Arnie styled posturing and growl. Dacasco's is too much of a poster boy and lacks the bellow in his voice to do it. He needs to be action men who know they can whip someone but don't give it away, they'll show it off buy actually beating some anonymous henchman to the ground. Few guys of his size can look really tough and give off a `don't mess with me vibe', Jet Li can, he has an amazingly intense and stoney faced glare. I think Dacasco's speciality lies in playing not your typical action man, he's too good an actor, as far as action men go, to be wasted like that and it just makes him look bad. Missy Crider is okay, she's very pretty and not too bad an actress, she certainly does well, especially in the more harrowing scenes. Also Kadeem Hardison is here but he is horribly miss-cast in too straight a role. Many comical actors can't really act, so they should stick mainly to funny roles, Kadeem is such as case. I was waiting for him to do something funny but he didn't. They tried to have him do the action man scowls and bellows but he to cannot do it. It's like when they cast Dacascos and Hardison they took no note of their specialities.
The direction is bad. The best scenes work because of writing and performance. The saving grace of this film should have been the fight scenes, but they are horribly captured. The director has absolutely no talent or appreciation for making movies. He seems to have no clue how to film his scenes. The fights are fairly well choreographed but at times are difficult to make out because Stevie Wonder was doing such a stand up job behind the camera.
Another laughable point is a lot of the inane moments and stupid dialogue that the actors have to spout. It ranges from good in Beckett's violence scenes to really bad in others. When Dacascos is teaching Tess about self-defence and talks to her about using `anything around you' as a weapon, he also mentions a newspaper (yeah right, give the assailant a paper cut!) there are a lot of similarly inane bits of dialogue. Also Becketts disguises, while some are good, some are merely a stick on moustache and a prosthetic nose. He uses this to get information from people that Tess knew, and that he also knew, people who know his face because they attended his weddings and no doubt a few Sunday lunches while the marriage was still hunky dory. They do not recognise him at all! Until of course he simply removes his moustache and then all of a sudden they looked shocked and say `Jim, its you'. Now I know this film isn't the only one guilty of this, it's a piece of classic cinema cliché, Superman being a classic example, whereby Superman's disguise consists of a pair of glasses, a slight alteration in hair style and a more slouched posture, and the world is fooled. This film however makes it far more laughable, particularly because of the stupid reactions the other characters have.
Overall this is a film that must have given off bad vibes to fans of any of the cast, having been a low budget TV-movie that has been delayed for two years, a delayed TV movie! Oh my god! Enough said. This is all nonsense but it does have its moments and some genuinely harrowing scenes, in amongst the drivel. **
Disappointing
someinfo6 April 2003
WANTED: Mercenary. REQUIREMENTS: (1) Must be able to hit his targets with a handgun, or at least come close to them. (2) Must be able to maintain emotional distance with his clients, or at least be able to control them to the point that the clients do not become a liability.
Too bad. I've always liked Mark Dacascos. This film just did not do it for me. It has a lot of good merits but certain obvious things were enough to turn me off to it. I expected more from the police detective. The lack of graphic violence is good, since the story involves lots of violence. I could see the ending coming too easily.
Too bad. I've always liked Mark Dacascos. This film just did not do it for me. It has a lot of good merits but certain obvious things were enough to turn me off to it. I expected more from the police detective. The lack of graphic violence is good, since the story involves lots of violence. I could see the ending coming too easily.
Well done adaptation of a good novel!!
coxsteffen28 May 2022
Instinct to kill is based on the novel"The Perfect Husband" by Lisa Gardner. The only problem I had was the premise that Tim Abell could actually take on Mark Dacsacos in a hand to hand fight. No way!! Otherwise a very good movie!!
CRAP!
MSTracy14 March 2004
This movie is the PREDICTABLE Hollywood CRAP where the BAD GUY gets away with murder SO MANY times due to the inability of the GOOD GUYS to fire their weapon with even BASIC MARKSMANSHIP SKILLS!!!
This movie was SO frustrating that I "fast forwarded" through the BS after the first FIVE times the BAD GUY "successfully" dodged a hail of pistol fire being fired at him FROM JUST ACROSS THE ROOM!
The ONLY redeeming scene was where the BAD GUYS WIFE NAIL him with ONE SHOT in the end!
I would have LOVED to have the Director in my living room so I could "Bitch slap" this idiot every time he wasted my time with "unrealistic" scenes!
This movie was SO frustrating that I "fast forwarded" through the BS after the first FIVE times the BAD GUY "successfully" dodged a hail of pistol fire being fired at him FROM JUST ACROSS THE ROOM!
The ONLY redeeming scene was where the BAD GUYS WIFE NAIL him with ONE SHOT in the end!
I would have LOVED to have the Director in my living room so I could "Bitch slap" this idiot every time he wasted my time with "unrealistic" scenes!
Great
craigstinchcombe41011 August 2020
The filmmakers' instinct should have been to kill this project!
Wizard-820 April 2013
Where to start with this movie? How about with the DVD packaging. The back of the box claims the movie is from the director of "Commando" and "Firestarter". Well, that's technically true, but the individual in question (Mark L. Lester) just PRODUCED this movie, not actually directing it. The packaging also puts Mark Dacasco up front and center with a gun, suggesting (along with the title) that this movie is filled with action. While there are some action sequences, there aren't as many as you'd think. The story actually concerns Dacasco helping a woman fend off her psychotic ex-husband, and Dacasco's character isn't as prominent in the movie as you may imagine. But there are a lot more problems than the ones I just described. This is a really low budget movie, which results in shoddy cinematography, sometimes poorly recorded audio, and some real cheesy production values. But even a higher budget would have still resulted in a screenplay which has some really laughable plot turns and actions by the characters. If there had been some more, I might have recommended this movie as an unintentional comedy, but as it is, kill any thought of watching it. By the way, if you are thinking of renting the movie because it reunites the two stars of the cult hit "Drive", know that Kadeem Hardison doesn't have that much screen time and only shares two brief scenes with Dacascos.
Exiting thriller, good acting!
archivision5 April 2002
The work of director Graef-Marino enhances the quality of this very entertaining genre picture. Working from an above the average screenplay, the director's work is unpretentious, often right on and always focused on the right emotions of the scene. ITK is a small film, but at the same time a very suspenseful thriller full of twists and surprises. Mark Dacascos has never been better - hey, this guy can really act!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
