Kill Me Again (1989) User Reviews

Thoroughly Entertaining

[sankhan99 · 7/10 · 28 September 2013]

As the fan of modern noirs which are often called Neo-Noirs I must say John Dahl knows how to make one. He is master of this genre. Good thing about him is that he focuses more on making movie entertaining rather than other aspects. Title in review is one of the example but IMDb users again have not done justice with another Neo-noir and rated it very low as usual.

Movie is a wholesome entertainment. Look and feel of the movie is fantastically dark. Putting the highway in the movie even made it best. Characters are well constructed and they all mean business and also are desperate. Some great twists and turns but if you see lot of suspense thrillers then probably you will guess them beforehand. But still that doesn't mean you will not enjoy the movie. This is sort of movie which will glue to your seat for whole time. Pace of movie is good and you will Not find a single boring moment in it.

I strongly recommend this movie to neo-noir lovers and also highway thriller lovers will equally enjoy it. So watch it.

Laid back film noir

[preppy-3 · 7/10 · 10 May 2008]

Two crooks (Joanne Whalley-Kilmer and Michael Madsen) kill a man and steal a briefcase full of money. Then Whalley-Kilmer knocks Madsen out and runs off to Las Vegas with all of it. When there she hires a private investigator (Val Kilmer) to fake her death to get Madsen off her trail. Naturally everything goes wrong.

Laid back film noir. It's well done with an intricate plot and plenty of double crosses. It's beautifully shot too. Still I wasn't too crazy about it. The movie is just TOO laid back. Everything unfolds in such a quiet easy-going way that it lacks the tension that a really good noir gives you. It's not the fault of the cast. Kilmer is good and his then wife Whalley-Kilmer is excellent but the direction and editing is done in such a leisurely fashion that it mutes their acting. Even the violence is done in a casual laid-back way! It's not a total disaster and is worth catching but I couldn't stop thinking of how really good this could have been. A 7.

Despite the Flaws, a Great Neo-Noir

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 29 May 2015]

The psychopath Vince Miller (Michael Madsen) and his girlfriend Fay Forrester (Joanne Whalley-Kilmer) kill a mobster and rob his wallet with a large amount. Then Fay double-crosses the abusive Vince and flees with the money to Reno. She hires the needy private investigator Jack Andrews (Val Kilmer), who grieves the death of his wife and owes ten thousand-dollars to loan sharks, to simulate her death telling that she wants to start a new life without her boyfriend. He accepts the offer and produces her fake death. However she betrays Andrews and escapes to Las Vegas without paying the rest of the money, leaving him as the prime suspect of her death for the police. Andrews finds Fay in Las Vegas and they have a love affair. Meanwhile the police, the mobsters and Vince hunt them down.

Despite the flaws, "Kill Me Again" is a great neo-noir film with a sordid story. Michael Madsen is perfect in the role of a psychopath scum as well Val Kilmer in the role of a smalltime private investigator. Joanne Whalley does not have the profile of femme fatale but has a good performance. However, the plot point with Fay teaming up with Vince against Andrews after letting him hide the money is flawed. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Mate-me Outra Vez" ("Kill Me Again")

'80s Noir For Audience Which Likes A Mean Edge

[ccthemovieman-1 · 6/10 · 11 March 2006]

Unlike the title, once turned out to be just right. I should have stopped at one viewing, which I really liked. For some reason, a second look five years later wasn't nearly the fun. All of sudden, the characters just were too hard-edged with a sadistic killer and lead female that were not fun to watch. Maybe I'm just mellowing and these type of low-lifes just don't appeal to me anymore, at least when comprise two- thirds of the main characters.

So, if you like nasty characters with a big mean streak in them, ones that have no ethics whatsoever and are proud of it, then'll you like this modern-day film noir very much. Val Kilmer, Joanne Whalley-Kilmer and Michael Madsen are not three people you want as friends, particularly the last two.

The story has a few twists - big twists - near the end, although I suppose if you thought about it long enough you'd discover some credibility problems with it. Nonetheless, you have to give this film decent points for one thing: it entertains you for the full 95 minutes.

Once was not Enough?

[sol1218 · 7/10 · 5 September 2005]

A 1989 version of a 1940's like Film Noir crime/suspense movie set in the wide open spaces of the Navada and Arizona desert and American Indian Reservations.

Ripping off the mob of $850,000.00 outside of Winnemucca NV. as well as killing one of it's top honchos the two desperado's Vince and his girlfriend Fay, Michael Madsen & Joanne Whailey,take off for parts unknown to wait out the storm of the mob and state police all points search for them. Stopping off at a rest stop Vince is smashed in the head by Fay, as he was answering natures call, who took off with his car and the mob's cash for Reno.

The move "Kill Me Again" then switches to this local Reno Private Investagter Jack Andrews, Val Kilmer, who gets his right pinkie broken by two goons for being late on his loan of $10,000.00 that the mob advanced him. Jack is told by the mobsters that if he doesn't have the money by Wendsday they themselves will donate it to him for his funeral. Not knowing what to do and with no way to come up with the cash Jack get's his prayers answered when the next day. Fay walks into his shabby and smashed-up office with a proposition that may very well save his life.

Fay is willing to pay Jack $10,000.00 to forge documents to make it look like she's officially dead so her boyfriend Vince won't find her. But their's one small thing that the two didn't figure on. The $10,000.00 that Fay's to pay Jack for his services belongs to the Navada Maranot Mob who Fay and Vince riped off. Added to all that the Mob that got ripped off by Fay & Vince is who the loan sharks, who are about to do Jack in, work for!

Val Kilmer even though he has the leading role as Robert Andrews is very unconvincing as the hard boiled and down and out PI. Kilmer is far too pretty and good looking to play the part that a Humphrey Bogart and Robert Mitchum portrayed in the 1940's and 50's. Michael Madsen is near perfect as the psychopathic and sadistic Vince Miller who chillingly toys with his victims, like a cat playing with a mouse, before he brutally does them it.

Joanne Whailey is also near perfect as the femme fatal who manipulates those who fall under her spell, like Vince & Jack, and uses them for her own selfish and greedy needs. The ending of "Kill Me Again" is so predictable that it hits you with a strong dose of deja vu; you more then expected something like that to happen. With those in the film, Jack Vince & Fay, reminding you of many like wise type characters you've seen in film noir movies over the years.

Okay Neo-Noir

[dougdoepke · 13 March 2015]

40's style noir played against sunny Nevada desert and vicious gambling dens. Val Kilmer is too boyish to bring off the classic role of private eye, but at least he doesn't try to act tough while being slapped around or thrown like a rag doll over a series of chairs and tables. In fact his Jack Andrews gets pushed around by almost everyone in what amounts to one of the most feckless of all movie private eyes. His every move seems to either flop or backfire. He's seldom in charge of any encounter, and in that important regard, the movie stands as a genuine oddity to the genre. Joanne Whalley-Kilmer, looking like a trampy Natalie Wood, is reasonably convincing as the femme fatale, squealing delightedly whenever she's roughed up. Then there's villainous Michael Madsen, looking like Elvis's spooky older brother, who steals the show with a series of scary outbursts that are totally convincing. Despite the oddities, there're enough twists and turns to keep viewers guessing. And while Kill Me Again is no classic of noir filmmaking, it does stand as a reasonably successful low-budget entry.

Doublecrossing dame deals double dose of danger & death

[helpless_dancer · 7/10 · 17 January 2002]

Cool mystery set in the magical 4 corners area of the U.S. Why do these fools who come up with a big wad of cash always have to be stupid and draw attention to themselves by becoming a high roller? Because, like this woman, they are born to lose: running with psychos and stealing from rough trade is not wise. Good film, not just another noisy shoot-em-up or unrealistic private eye flicker.

Generally enjoyable.

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 20 June 2012]

Co-writer and director John Dahl updates the film noir genre for the late 1980s with this entertaining, if fairly standard plot wise, bit of crime fiction. He would also show with subsequent efforts such as "Red Rock West" and "Joy Ride" his ability to capture on film the beauty and desolation of various rural locations. The movie is certainly well cast: Val Kilmer plays Jack Andrews, a Reno private eye who's *really* fallen on hard times. He owes the mob a fair chunk of change, and what at first appears to be his salvation arrives in the form of super sexy Fay Forrester (Joanne Whalley, married to Kilmer at the time), who we already know is a bad, bad girl having seen her double cross her partner in crime, Vince Miller (Michael Madsen, in full blown psycho / thug mode). Fay's idea is that to avoid Vince, she'll hire Jack to fake her death. As one can imagine, things go more and more wrong for Jack, a definite patsy who is drawn to this femme fatale even when all common sense is telling him to stay away. There are no real surprises here, but then Dahl isn't actually out to reinvent the wheel, just put a modern - sometimes comic - spin on a classic and well regarded genre, with archetypal roles, a serious tone, and occasional bursts of violence. The movie is good fun for any fan of film noir, sort of taking its time at first but picking up in intensity as it goes along. Good supporting performances by Jon Gries, as Jack's loyal friend, Michael Greene, as a surly police detective, and Bibi Besch (too briefly seen), as Jack's secretary, are all assets, but the biggest thrill comes from watching the sultry Whalley sizzle and scam her way through the story. As femme fatales go, she's a very watchable one. The movie's not particularly memorable, but is still fine viewing while it lasts. Seven out of 10.

The first of John Dahl's neo-noir forrays.

[hitchcockthelegend · 6/10 · 16 March 2019]

Kill Me Again is directed by John Dahl and Dahl co-writes the screenplay with David W. Warfield. It stars Val Kilmer, Joanne Whalley, Michael Madsen, Pat Mulligan and Nick Dimitri. Music is by William Olvis and cinematography by Jacques Steyn.

Detective Jack Andrews (Kilmer) becomes involved with a beautiful woman on the run from the mob and her psychopath boyfriend.

John Dahl loves film noir, we know that now after all these years. He would direct the superb Red Rock West and The Last Seduction, two bona fide greats from the neo-noir splinter of film making. Kill Me Again (classic film noir title right there) is his fist directorial feature film venture, it is like a lot of debuts from directors who have a kink for a certain genre or style of film making, in that it only hints at better things to come.

Unfortunately, in spite of being solid enough within the noir parameters, it's all a bit too derivative for its own good. Standard noir tropes are adhered to, male protag led into the murk by a femme fatale, a bruising psycho, some twists and turns, and some stylistics via camera and photographic lenses. Plot relies on the salty machinations of Whalley's femme for its intrigue, and for the most part her character is the dominating factor, but later on the film sort of bypasses her character and it begins to sag as Kilmer's weary P.I. plods onwards.

Fans of the actors do have interest value (though Kilmer is a little miscast and a world away from great neo-noir films he would later do; Heat, The Salton Sea, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang). Really the performances are neither good or bad - though Madsen holds court every scene he is in - and although the screenplay and script are merely serviceable as pot boilers, there's just enough to keep you watching till the culmination of proceedings.

Fans of noir can grab enough from the pic to warrant time investment, but it doesn't linger long afterwards. While casual film fans are warned to use this only as a time filling exercise. 6/10

Journeyman Hollywood noir crime flick

[=G= · 6/10 · 15 July 2001]

"Kill Me Again" is a lukewarm noir drama which tells a very mediocre, convoluted, and unlikely story about a babe (Whalley) who rips off her boyfriend (Madsen) for stolen mob money and then hires a private eye (Kilmer) to fake her death. Madsen is the only well cast character in this watchable but ordinary flick.

Fatal Femme

[rmax304823 · 5/10 · 21 August 2005]

Joanne Whaley is a deceitful slut in this complicated neonoir thriller, and Val Kilmer is the private eye she manages to suck into her scheme to steal money from Michael Madsen who has just stolen it from the Mafia. There are multiple murders along the way. In the end everybody gets dead except for Kilmer who makes off with the entire stash. I don't know why the plot let him get away, because he's done all kinds of illegal stuff and proved himself as untrustworthy as anyone else. But the narrative has established him as just about the only sympathetic character in the movie -- his wife recently died in a drowning, for instance.

The natural locations around Lake Mead are splayed out across the screen in gorgeous color. You really want to dive into the electric blue of that man-made lake. Urban settings are less well realized.

The story line is involved and not very plausible. This babe, Whaley, conks Michael Madsen over the head with a rock while he's at the urinal, which is among other things very bad manners. What's she doing in the men's room anyway? What kind of a movie IS this? After Whaley and Kilmer have been together for a while, Madsen finally catches up to them, threatens and beats Kilmer, and rapes Whaley who manages to find a gun and appears to shoot Madsen multiorgasmically. But no! Madsen shows up for the climax of the film and he and Whaley fall into each other's arms and laugh. I guess he's forgotten about getting bashed in the urinal. And I guess he's still alive because Kilmer didn't bother to check and see if Whaley had REALLY shot him after being raped. Are you following this? Good, because I couldn't. Oh -- and I also must have missed the part in which Kilmer gets to take the money out of the attache case and fill the case with junk, including a can of Spam. In fact -- well, okay, I admit it. I lost track of the money per se once or twice during the film. I'm also not certain why we are left to assume that, at the end, Kilmer can be presumed to be safe from both the Mafia and the police. I'm sure there's some reason because I am a mechanical determinist.

Performances. Whaley is suitably sluttish and very yummy. She looks a little and acts a lot like Natalie Wood and is about the same size. I rather liked her appearance -- that saucy ever-jiggling bosom, those big dark eyes looking outward in two slightly different directions.

Whatever "charisma" means, Val Kilmer hasn't got it here. He recites his lines as if reading them from a cue card on an afternoon drama. There is no animation in his delivery or his movement. He seems bored by having to speak. And he has prissy good looks that are repugnant. But, man, did he come awake for some roles in later movies, doing for instance a splendid job in "Heat." But here he seems to be playing his instrument with a mute.

Poor Michael Madsen, a nice guy in real life apparently. But if you've seen "Reservoir Dogs," you know what he's like here, slavering over the prospect of torturing bound prisoners with lighted cigarettes, automatics, a hunting knife, a baseball bat. Sometimes he switches from one application to another in the middle of a schtick.

I was kind of in the mood for it and was pretty much disappointed by it, but I can see why someone in a less demanding mood might enjoy it. It doesn't really seem to deserve much applause.

Great Entertainment For Film Noir Fans

[seymourblack-1 · 8/10 · 19 December 2010]

"Kill Me Again" is a highly enjoyable action packed neo-noir thriller featuring a group of characters who are all thoroughly untrustworthy and a plot that's full of twists, double crosses and deception. This was the first movie directed by the talented John Dahl (who later made the brilliant "Red Rock West") and possibly it's for this reason that it didn't gain the box office success that it clearly merited.

After Fay Forrester (Joanne Whalley-Kilmer) and Vince Miller (Michael Madsen) steal a large sum of money from a couple of mobsters, Fay takes an opportunity to hit Vince over the head with a stone and leaves him unconscious when she makes off with all the cash. Vince is a psychopathic killer and Fay is justifiably terrified of what'll happen if he catches up with her. She makes her way to Reno and there hires private investigator Jack Andrews (Val Kilmer) to help her fake her own death.

Jack's life has been in turmoil since the car accident in which his wife was killed and he's also deeply in debt to a violent gang of criminals who broke one of his fingers to show that they meant business when they said that they wanted his loan repayments made on time. Jack has serious doubts about taking the job but decides to go ahead anyway because of his desperate financial problems.

Jack makes a good job of faking Fay's death and even becomes the murder suspect but Fay then disappears before paying him his full fee. He decides to go after her but when Vince discovers that's she's still alive, things get desperately dangerous for Jack and he finds himself being pursued simultaneously by Vince, the police and the criminals.

Joanne Whalley-Kilmer puts great energy and enthusiasm into her portrayal of the treacherous and seductive femme fatale and Val Kilmer successfully conveys the aimless and apathetic state of mind which has overtaken Jack since the tragic loss of his wife. Michael Madsen steals the show, however, as the incredibly brutal and seemingly unstoppable Vince.

No-one would describe "Kill Me Again" as ground breaking but it is extremely exciting and wonderful entertainment for anyone who loves film noir.

Certainly not great, but watchable..

[blkhwk41 · 7/10 · 4 October 2015]

This was certainly not a great movie or wonderful acting, but not terrible. It was entertaining, especially to me, living in Reno where some of it was filmed. Part of the crew and actors were in Reno for about 2 days. Val Kilmer was a trip along with some of the bit players. At the time I was running Security on the night shift at the Sands Hotel/Casino which owned the motel - the Rancho Sierra, on 4th Street opposite one of our towers. RPD was hired to do traffic control for a few hours on one day and Sands Security was responsible for the parking and staging of much of the time the crew was on site. Some of them did some 'partying' at a couple of our bars which provided us with interesting scenarios several times. They were given some latitude and responded fairly well. Again, not a great movie, but I gave it a 7 because it was, subjectively, watchable and due to the location.

I have wished for years that IMDb would give 1/2s instead of just the 1-10, but it has not materialized...

Sloppy noir. (spoliers)

[vertigo_14 · 2/10 · 17 December 2005]

This may've started out to be a decent, if not routine desert noir which slightly models Billy Wilder's cool noir classic, Double Indemnity. Writer/Director John Dahl had already proved that even a simple noir can be quite good (see Red Rock West). A con woman (Joanne Kilmer) and her sadistic boyfriend (Michael Madsen in his standard fare) get their hands on a fairly hefty loot of $75 grand. But, along the way, the woman decides she's heading to Vegas without him, and has a plan to separate the boyfriend from his share of the money.

Conveniently, a private detective (played by Val Kilmer in almost a mockery of 1930s pulp fiction) in Reno, the city in which the con woman winds up, is in dire need of a quick and easy $10 grand, which he in turn owes a bookie. As the protagonist of a noir drama, he is the usual once-innocent character who is tempted with greed and lust before redeeming himself morally (or at least as much as the viewer's sympathies will allow). The con woman shows up at his door and offers him just that, $10 grand immediately to fake her death. It doesn't look as though he buys the story about her abusive boyfriend, but of course, tainted with such foolishness, he acquiesces and falls in love with her, leaving himself open for the usual noir double- and tripple-cross among greedy characters.

A simple noir with all its convenient connections, however, soon becomes too convoluted to take it seriously. Once you're to the point of the story where they're trying to fake her death, you might wonder how any of it would work, considering the plan they have is pretty ridiculous and lacks good attention to both detail and logic, even for a fictional film. Things just seem to happen so easily, and when you see the way they fake her death (along with the subsequent events) and are later supposed to believe that nearly every cop in Reno is looking for the private eye and the con woman, you wonder...what the hell kind of cops are these that this scheme worked in the first place? At this point, everything that follows just becomes too incredulous considering the events. Suddenly, despite all the conveniences that arise in the story, what started as a decent noir quickly falters.

If it is desert film noir or Sin City film noir you are looking for, you're probably better off sticking with Dahl's 'Red Rock West'; it may be routine and the story a series of conveniences, but at least it pays better attention to the detail to make it all work.

I loved the Title, Not The Movie !

[elshikh4 · 1 December 2007]

Actually, I sat to watch an indie kind of movie, because I respect that kind as the effective reaction to the extreme big movies of Hollywood, or as the true reaction against its pure nonsense sometimes. But, unfortunately, the result was something as pure as the same old nonsense!

OH MY GOD, it's the seventh hundred undeclared remake of the film noir classic (Double Indemnity - 1944). So why?, just why?!!

I would give you a list of more and more movies, made before Kill Me Again and after it, which did the same, and remade that immortal movie. And the thing is not the idea of the remake itself, despite the numerous number, inasmuch as its QUAITY. THE QUAITY, YOU PEOPLE!

Despite the Double Indemnity matter, I followed it anyway to watch the efficacy of that new "double". Though, I've witnessed the destroying of that desire. Because they treated the story so tritely, making it highly predictable with nothing to entertain. It didn't achieve a grade but being customary, and didn't make anything smarter than the 699 other remakes that we've watched before. So for one who grew up watching too many American movies & TV shows with too many twists, it was so easy to find out early about the couple of surprises at the end, because simply I've learned from the best, but obviously the makers of this.. didn't!

As for the acting, I began to think that every single movie has the name of (Val Kilmer) on it should mean a total disaster. And while (Joanne Whalley) gave good performance, she wasn't any close to be convincing as the femme fatale.

Yes, there are very strong music and creative cinematography, but I loved the title very much. It's smart, unlike this movie!

Can some men be anymore stupid ?.

[moviestar26 · 7/10 · 17 June 2010]

Prior to 'Red rock west', John Dahl made 'Kill me again'. This movie was his first attempt at the noir genre. In fact this seemed to be the template for 'The last seduction' as the theme is very similar. His inspiration is clearly evident in the plot itself. There is a feeling of 50s noir cinema in the movie. Every element from the detective to the cheating femme fa tale is present. Dahl writes and directs his own movies. He is obviously talented in the in the writing field, so this is what he should have continued doing. However in terms of direction the certain edge is lacking. As it became frequent to direct in television style, maybe his movie making career did not sustain. Though many scenes have clever camera angles and close up shots that enhance intrigue factor and suspense. But this becomes irrelevant as the movie progresses with a interesting moment to a next.

As I stated the movie contains all the ingredients of the typical noir movie. The disloyal characters, double crosses and money are at the core of the plot. John Dahl has incorporated all these elements intelligently. Everybody who is a fan of noir cinema will immediately find this theme very familiar. It has been a routine concept in the 50s. The deceiving woman requiring assistance from the innocent man, however is later betrayed is noticeable territory. For many this movie will bring back memories of 'Body Heat' and 'Double Indemnity' to mind instantly. The plot is highly similar. The main character is the female character. Everything that happens revolves around her. Therefore this does not complicate the movie at any level. Those searching for a simple and short movie will be happy with this feature. One element which is devoid however is adultery. The theme is not existent at any point. But this does not mean that there would be no scope for intimate scenes.

SPOILERS AHEAD The plot begins with the conning pair of Madsen and Whalley Kilmer who steal $875000 from the mob in the Nevada state. However Whalley Kilmer does not intended to keep acquaintance with Madsen for much longer and leaves for Vegas after leaving him unconscious in a restroom. She is aware that he will attempt to trace her down for the money so she has a plan. We are then introduced to Jack (Val Kilmer) who is a private detective who happens to be in dept to some bad guys and has a troubled past. Whalley Kilmer approaches him with a faking a death plan. He agrees in return for a good payment. They set the scenario up at a motel room. Upon leaving the scene Whalley Kilmer intentionally leaves a piece of paper with Jacks name on it. Later he is questioned by the authorities and given a cautionary warning. Meanwhile Madsen notices news of Whalley Kilmer's murder in the press and goes to Jacks office to find a lead. Jake later discovers that Whalley Kilmer has left him and headed to Reno. He locates her though the mob too are searching for the stolen cash and notice it at a casino. The pair hitch up again and flee from the hotel room after killing some of the mob's men. Madsen is hot on their tails after Jake's friend gives information on Jacks whereabouts. Who gets possession of the money forms most of the part of the climax. END OF SPOILERS

The unique point of the movie is obviously the plot. Dahl has written the script with maturity. It is totally flawless. However to this date I have never seen a movie with not one but two men attempting to hitching back on to a woman after being betrayed. This was one element in the movie that I was scratching my head over. Many moments in the movie seemed like a Jim Thompson novel. But what sets this movie apart the the typical noir ending is that the innocent man escapes. The movie contains many double crosses. This is actually the highlight of the plot and will raise eyebrows constantly. Secondly Micheal Madsen's performance. Unfortunately he does not get much scope. But when he appears on screen he steals the scene. Every scene is integral to the movie and there are no side tracks. Plot wise the movie is very reminiscent of 'Pink Cadillac' and 'The Getaway'. In fact one could say that this is a clever combination of both movies. Madsen played the same role in 'The Getaway' too. However Dahl has avoided plagiarism and has managed to think of his own ideas. Background music appears very old fashioned. But is suitable to the tone of the movie. It has been implemented at a minimum level, however only at important moments when required.

Initially many viewers will misinterpret this for a Cohen brothers movie. The look and atmosphere is highly reminiscent of 'Blood Simple'. Maybe Dahl's career with noir movies would have continued but they were overshadowed by the Coen Brothers. Performance wise Jaoanne Whalley Kilmer gives a reasonable effort. Her facial expressions are on the mark. Val Kilmer disappoints with a look of uninterested. Overall if you like your noir movies to be short and simple this would be recommended. But I could not say that one would feel the urge to watch it more than three times.

Unpredictable and engaging

[onahwinifred · 6/10 · 3 October 2020]

The film shows how easily a person's loyalty can change when a more tempting alternative appears. It shows how an individual can be deceived if he fails to think twice before making decisions. It's a must watch and after watching, it will make you understand that you can be used under the pretense of being loved or cared for.

Derivative noir drama surpassed by the director's later work

[HuntinPeck80 · 6/10 · 27 August 2023]

Just as the Coens' Blood Simple is nothing like as good as their later movies, so Dahl's Kill Me Again is not in the same league as Red Rock West (1993). It is a derivative film noir in which Joanne Whalley double-crosses her partner in crime (Michael Madsen), then employs a private investigator to help her fake her own death, but then she betrays him too. Not too smart of her, especially with Madsen on her tail and the mobsters the two of them ripped off on the trail.

The movie begins with a boring credits sequence showing desert scenery, and throughout the movie the musical score doesn't fir the story, tending towards enervation rather than energy. Kilmer, playing the PI, is miscast, or rather the decision to make the character a PI doesn't seem to fit the story. I don't know if Dahl and his co-writer were thinking of Double Indemnity when they wrote this but the comparison does them no credit. Kill Me Again lacks the spunky dialogue of the best film noir, and Kilmer's PI is not hard bitten enough or cynical enough or really anything enough for the part. Whalley may be sexy but she isn't seductive enough for the role of the femme fatale. Probably the movie would have been better with Madsen playing the PI and Kilmer playing the vengeful boyfriend, but hey, hindsight is 20-20.

A waste of time. Go for Red Rock West instead, of which this movie is a pre-echo and a faint one.

Boring neo-noir thriller.

[BrettErikJohnson · 2/10 · 14 May 2002]

"Kill Me Again" has nothing new to offer the experienced viewer of this genre of film. It has the male/female duo of criminals on the run. It has the so-called "good guy" who falls for the femme fatale. It has its share of uncomfortable violence. And of course, let us not forget the twist, twist, double twist ending.

There used to be a time when a movie watcher could actually be surprised by one of those kinds of endings. In fact, if the ending is original enough, they still work in some situations. Alas...this movie does not contain one of those inspiredly creative conclusions.

Michael Madsen and Joanne Whalley are the criminals Vince and Fay. Val Kilmer is the down on his luck private investigator who crosses paths with Fay. She has double crossed Vince and she wants the private investigator to fake her death. The reason? So that Vince will think she is dead and stop looking for her. If only it were that easy.

Fay does something so stupid that I am still shaking my head over it. She decides that it would be a good idea to shaft the private eye and skip town before he got paid in full. I know this next part is gonna be a real shocker. Yeah...right. The private eye tracks Fay down and wants the rest of his money. Who would've figured that a private investigator would be good at finding someone?

Anyway, the movie tries to impress the viewer by making you guess who is backstabbing who. Sadly, the three main characters are such jerks that you don't even care who ends up getting killed and who gets away. I would recommend watching "The Last Seduction" if you are interested in watching a John Dahl flick. This one is really weak. 2/10

Double crossing

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 26 August 2005]

John Dahl has mastered this genre almost effortlessly. "Kill Me Again" shows him in great form. The screen play by the director and David Warfield has all the makings of a film noir, which Mr. Dahl's executes beautifully.

The great coup for the director is the first rate performances he gets out of his cast. Val Kilmer, plays Jack Andrews, a Reno P.I., fighting some demons of his own. Andrews falls for the vixen Fay Forrester who comes knocking at his office door seeking to solve her problems, but instead, she uses Jack shamelessly.

Fay Forrester, the calculating dame of the story, has in turn double crossed her own partner Vince Miller, who doesn't give up trying to find what belongs to him. Jack Andrews in the end, proves he is more resourceful than Vince and Fay in an ironic twist at the end.

Val Kilmer had one of the best opportunities of his career and he runs away with the movie. Joanne Whalley-Kilmer, is excellent as the calculating Fay. Michael Madsen portrays yet another bad guy with great verve.

Mr. Dahl delivers a satisfying film that will not disappoint.

Kill this turkey off

[andy-633 · 2/10 · 15 May 2002]

John Dahl shows little of the talent he displays in his other movies. Here the writing is weak, with some bizarre plot holes and poor dialogue. The normally reliable Joanna Whalley struggles with a US accent, while Val Kilmer just appears bemused. The bandaged hand he gets at the hands of some thugs is presumably an attempt at a knowing reference to Jack Nicholson's nose in Chinatown, but only serves to remind the audience what a gulf there is between the films.

Don't let this put you off other, much better John Dahl films (Red Rock West and The Last Seduction).

Enjoyable little neo-noir - worth watching until the last ten minutes

[The_Void · 8/10 · 3 January 2006]

Even to this day, it's regrettable that the film noir tradition had to die out at the end of the fifties; but all is not quite lost, as since the release of Chinatown in 1974, there has been a steady stream of 'neo-noir' thrillers being released, and while generally not as good as their ancestral counterparts; they usually make for decent films. Kill Me Again is one such thriller; that, while suffering from a number of problems, does a good job in reminding us film fans of the classics from the forties and fifties by creating a good noir atmosphere, which is fused with a typical noir plot line. The film that it takes the most influence from definitely seems to be Billy Wilder's classic "Double Indemnity", as it follows themes of a man being dragged into a plot by a woman and death for profit. The plot follows a woman who escapes her jealous boyfriend after the pair steals over eight hundred grand from some mobsters. He isn't too pleased about her taking his cash, however, and despite her efforts of hiding by hiring a private detective to fake her death; jealous boyfriend remains on her tail.

The film starts off well - the plot is set up nicely, and hints at a thrilling ride to come. The middle, too, is well done and remains thrilling while taking in the familiar noir elements. It's the ending that really, really lets the film down, however. The ending is probably the most important part for any film - as it is this that is going to stay in the audience's mind after the credits role; but the filmmakers here haven't realised that. The twist is one the most clear cut cases of having a twist in the film just for the sake of having one. It makes absolutely no sense given what has gone before, and this is matched by the abrupt ending that follows straight after. And then, just so it gets a little bit worse; we get 'treated' to a sappy final conclusion. To it's credit, the cast does well; with Val Kilmer taking the starring role. I'm not a massive fan of this guy, but he usually performs well, and he looks the part here. He is joined by his then-wife, Joanne Whalley and the always excellent Michael Madsen tops off the central trio. It's always great to see Madsen in films, and the role here is an obvious prelude to his career making performance in Reservoir Dogs. Overall, this isn't an essential film - but it's good up until the ending, and I enjoyed it so it gets a thumbs up on the whole.

Nifty little flick

[inframan · 9/10 · 25 June 2005]

What a sexy woman Joanne Whalley is. I can see why Kilmer grabbed her & married her. In this she's the antecedent of the Linda Fiorentino character in Last Seduction, another wondrously sexy wench. John Dahl has a unique & powerful knack for choosing strong actresses & bringing out the universal vixen in them.

The plot's nothing terribly original but it plays its familiar theme with some nice changes & variations. It has that classic quality that the best "noir" films had: it moves right along & keeps you in the center of the action.

One thing I find curious is that no one (to my knowledge) has ever linked the Michael Madsen throat-cutting scene in this film with the Michael Madsen ear-cutting scene in Reservoir Dogs. Give credit where it's due!

While this movie is far from perfect, it deserves any true noir fan's time and attention.

[movieman-187 · 8/10 · 8 February 2000]

Film noir is one of the oldest and most worked of all the Hollywood genres. Starting as early as 1941 with John Huston's The Maltese Falcon. Other greats include Orson Welles's Touch of Evil and Hitchcock's Notorious. With such a great variety of so-called "classic" noires to see, why would one want to take the time and money to watch an independent film noir by a then unknown director/writer. Simple: the director/writer is John Dahl, and this is no ordinary film noir. In fact, his movies (this was the first of them all) are so well received that critics credit him with starting a new genre called neo-noir.

It starts out like any other noir. Fay Forrester (Joanne Whalley-Kilmer), the femme fatal, and her boyfriend (Michael Madsen) are some small time criminals who rob the mod. They steal a briefcase full of money and kill one of the mod members. Then, Fay, who longs to escape country life and move to Las Vegas hits her husband on the head with a rock, takes all the money for herself, and runs to Vegas. Once she gets to Vegas, she hires Jack Andrews (Val Kilmer) to make it look like she was murdered, offering him, "$5000 up front and $5000 when I'm dead." Jack, reluctantly takes the job. However, once the job is done, Fay skips out of town without paying Jack the final $5000, and to make matters worse, Fay's boyfriend is in town at Jack's office looking for Fay. Now this is where it gets really interesting because everyone is looking to kill everyone else for revenge. It is just a question of who will succeed. The last half of the movie is filled with plot twists and unexpected actions. This, and especially the end, is where this film deviates from what is usually called film noir. This is not to say that the twists are unmotivated or out of character. They very much are. It is just the types of twists and the number of them are uncommon for films preceding this time. The ending is unexpected and pleasurable. But I won't ruin it for you here.

One thing that is particularly true for this movie is the consistency found in each of the main characters. There is no scene that feels out of place within the context of the picture. Also, I have to give a thumbs up to the under-appreciated performance by Michael Madsen. He does one heck of a job as the psycho boyfriend. Another thing that must be mentioned is the great choices for the camera angles by John Dahl. This makes the movie better than it is or should be. He places the camera in places so that you feel either closer or farther from the action, depending upon what sense he is trying to convey to the viewer. He really makes the tension tenser, and the action faster. The audience always gets enough, but never too much. This is just an outstanding example of film directing. The only other directors that have this uncanny ability are Welles, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Tarantino, and Scorsese. In my opinion, this film (which is from 1989) is a major influence on Tarantino and his works. You can clearly see the similarities between their choice of camera angles and what the audience gets to see; however, Tarantino is more graphic face.

While this movie is far from perfect, it is quite good and deserves any true noir fan's time and attention. If you like noires, and in particular, this film, then go check out Dahl's other two good neo-noires: Redrock West and The Last Seduction. I give this film an 8/10.

"Where's that?" "It's up by Lake Mead"

[PredragReviews · 8/10 · 12 October 2016]

Somehow the dark, horrifically-empty aspect of modern American life - which is itself especially starkly on view in NV - is precisely nailed by this film. The film might aptly be subtitled - "The Illusion of Love in a Dead Culture like ours". Yes, outwardly, it's about the astonishing betrayals and cruelty everybody - good or bad - will go through to get their hands on the attache case with the mob's money. But inwardly it's about the search for a love that has sunk irretrievably below the surface of one of Nevada's beautiful lakes. But it is on the "inner" level that this movie really struck at me. It is set in Nevada: Winnemucca, Reno, Vegas, Overton etc. Well-developed, uniquely-identified, memorable characters; excellent acting by all; crisp, often amusing, dialogue; well-plotted and paced with surprising twists and turns, and a surprising climax. The haunting background music (William Olvis) alone is worth the seeing the movie for.

Val Kilmer and Joanne Walley Kilmer make a great team in this absorbing movie of cross, double cross, triple cross. The editing was a little choppy but not enough to really detract from this absorbing story. Good looking Joanne Whalley cons low-rent private eye, Kilmer, into helping her fake her death to escape her ostensibly murderous ex-boyfriend, played by Michael Madsen. Once the plan is in motion Whalley constantly shifts allegiance depending upon who seems to have the upper hand. This movie actually does not pretend to be profound or politically deep. For me that's a plus as I get enough politics every day and just want some good escapist fare.

Overall rating: 8 out of 10.