julian kennedy San Franpyscho: 1 out of 10: So you want to make a serial killer movie. But your budget is non-existent, your camera equipment is elderly and your stars are Joe Estevez (Martin Sheen's younger brother and a staple in really bad movies) and Todd Bridges from Different Strokes. There are probably ways to pull of at least a watchable film. The Quiroz brothers have no clue.First of all much of the cast seems to have been chosen in a desperate attempt to make Bridges and Estevez look like Oscar caliber thespians. Really how hard is it to play a priest or an overbearing mother? Certainly a city the size of San Francisco has a few professional actors willing to work for a few bucks and a screen credit. Clearly Chris Angelo and Bonnie Steiger who play these roles have other talents such as landscaper or waitress they ought to be fine tuning.Joe Rosete as the killer (yes the serial killer is simply known as "The Killer") is also pretty awful in a mentally ill method kind of way but I am almost willing to give him the benefit of the doubt as his character is written with zero style or personality. A boring almost laughable serial killer is a problem for a serial killer movie.In addition the Quiroz brothers seem to have originally planned this as an ABC Family movie of the week. There is no nudity or violence to speak of and the R rating clearly is for the adult style pacing. This move meanders like an 85 year old woman driving with wraparound sunglasses and her turn signal on. The only occasional horror comes from lighting Estevez's face with a glare that makes it look like his lower jaw was removed.I wasn't expecting a great film when I rented San Franpyscho but I wasn't expecting mind numbing boredom either.

somethingtee I lived in San Francisco until I was twelve years old. The only thing that really scared me was the thought of ever ending up in Alcatraz. Now the thought of a psycho walking the streets could scare anyone anywhere. I thought the title was catchy but had a really bad feeling about the actual movie. Never really seen any movies with Joe Estevez, but I'll get to him later. When you watch a low end budget/quality type of film you pretty much know what your getting. I'm not one to get into what other reviewers think or say but I don't know what movie they were watching. I've loved watching horror films since I was a kid and all I have to say is how many horribly made garbage can you see? And no, this isn't a horror film, it's a thriller and a very well made one. I really liked the fact that they went that extra mile to make a "movie" which was more of a motion picture attempt, rather than some recycled crap that keeps getting made over and over and over. San Franpsycho introduces two detectives on the trail of a man killing people for his own sick pleasure. A news reporter finds herself being at the top of his list as far as someone he goes out of his way for, risking getting caught. Joe Estevez really played his role well for me seeing him for the first time. He has that old school charisma going for him. He really stood out as should your lead character. The rest of the cast I have mixed feeling about. The psycho himself really needed to be on the screen more. I really liked the performance but there wasn't enough of him. I think the insight in that was to tease the audience with him but not over do it with him. But one of my complaints of the film was to have this guy more involved and produce more of a back story. I see him looking at pictures from other cities but the audience doesn't see them? I don't understand that. I think that would have added a little more gore, even if it's just coming from a picture. The smaller roles seemed to be throw ins. The other cop complimented Estevez very well. You have an older/younger thing going as well as them being different races. The reporter is the actual lead role in the story. The priest character was one of the better moves in this story. They have a priest get involved knowing no one will expect him to get killed. And that's one of the more disturbing parts of the film. But believe me when I tell you that this film has it's share of problems. Like I said, the smaller roles didn't do it for me. The one thing I think most horror/thriller filmmakers don't get is that your victims need to be where your better performances need to come from. If those actors are weak, the performances are weak and it ruins those moments of excitement that these kinds of movies strive on. The killings good enough but you need the actors in these roles to come through a lot more. Some time could have been taken off of this movie. I really liked the fact that someone took the chance and made a dialogue/character driven story but you can only have so much explaining and talking period. If you want a good thriller to watch, watch San Franpsycho. Good movie.

woodbridgevaplaya This was a pretty good rent. Well worth a slot on my Netflix account. I really like the introduction of the Psychotic Killer, he takes out a couple people under the Golden Gate Bridge and roams the streets of San Francisco looking for more victims. Later on in the movie you find out he's been doing this for years in other major US cities. He loves to take pictures of his victims and has a folders with different cities. I think I saw Seattle and Las Vegas or something. Anyhow, two detectives are hot on his trail when all of a sudden a news reported starts releasing info that only the killer would know. The cops, played very well by Joe Estevez and Victor Zaragosa confront the reporter who is now being stalked by the killer herself. A bumbling priest is brought along to help decipher the killer's creepy letters and after the 12 or so bodies, we come to a twisted end. I won't ruin it for you but just do the math, it's not a happily ever after ending.

starla51792 go get your camcorder, your little brother, and the disturbing neighbor next door who throws boiling water on raccoons; and you got yourself a film! well, that's what these guys thought anyway. it was so bad i can't even remember the majority of it except for flashbacks comparable to someone who toured in 'Nam. despite the really corny title, the horrible quality, the terrible actors, and the cliché writing, i think this movie isn't the worst i've ever seen. i'm saving that slot for everything with steven seagal, chuck norris and jean-claude van dam. anyhow, if you are out of options when it comes to finding new "horror" films that you haven't seen 1,000 times already, (as i was) and you are debating this one, i would still skip this. it had absolutely no redeeming qualities. this mock serial killer thriller was a weak, puny attempt at an even B film. if they're really lucky it might make the wal-mart $4.50 bin. but, i highly doubt it.