I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

First of all, it got one brilliant factor. It's where the killer is the partner. Very unpredictable I must admit.Another, yet half-brilliant, factor. The characterization of the lead. It's unusual, catchy, and sad. However with no serious shadows or dramatic justification. I mean yes Armand brought some of the Assante magic to it, made it believable and special. But for instance why he was dying ?? The answer of this question could be something high and meaningful, like being poisoned by the modern civilization (that created such a maniac and advanced killer as well), or maybe he's dying because the ethics are anyway. Well, sure any answer would have completed it as whole brilliant.The real bad factor is the killer's motive. It's bad because it's nonexistent. They succeeded to make him unpredictable, but forgot anything else. As if it's enough motive to chuckle crazily in front of a computer!Another, yet slight, bad factor. Which's Armand Assante's dark contact lens. They forced the guy to put them to look weary. But that was pretty exposed. You can see them clear when he was lying on the couch of the dancer. The fake black points in them were moving as his eyes. It was unnecessary and cheap move; just like his endless cough too!So as you see, the brilliance wasn't that much available. Nonetheless still it is "something else" amongst the other V crap that looks meaningless and senseless in comparison. And generally it is a good attempt to make what's different in the new genre of catch-the-serial-killer that became in fashion since (The Silence of the Lambs – 1991). But why it stopped at being just an attempt?? Anyway, the weak links will be stronger, and the brilliant factors more complete, 3 years later in (Untraceable) which seems, somewhat, like a refined remake. I believe the only love to kill in here is the movie's love to kill itself !

So, this evening my boyfriend and I decided to spend the night relaxing at home and rented this movie off our COMCAST on DEMAND.Yes, the movie, which would be better described as 'fecal matter', cost us a whopping $3.99 too damn much.Aside from having little or no suspense, bad acting, and weak effects, the only thing really missing from making this a complete waste of time and money was the flashing neon arrow hovering over the 'handicapped killer' in the scenes of which he rolled past.I would like to know what teenage youth group wrote this piece of 'work'? Or perhaps who gave a monkey a type writer? My 3 year old nephew could keep a secret longer than this film took to reveal the killer.Go ahead, waste your money, waste your time, hell this movie is a complete and total waste and if that is what you have in mind for 'having a good time' then this is the perfect movie for you.

One of those movies that you select at Blockbuster when most of the viewing choices are unappetizing. Armande Assante delivers a strong performance as a police detective, with a bad smoking habit, trying to run down a creative killer. In this moody, urban film all the acting is above average and the story is well paced. The number of characters in the story is substantial but the lead actors (wife, son, buddy, snitch, computer-geek) are easy to follow. The killer selects each of his victims from diverse backgrounds and then proceeds to murder them in unusual - but appalling ways. If you're tired of the animated animals (exception: Ice Age) and/or the non-funny slapstick comedies populating video stores, try Dot.Kill.

Dot.kill, Digital Jesus? Couldn't find this one as it was rented under the title Digital Killer. Many aliases give away it's a B-movie.After many internet related movies, killings through wires, addicted cop-movies there wasn't really any surprise in the story. Armand was acting over the top, I didn't feel any sympathy, rather irritation.How this one got 5 out of 10, rather than number 5 of worst movies is unclear to me. Straight to the sell out bin with this one, don't rent it unless you're not annoyed with quite simple story lines.(spoiling bit) Why does a cop not check for cameras when after every killing he is portrayed at the crime scene on the television? Couldn't these cameras be followed to a destination? Is the cop's son really that stupid, that he doesn't warn his father earlier on?