The greatest movie ever!

Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

I cannot believe the commenter's who put this show down. Look, the original Night Stalker was fun, but lets face it, it was campy and silly. This Night Stalker is brilliant, engaging, believable, and best of all, scary."What's the frequency Kolchak" is a perfect example of this. Made you think, freaked you out, it had a lot going for it. I am amazed that the writers were able to pull off a show that could suspend my disbelief. Especially in light of the crap put out by the "X-files". This was an incredible show, a pity it had to get canceled. I think they could have found a viewer base if they just had more time.Ah well...-ron

Network: ABC; Genre: Remake, Horror; Content Rating: TV-14 (horror violence, blood and gore); Available: DVD; Perspective: Contemporary (star range: 1 - 4); Season Reviewed: Series (1 season) I've got to admit right off the bat that I'm not familiar with the original Jeff Rice series "Kolchak: The Night Stalker" starring Darren McGavin. I can't compare the two. I don't know how derivative this remake is or how blasphemous it may be, but it isn't hard to imagine. For those not familiar with the story, it follow Carl Kolchak, a newspaper crime reporter who obsessively hunts down all things supernatural after the brutal murder of his wife by a beast that left a mysterious mark on her (and other victims) after she died."Night Stalker" is a disaster from head to toe. Starting withe casting of Kolchak. As a man who should be obsessed, in turmoil, maybe a little unhinged, Stewart Townsend plays Kolchak blank-faced, without any passion, emotion or depth. Instead of a hardboiled crime reporter he looks like a soft WB TV star sleepwalking through a slasher movie.While I may not know "The Night Stalker", I do know "The X-Files" where "Stalker" developer Frank Spotnitz hails from. And while the original "Stalker" may have been an inspiration for Chris Carter's supernatural thriller, for Spotnitz to dig up the ghosts of the past reeks of a creatively bankrupt effort to recapture the magic of both shows. Kolchak is the open-minded one, quick to believe the average crime is motivated by a something otherworldly. The Fox Mulder. His crime-beat partner Harry (gorgeous Gabrielle Union) is the reluctant one who butts up against Kolchak with a belief in science and facts. The Dana Scully. They are helped in there endeavors by young intern photographer Jain (Eric Jungmann). The Jimmy Olsen. Guess what else? The two leads have a purely professional relationship with only the tiniest hint of sexual tension.There is a slight hypnotic quality to "Stalker". The final (unaired) episode, "What's My Answer Mr. Kolchak" is the best of the series because it tapes into a surreal idea that the rest of this procedural show should have had. It keeps you guessing in a way the others don't. But for the most part "Stalker" is aggravatingly straight forward. Many of the stories feel lifted heavily from other Sci-Fi/Horror shows and the show really suffers from brutally stupid written dialog. The opening and closing narrations make pretty much no sense.Is it scary? Even creepy? Well that standard is just another tool the show used to dig the show deeper. Spotnitz's lame attempt to build suspense cure-all is to show ominous walking feet into frame. Who is it? We don't know yet. He does this over and over. Feet. The violence and use of (quote/unquote) creature effects is chopped to hell in the editing - an obvious attempt to hide a low budget rather than to meet the network standards."Night Stalker" is one of several network potholes on the long, boring road between the time when the masterful "The X-Files" held nerds in suspense over alien conspiracies and now, when the unbridled funhouse ride "Supernatural" has brought the TV horror genre back from the dead. A perfect cure for insomnia.* / 4

Excellent show, so much more - more modernized compared to the OLDER series - back in the day. Good story lines, your never left behind or left predictable. A lot of Competiveness leading those in dangerous situations, for the sake of....the truth & prove it. Not easy. Stuart Townsend is a great, he's a reporter who brings mystery when he's on the screen (a little reckless, but you know he believes & so will you) Gabriel Union plays his rival, (who shoots straight from the hip)who wants to trust him, but just cant grip all the supernatural occurrence's this show brings(kind of similar to the x-files(which made it famous & millions as well)you know the story - Scully is always fighting Mulder with his far fetched ideas of the supernatural) This is a great show with good acting, but it just hasn't gotten the proper publicity it deserves to have.

I just recently watched the box set and enjoyed it very much. If you approach it from the angle that this is a different show(but with the same name as the old show-which I enjoyed)you can enjoy it on it's own merits. There was some unexplained and "huh?" type stuff going on, but getting canceled after 6 episodes will do that. I liked the leads, and there were spots of humor in the show(as dark as it was)if you were paying attention. Network TV is inane simply for the fact that they don't give us viewers a chance to get into shows anymore...remember when a show came on every week at the same time and was there for at least a year(even if it sucked)? I had no clue this show had been canceled until I saw the box set of the "complete series"...heck, I never even got a chance to watch it on the telly. Oh well, enough railing against the system...a nice little show that could have been something if given a chance.