Moviefone: Did you enjoy The Watcher?

Kelly Riddle: Yes, I enjoyed the movie and thought it was worth the time and money.

MF: Did this film paint an accurate picture of the type of work private investigators would do on a serial homicide case?

KR: The movie did provide an accurate depiction of what investigators and forensic experts do behind the scenes in a case like this. I think they could have gone a little further into it, which would have added to the overall suspense. As an example, they knew that the detective moved from L.A. to Chicago. Why didn't they check files such as utility records in Chicago for those recently receiving service in the same time frame? Better yet, why didn't they use postal service investigators to check for any mail being forwarded from an L.A. address to Chicago in the same time frame?

MF: Is this the way a serial killer behaves?

KR: I feel that the movie accurately depicted the methods of a serial killer. The majority of the time, they pick the same type of person (age, race, physical characteristics). It is common for serial killers to study their victims so that they can get inside their heads and figure out how they can frighten that person the most. However, like all crimes, some serial killers rely on opportunity. If they pass a female stranded on the side of the road with no one around, this would be such an "opportunity."

MF: Do these serial homicide crimes often follow such a close pattern?

KR: Studying a criminal's pattern, or "M.O." (modus operandi), is always useful. Most serial killers play out the torture and killing in their heads and get their "high" from following their fantasies. When they are successful, they need to repeat this to get the same "high." As in this movie, many serial killers intentionally leave their "calling card," which is a sign that it is the same person performing the act. Studying their methods will help the investigators figure out the "who, what, when, where, and how."

MF: In the film, the killer formed a very personal bond with the investigator. Is this common?

KR: It is common for a serial killer or a professional criminal to form a bond with law enforcement personnel. They think of themselves as being above the law and smarter than the investigators and tend to want to rub their faces in it. At the same time, many serial killers actually have an underlying desire to get caught. They desire the attention and fame, but want the cat and mouse game to go on as long as possible. The investigators often feel a sense of "bonding" with the serial killer because they spend so much time trying to get themselves to think like the criminal.

MF: Will a killer actually send an investigator photos of his or her crimes?

KR: The serial killer will often send messages or photographs (usually after the killing) to further taunt the investigators.

MF: In the film, the investigators relied on heavy media publicity to aid them in their investigation. Is using the media helpful in finding potential victims and criminals?

KR: Using the media can be a double-edged sword. On one hand, you may be lucky enough to locate the person before the murder. On the other, you could start a panic and also cause the killer to stop sending the photographs until after the murder is complete. I think that most investigators would not risk cutting off communications with the killer in a case like this. The officers would recognize that the victims are typically introverts with few friends who were selected because few people would miss them.

MF: Can you comment on the film's portrayal of the investigative process as they studied the photographs of the victims. Was this accurate?

KR: In the movie, investigators studied the photos, blew them up, and attempted to identify the background, film, processing methods, etc...This is exactly how an investigator would pursue evidence such as this. I think they did a good job when the investigator indicated that the victim was outside of a coffee shop, due to the fact that so many people in the background were drinking coffee. That was the first thing I noticed about the background of that photograph.

MF: How essential is forensic evidence in catching a serial killer?

KR: A serial killer is very difficult to catch. However, forensic evidence is a major portion of the success in a case like this. Not only is it important in catching the killer, but will be a major factor in the successful prosecution of the killer. There are evidence and clues in everything. A taped phone call can provide background noise that can be identified (airplane, factory, railroad, etc...). Clothing can provide hair, skin, dirt, and other evidence. When all of the little pieces of evidence are compiled, you form a complete picture.

MF: Would you recommend the film?

KR: I would definitely recommend the movie for several reasons. First, the special effects were well done. They also provided enough realism to make the entire plot believable. Next, the actions of both the serial killer and the police were accurate, although a little far fetched at times. The meeting at the cemetery was a little hard to believe, but most everything else was within reason and well done. The acting was very good, and Keanu Reeves did a great job playing a serial killer.

THE WATCHER / ** (R)

Date:07-Sep-2000
From:Chicago Sun-Times
Author:Roger Evert
Status:Nutral

Campbell: James Spader
Polly: Marisa Tomei
Griffin: Keanu Reeves
Hollis: Chris Ellis

Universal presents a film directed by Joe Charbanic. Written by Darcy Meyers, David Elliot, and Clay Ayers. Running time: 93 minutes. Rated R (for violence and language).
BY ROGER EBERT

"The Watcher" is about still another serial killer whose existence centers on staging elaborate scenarios for the cops. If these weirdos would just become screenwriters in the first place, think of the lives that could be saved. Keanu Reeves stars as Griffin, a murderer who follows an FBI agent named Campbell (James Spader) from Los Angeles to Chicago, complaining about the cold weather but explaining he had to move because "things didn't work out with your successor." Killing just wasn't the same without Campbell to bug.

According to a theory floated by Campbell's therapist (Marisa Tomei), the killer and the agent may need each other, or are the brothers neither one ever had. Freud would cringe. Campbell is indeed forever seeking Griffin's reaction; what the agent thinks is more important to him than what his victims think. Griffin spends relatively little time killing his victims, but must spend days preparing presentations for Campbell.

He sets puzzles, issues challenges, sends him FedEx packages with photos of the next victims, devises elaborate booby traps and recklessly follows the agent (who does not know what he looks like) right onto elevators. Finally he sets up a face-to-face meeting in a cemetery. The psychology here is a little shaky. Although some serial killers may have issues with the law, most of them focus, I think, on their victims and not on some kind of surrogate authority figure.

The movie's structure is simple: Killer issues challenge, agent rises to bait, desperate city-wide search leads to still more frustration. (Strange, that the same weekend would bring the overplotted "The Way of the Gun" and the underplotted "The Watcher.") "The Watcher" devotes an inordinate amount of its running time to Chicago police cars with sirens screaming as they hurtle down streets and over bridges, never turning a corner without almost spinning out. There are also a lot of helicopters involved. At one point the killer is pinpointed "20 miles north of the city," a map shows Lincolnwood, and the cops converge at first on the Wrigley Building, before relocating to an abandoned warehouse. I know you're not supposed to fret about local geography in a movie, where a city is a backdrop and not a map, but aren't there a lot of people who know the Wrigley Building is not 20 miles north of the city? Maybe the helicopter pilots are disoriented; in the chase that opens the movie, they come whirling into town from Lake Michigan, which makes for a nice opening shot while not answering the puzzle of how many miles from shore they are usually stationed.

The actors cannot be faulted. They bring more to the story than it really deserves. Spader has his hands on an intriguing character; Agent Campbell's tragic history (shown in flashbacks) has led to migraines so bad that he injects himself with pain medication straight into a stomach muscle. Painkillers have made him start losing his way and forgetting stuff, he complains to Tomei, and a Chicago cop calls him "Captain Barbiturate," observing "if his pupils don't dilate, we don't need him." Migraines literally cripple their victims, but Campbell has one of those considerate cases that never strikes when he is saving lives or pursuing fugitives.

Spader's quiet exchanges with Tomei are effective, too, even if we know her character was put on earth to get into big trouble. Reeves, as the killer, has the fairly thankless task of saying only what the movie needs him to say; he's limited by the fact that his killer has no real dimension or personality apart from his function as a plot device. The final confrontation is an example: Is he more interested in revenge, or in demonstrating the ingenuities of his booby-trapped scenario? It goes without saying, I guess, that the scene features hundreds of candles. Just once in a pervert killer movie, I wish they'd show a scene where he's pushing a cart through the Hallmark store, actually buying all those candles ("Do you have any that are unscented and aren't shaped, like, uh, little Hummel figures?"). ~~~~

Peeved Reeves in snit over another local film

Date:07-Sep-2000
From:Chicago Sun-Times
Author:BILL ZWECKER SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST
Status:Nutral

Now we *know* Keanu Reeves loves Chicago--at least the people, nightlife, music scene and restaurants. He's made that clear to this columnist and others. But the box office kingpin sure seems to be somewhat unlucky with the *films* he makes here. "Chain Reaction" was a big bomb, and then there was last week's furor with Mayor Daley and Paul Vallas over the script for "Hardball," which is currently lensing.

Now comes word the actor has consciously backed away from the Chicago-made "The Watcher," the $30 million thriller (originally called "Driven") opening Friday. Reeves has done no publicity for the picture and has insisted his acting credit be listed as unobtrusively as possible--*below* James Spader and Marisa Tomei. Universal Pictures has also agreed to limit Reeves' exposure in the trailer promoting the movie.

According to Hollywood scuttlebutt, Reeves is peeved about "The Watcher" because of a rift with the filmmakers--particularly his former hockey-playing pal Joe Charbanic. The former music video producer makes his feature film directing debut with "The Watcher." After reading the original script, Reeves signed on to play a serial killer in what originally was slated to be a small independent-style production. Because he thought it would be more of an arty film and a new acting challenge, the actor agreed to work for union scale, instead of his usual $15 million, against 15 percent of the gross box office.

"The script did change," Charbanic tells Inside.com. "It got bigger than [Reeves] wanted. He wanted it to be a little boutique film."

Reportedly the actor attempted to exit the project altogether, but did not after lawyers warned him it would be futile.