The Poughkeepsie Tapes (2007)

This whole mockumentary has interviews with profilers, cops and detectives praising this killer as elusive and dangerously smart at evading and misleading the authorities.Except the tapes themselves show him as a careless individual who almost get's caught by two little girls selling cookies. Ignoring the unbelievably tame tapes themselves (I don't really find "gore" scary when it's overdone), the fact that the killer goes around recording everything, even at his own crime-scene with cops around, would get him caught REALLY fast. The killer is basically like one of those attention-seekers who keep recording themselves and posting it on Twitter and Instagram for the world to see. And what exactly was he recording on? That camera's battery lasts longer than most cameras these days.I got hyped up with people recommending this movie, and it's a dud with a LOT of "logic" (it is trying to present itself as a documentary) issues that can't even be ignored cause of "suspension of disbelief". That excuse doesn't work when you are making a documentary and pretending to have a story of a serial killer that is the smartest killer every born, while he's saved by camera cuts and fade-outs instead of a proper explanation/excuse.Waste of time.

When I first heard about this film, I had seen the trailer before a film and then suddenly heard nothing more. Thankfully I had written the title down in the notes section of my cell phone because, had I not, I probably never would have seen this movie. I'm a student studying criminal justice with a particular interest in serial homicide. When I had broken my phone and synced my new phone with the old data I found the list of movies and noticed this was still on the list.This film takes you deep in the mind of a killer and his journey from amateur to, practically, professional level. I found the idea of having found a killer's old video documentation of his murders an interesting and great way for analysis through out the film. Personally, I have used this film for analysis in classes and my professors agree that it does help get into the mind of a killer.

I was quite impressed with this film and definitely think it's worth a watch.It is low budget and in some instances the acting isn't stellar and occasionally some of the really dark sequences make it a bit too dark to see what is going on - normally this works fine as it makes your imagination do a lot of the work, but in one or two cases I really would have liked it a little brighter just so I could follow what was happening (mainly involving the killer moving and I didn't fully catch exactly what he was doing.) This is however a fairly minor gripe and I enjoyed the film and found it pretty engrossing.As many people have noted, the standout parts of the film involve the gradual breakdown and degradation of the Cheryl Dempsey character and the Master/Slave relationship that develops between herself and the killer. It was a surprisingly effective story and I don't think the film would be anywhere near as good without it.For the most part I like that the vast majority of the killers motives and so on go completely unexplained (though it does lead me on to one of my gripes later on). One of the FBI profilers offers some conjecture as to what might have driven the killer to do these ghastly murders but that is about it. The film also does a pretty good job of making you dislike the killer (some of the stuff he does is pretty awful and sadistic) and wanting background that is never provided - in most cases this works well as it makes the viewer feel the same level of exasperation as the authorities.That said....there were a few things that didn't work for me -almost all of them mechanical/technical details.1.) There is too much emphasis on how awesomely great the killer is. By this I mean things like not a single finger print being found at the house, etc didn't work for me. I began to wonder at one point if they were building toward a superhuman/supernatural angle and it did spoil some of my suspension of disbelief.2.) Partially tying in with the above point - the whole James Foley storyline. i seriously think this entire thing could be cut form the film and it would make the film a lot better. For starters, it only serves to make the killers skills laughably good rather than intimidating (the whole taking his sperm donations from a fertility clinic......I guess it's not impossible but I found the level of planning/resources and time involved in the frame job so ludicrously unlikely that I think the film suffers for it).Secondly, given that the killer actually approaches Cheryl Dempsey's mother and she becomes aware that he is the killer before he leaves just makes the whole Foley angle even more ridiculous. If Mrs Dempsey has met the killer then unless he was masked/heavily disguised (which would be rather odd at a crime scene) then she must have known enough to know that Foley was not the killer (I don't think she comments on the Foley angle at all in the film). I certainly think she would know enough to help narrow down some of the profiling issues the authorities have been having, unless the killer actually looks like Foley, but even then, that's a pretty good lead. No, for me the Foley angle weakens the film considerably.3.) While I realise that a lot of stuff goes unexplained in this (and as I mentioned above this is mostly actually a positive thing) I think at least some hint of a reason as to why the killer chooses Cheryl to be his "Slave" rather than a victim would have been good.Beyond that though it is a good film and I would recommend watching it.

Well paced, but it reminds me of some real-crime US documentaries from the '70s, so not an original.It is unpleasant, but no jump scares and no tension. So it's not a horror either - although there is a disturbing murder at 1:09.The interviews to camera aren't convincing - I guess that's difficult to get right, to balance script and improv with good editing. The two main characters are interesting. I think they showed too much of the killer in his mask and ruff - gave the impression of a dramatic bloviator, which ruined the deliberate mystery for me. The interview with Cheryl was a chance to make a great story, to show how she was in love yet doomed, show us the real killer. But it was just a bit sad.The decision to use "authentic" '80s sound & vid quality for the first half was a bad call - although it had some effect, I found it irritating. The soundtrack relies on discord at scary moments, elsewhere a soft xylophone rhythm.Well worth a watch, but it me no horror makey.