CHICAGO MASSACRE: RICHARD SPECK (2007)
Review by Peter Syslo

CHICAGO MASSACRE: RICHARD SPECK (2007) is a “so-so” entry in the real-life-killer movie genre. I have seen a few movies based on real-life killers and the best that I have seen, by far, is ED GEIN (2000) (which I thought was better than last year’s ZODIAC). Actually I went into CHICAGO … wondering how they were going to make a 90 minute movie out of a single mass murder. The real Speck murdered the group of nurses (except for one), fled the area, and then he was caught, from what I remember of his story. I never really found his story to be that interesting and I don’t think that it translated well into a full-length movie (also, a lot of poetic license was taken – there are inaccuracies). Despite some inter esting points in the film, I feel that the story of Speck is probably best left to forensic documentaries.

CHICAGO … is written and directed by Michael Feifer and it stars Corin Nemec, Andrew Divoff, Tony Todd, and Debbie Rochon. Basically, the film is about Richard Speck (Nemec) and his one-night Chicago killing spree, which resulted in the deaths of several nurses. Some background is given on Speck – you get to take a peek into his childhood and his deviant behavior prior to and during the Chicago incident. Most of the film is about the detective (Divoff) who is pursuing the elusive Speck in a cat-and-mouse game.

Yes, reading the cast list is almost an indication of trouble to come. It seems like there is a new trend of placing several horror icons together in movies and it rarely seems to benefit the film, or work out at all. Sometimes it does work, as in the case of WISHMASTER or BEHIND THE MASK, but it is a very risky gamble. I did like Andrew Divoff in this movie; he did a recent stint on Television’s “Lost” (3rd season) and I really think that he is an interesting actor. Some “character” actors seem to play each role in a very similar way, but Divoff always seems to put his own unique spin on a part. I always like to see Tony Todd, because of his formidable presence and voice, but he really did not have a lot to work with here; his scenes, as a lead detective, were fairly sparse. Before I forget (how can I forget!), Debbie Ro chon also has a bit part as a prostitute, but as enjoyable as she is, there was not a lot for her to work with, either.

In a very strange turn of events, Corin Nemec was the highlight of the film, as Richard Speck; it’s hard to believe that he played the quirky Parker Lewis, back in the early 1990s. Although this film’s vision of Speck is more of a dramatized version of the real killer, Nemec did give a chilling, charming, and psychotic performance. However, it seemed like the overall film was stretched too thin; there may not be enough substance in the Speck story to propel a whole film and the details were not really accurate. From what I understand, Speck was not as charismatic a character – he always seemed like he was kind of a creepy, quiet guy who women would steer clear of. This Speck was more of an alpha-male, ladies man which really did not fit the story. Also, I remember that Speck killed all but one of the nurses in a small house. In this film, the killing occurs in a large dormitory – I don’t know, maybe I’m being picky, but more adherence to true details may have resulted in a stronger picture.

Cutting to the chase: CHICAGO MASSACRE: RICHARD SPECK is okay; it is entertaining on a certain level, mainly due to Nemec and Divoff, but I didn’t think that it was a very compelling film. Like I said before, a lot has to do with the fact that I don’t think that Speck’s story is very interesting. Even the kill scenes lack a kind of spark; they are violent and slightly bloody, but they are largely standard kill scenes. As a contrast, I remember saying that the Zodiac Killer was grossly underused in ZODIAC – with such a rich, enigmatic character, how could you go wrong? Refer to the Infernal Dreams Archives and read how. It just supports my theory that biopics/real-life-killer films run the risk of only being as interesting as the real-life story is. If you have a plain life story, you may wind up with a plain film. At any rate, if yo u like real-life-killer films such as ED GEIN (2000), BUNDY, GACY, ZODIAC, or DAHMER, then you may like this film. It’s worth seeing for the curiosity factor and some of the performances, but it wasn’t as satisfying as I thought that it would be. Sometimes these films are either a hit or a miss.