Watch Slaughter of the Innocents For Free

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.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

I think Scott Glenn could have easily handled this serial killer movie by himself, and "Slaughter of the Innocents" would have been better off for it. The nepotism casting of James Glickenhausus's own son, into a script that didn't need him, is the main problem with this seriously flawed film. Everything involving the kid is totally unbelievable and an insult to the audience's intelligence. At times I don't mind suspending realism for sake of a story, but here it's ridiculous. A kid flies to Salt Lake City on his own, intimidates an adult zoo employee into revealing incriminating information, and manages to use his computer to locate the killer's hideout. There is never any clue how this boy wonder travels all over Utah, other than stealing a mountain bike. Sure the flying ark at the end is kind of intriguing, but getting there is a real brain drain of logic. - MERK

At first I believed this was a SILENT OF THE LAMBS rip—off, and not a very bad one, and I even wondered why it wasn't more famous ,or at least somewhat famous. Then I saw why:--because it's too lousy;--because it's so ridiculous;--because it's extravagant in an over—camped manner. Because that kid is so annoying. These are several causes.It's a HOWCATCHEM, so over—the—top and bombastic as to be ridiculous.It plumbs new depths of rubbish. The script is bad and stupid, the kid is annoying.What's ultra disgusting is Scott Glenn's cult actor prestige.

This slightly violent thriller revolves around a serial killer who has now kidnapped a little girl. On his trail are the FBI and the twelve-year-old son of the agent leading the investigation. Although the acting is not too bad with the man playing the killer giving a very creepy performance, Scott Glen came off as being too cocky at times. On the whole, the film is quite enjoyable and stylish if you ignore the person making the most headway in the case is a twelve-year-old child!The film's main downfall certainly has to be this kid, Jesse, who is far too perfect and intelligent to be credible (although he does make a pleasant change from the snotty, rude brats that often pop up in films these days). Also, he brings about plot holes such, as how can a boy of twelve be allowed to buy himself a plane ticket to traverse the continent, what kind of man takes his young son to a murder scene, why does the FBI give a kid access to their mainframe and why on earth is a grown man intimidated by this boy?I think if you ignore the fact that there are many non-too-credible moments in the film, it does have the capacity to chill you. Certainly, the guy playing the killer is rather frightening. If not, you'll get a good laugh out of seeing the kid playing 'bad cop' as he tries to question a suspect, using fancy computers that are barely available now let alone in 1992/3 (his personal computer resembles something more suited to 'Star Trek') and solving the case while the grown FBI agents flounder around like incompetents.

I like the way this movie was made, the only bad thing is... they had to use the director's son as a lead. Sure, he didn't do that bad of a job, but it would have been better if they could have used Elijah Wood, or someone else less annoying. Overall this was a decent film that I'd see again. It is creepy to think we have these type of people running around.