DRIVEN TO KILL… AGAIN

1 Stars
Year Released: 2013
MPAA Rating: Unrated
Running Time: 110 minutes
Click to Expand Credits:

In Driven to Kill… Again, serial killer Antun (Bill Lee Loscalzo) is working his way slowly through a small town by first enticing his victims to smoke out with him before murdering them in various ways. Then he disguises their death to look like accidents or suicides, and moves on to the next victim. Unfortunately for Antun, his latest crew of victims includes Rocco (Rocco), an annoying musician who is slowly becoming Antun’s Waterloo. Will Antun finish Rocco off, or will Rocco catch wise and turn the tables?

Filmmaker Rocco Iannacchino (who prefers to go professionally by the name of “Rocco”) wrote, directed, edited, produced, composed and starred in Driven to Kill… Again. He was also in charge of casting, wardrobe, set design, makeup, props, stunt blocking and special effects, while also taking the title of director of cinematography and handling some lighting duties. In other words, if this film is a great success, look to Rocco. If it’s horrible, look to Rocco. I’m surprised it wasn’t just named Killing Rocco.

Unfortunately, this is not a case where I come to praise Rocco for all he accomplished with his film. I’ll admit I respect, to a certain extent, his decision to do practically everything, or perhaps it was a necessity (it often is in low budget filmmaking), but this is a film that could’ve used someone else handling various aspects of the production, particularly when it comes to editing… and also writing and probably directing… but let’s focus on the editing right now.

To say that this is a film that lingers is to seriously understate its lack of editorial flow. This film is a bloated mess of an edit that, at almost two hours long (roughly ten minutes of which are end credits), is unnecessarily exhausting. Often scenes seem to be running right up to the actor breaking character, with a brief moment of said break included.

But it’s not like it’s just a simple case of scenes being too long where you could solve the problem by tightening up the edit, however; sequences rarely flow smoothly into or among each other. One lengthy sequence involving another killer (Sam Rappold) has little-to-no connection to the other characters and seems to exist solely because it was filmed, and it seemed like a good idea on the page.

The film is also painfully repetitious; there’s only so many times you can hear a guy ask someone if they “want a smoke,” watch them enjoy some poisoned weed and then wait for them to get murdered. Except Rocco. Attempts to take out Rocco turn the film into a bizarre, weed-addled, Wile E. Coyote and Roadrunner-style endeavor.

So did I enjoy anything about the film, or was it a complete wash? Frankly, it’s pretty bad, but I did find enjoyment in some of the bold visual composition choices the film makes (the first few times it makes them, but this film overdoes everything). I also liked the active camerawork and usage of different lens and depth of field to sometimes achieve a wavy or shimmery effect.

Of course, at the same time, the film does seem to enjoy the severely uncomfortable close-up too much, and it also meanders in the land of soft focus more than is welcome. Really, the film is a cinematic embodiment of the Rocco character, which is to say that it is annoying and I often wanted it to just end. You’re not supposed to sympathize with a murderer like Antun, but at a certain point you wish he’d have taken out Rocco so someone else could be the main focus.

That said, I am a fan of absurdity, and there’s quite a bit of it mixed in, whether it be Rocco’s bike-riding musical montage early on or even his disturbingly inspired way of defending himself near the end of the film. Again, though, just as there were elements to the visuals that worked, those same elements eventually became a hindrance.

In this case, the absurdity becomes an issue in moments such as the dinner scene, where Rocco starts to get a handjob, through his pants, from a nun while the two are sitting next to Rocco’s wife and daughter. And not like some clandestine, under-the-table, hope-we-don’t-get-caught moment; they start talking about it while it’s going on.

Bill Lee Loscalzo is sufficiently unsettling as Antun and, as far as the cast goes, is easily the bright spot. His character isn’t all that developed, however, so we never really get why he’s going around smoking out people and then killing them beyond, hey, he’s the killer, but that’s not the actor’s fault. He does the disturbing best with what he’s given.

Driven to Kill… Again is a mess, but it does have a moment or two of charm. Just not two hours worth of charm (or arguably five minutes worth). I would’ve loved for this to be an example of a filmmaker wearing all the production hats and creating something other filmmakers can aspire to, but unfortunately this turned out to be an example in the other direction, showing how important it is to have other, skilled, creative collaborators involved with the production.

This film was submitted for review through our Submission for Review system. If you have a film you’d like us to see, and we aren’t already looking into it on our own, you too can utilize this service.



Posted on February 26, 2013 in Reviews by
Buffer


If you liked this article then you may also like the following Film Threat articles:
Popular Stories from Around the Web
11 Comments on "DRIVEN TO KILL… AGAIN"

  1. Rocco on Tue, 26th Feb 2013 12:49 pm 

    Dear Mark,

    In response to your ass whipping, nut crunching film review of my film, “Driven To KIll Again”, I’d like to take this opportunity to make some personal comments. First off, I like to be professionally known as Rocco. I intentionally don’t use my last name because it has been butchered since the 1st grade when I would get up to sing a solo at the school Lunch Time Talent Show. It was always mispronounced by my principal and she’d ask me to pronounce it, and then she would fuck it up again, and so on. So if you could delete my last name from the review, I’d appreciate it. If you had noticed the credits (sorry they ran on for ten minutes) you would have seen I don’t use a last name. You failed to mention the music for the film (since you did mention all the other things I did do right or wrong) or the fact that I put a musical score together for the movie. By the way, I played all the instruments on “Antun’s Theme.” I’m also a former member of Grammy having had two self produced albums Grammy Entry- Nominated.

    You state that you were surprised that the movie wasn’t named, “Killing Rocco.” The whole point of it was (if you had been following the plot points I revealed) you would have realized that “Antun” was always a stalker. Later on in a flashback, it is revealed that “Antun” had stalked “Rocco” on Halloween when “Rocco” was just a mere child of 12. And in the end, it wasn’t “Rocco” who finished off “Antun” it was “Detective Dan Goldman” (Daniel Kaplan) who gave a fantastic performance. Not a word mentioned about actor, Daniel Kaplan.

    Yes, I intentionally kept in the cast breaking character at the end of the scene with “Sister Meredith” (Meridith Turkel) , “Antun’s” sister, feeling up “Rocco’s” leg. I thought it was funny. I do not recall the actress ever once touching my penis or balls in the movie, just my leg. I wanted her to touch my privates, but her boyfriend was watching, and she probably would of done it, but her being friends with my wife (who was sitting next to her) might have also put a damper on the grope.

    The reason why I used the “lengthy sequence” (5 minute scene) involving another killer (Sam Rappold) was to show how different “Antun’s” killing style was to that of the impulsive, get caught, reckless, insane style exhibited by “Evan Martin.” Also, I based this scene on a true event that took place in my town. I thought it would be interesting to show “Antun’s” reaction to the murder of Janice Morgan” (Danielle Viteretti), and how “Antun” found it amusing. Also, this is the first time that “Rocco” sees another side to “Antun”.

    The line, “Do you want to smoke?”, also is intrinsically connected to the musical score, and is “Antun’s” way of luring the pot heads to befriending him. You don’t mention the line that followed “Antun’s” by “Matty”(Stephen Reyes). “What could be better than being drunk and stoned?” Once again the ominous theme kicks in.

    You mention that “Antun’s” reasoning for killing isn’t fully satisfying to the audience. You might recall that “Antun” happened to find a manuscript entitled, “Driven To KIll” in the garbage. It was to be a novel that told about how a killer could get away with murdering in a clever way. “Antun” took this as his bible, and got the idea to kill in this fashion from the manuscript, that “Rocco” finds in “Antun’s room towards the end of the movie.

    I think you are wrong when you say the movie doesn’t even have “5 minutes worth of charm.” We showed this movie to test audiences I did not know personally and we heard the laughs in the right places, and the audience were engaged for the whole movie.

    What about that great scene when “Brother Christian” visits “Rocco” ? This is a five minute scene.
     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuRUXVH5vnE 

    Didn’t you like the priest getting shot and then burned to a crisp on the cross?  No mention of the “Showdown” between “Antun & “Rocco” ?  What about the cock bite inflicted on “Antun” by “Rocco” ? That final scene between “Antun”, “Rocco” and “Detective Dan Goldman” was epic.  The closeup of “Detective Dan’s” face after he shoots “Antun” with the music is satisfying. My personal homage to Sergio Leone. 

    What about the aspect of “Antun” asking “Rocco” to write and record music to a sound that “Antun” had been hearing in his head, (which also happens to be the movie’s musical theme music) only for “Rocco” at the end of the movie giving “Antun” his music theme on 8 track?  My film is far from perfect, but it is more entertaining than a lot of the stuff that has been made by the film school “elite.”  

    No, I never went to film school. But I am an an optioned screenwriter, but that’s another story and I don’t even want to go down that rabbit hole.  That is why I made my own movie, and did it all my self, from getting the costumes just right, to the make up, location scouting, writing, directing, musical scoring, and so on; because they yanked my chain with the option with all the bullshit and I figured why wait to make a movie, when you can do it yourself.


    Report Comment

  2. Mark Bell on Tue, 26th Feb 2013 1:24 pm 

    Rocco, a few things. On using your last name in the review, the film was submitted with the last name included; end credits may not have utilized it, but since you submitted the film, I figured you would’ve wanted me to use the information you submitted. I’ll edit the review to mention that you like to be professionally known only as Rocco, but your last name is, you know, your last name (and I don’t think anyone is reading this out loud to butcher the pronunciation).

    Regarding the various scenes you set out and explain above, you’re basically asking me why I didn’t just mention almost every scene in the film, and then explain the why or whats. I review the film, I don’t re-tell the entire film; for those who may actually want to see it, they may not want the entire thing spelled out for them in a review. Or a review comment, but that’s your call.

    For the record, in that line of thinking, I did refer to the “the cock bite inflicted on ‘Antun’ by ‘Rocco’” when I mentioned Rocco’s “disturbingly inspired way of defending himself near the end of the film.” I could’ve come right out and said what he did, but that doesn’t leave anything for the audience to experience fresh. Since it is one of the few moments I did think was good in the film, I didn’t want to ruin it for anybody. But, since you mentioned it in your comment, I guess it’s done.

    My opinion and criticisms of the film are set out in the review. You can tell me that I’m wrong, and try to explain why I’m wrong, but frankly your comment doesn’t change my mind about the experience of watching the film. I didn’t miss anything you mentioned above, but I don’t think they’re as great as you think they are, or that they work necessarily as you think they should. We’ll have to agree to disagree here.

    And as I mentioned at the end, I would’ve loved for this to be a great example of DIY ingenuity; I have a huge respect for DIY, and I agree with you about not waiting for someone else to make a movie when you can do it yourself. That said, just because you do it yourself, it doesn’t mean it’s going to be the best it could be. Lots of DIY filmmakers collaborate on other aspects of production, whether it be the editing or set design or whatever. I think, as I mentioned, that this is a film that could’ve benefited from more than one person doing the majority of the work, particularly in the editing. It still would’ve been DIY, and it still would’ve been a case of making a film without waiting for someone to say “okay, make a film.”

    But, I know sometimes that can’t happen, and it’s unfortunate. I respect that you made a film and took a shot, I just didn’t like how it turned out. That’s just how it is. I can still respect the attempt without liking the result.


    Report Comment

  3. Don R. Lewis on Tue, 26th Feb 2013 2:11 pm 

    Rocco-
    this is a FILM REVIEW…not a congratulatory piece on how great you are for making a film. And frankly, judging from Mark’s review and your rambling, annoying response…I have zero desire to see the film.

    When you submit for a review or to a festival, people see what you give them. They respond to that. It’s idiotic to go back over this review point by point and try to see Mark (or, anyone) missed something. That’s idiotic. Are you trying to persuade him to change his mind? What is the point of your response? You were unable or incapable of expressing what you were trying to express to THIS viewer during your film. Get over it.

    In closing, I don’t know you nor have I heard of you or your film but based on this review and your response to it, I will PayPal you $5 American dollars if this film has been accepted in any film festival that wasn’t put on by you or a friend. I will also pay $5 if a company is distributing it. In short, I think it’s very clear you made a bad film that no one really wants to see unless you pay them to do so. I’d lick your wounds and get back after it and make another one. You seem to have many talents judging by all the credits listed in this film….maybe you need to get some help to focus on your strong points for the next film?


    Report Comment

  4. Rocco on Tue, 26th Feb 2013 3:14 pm 

    Don, my fellow filmmaker, and I might add FilmThreat critic, I will take you up on your offer of $5 American dollars for either inclusion to a film festival or Driven To KIll Again being picked up for distribution. I thank you in advance for the opportunity! Now let the games begin!


    Report Comment

  5. Don R. Lewis on Tue, 26th Feb 2013 4:06 pm 

    It’s on!! ;-)


    Report Comment

  6. Rocco on Tue, 26th Feb 2013 4:13 pm 

    :)


    Report Comment

  7. Rocco on Thu, 26th Sep 2013 10:16 pm 

    Don, we got distro. So, instead of giving me 5 bucks, how ’bout you stream rent my film ($2.99), and write a review?

    http://distrify.com/films/7060-kyrie/products/9887-kyrie


    Report Comment

  8. Mark Bell on Fri, 27th Sep 2013 11:04 am 

    Is it really “being picked up for distribution” if it is Distrify? Isn’t that self-distribution, with Distrify as the platform for release?


    Report Comment

  9. Don R. Lewis on Fri, 27th Sep 2013 2:10 pm 

    Rocco-

    I’ll give you the $5 because I don’t feel good about gloating over everything I said coming true. I certainly don’t mean to be an “I told you so!” kind of person. However your continued lack of self-awareness and inability to listen to criticism: constructive or otherwise is pretty sad.

    That being said, I’d rather give you $5 than pay $2.99 to rent your film. I don’t think rewarding bad behavior is prudent. What’s your paypal address?


    Report Comment

  10. Rocco on Fri, 27th Sep 2013 4:42 pm 

    Don,
    I appreciate you wanting to pay me the 5 bucks. But I can’t except it. It is true that I did not get a distribution deal, as Mark pointed out Distrify is self-distro. But, I must admit I did take the criticisms to heart and did edit my film to 1:30 minutes. Mark was right. It was a bloated mess of an edit. I changed the title as well to reflect the true essence of the movie. Kyrie. Don, I want you and the Filmthreat community to know that I am able to except criticism. I might of said some things in the heat of the moment, but I think when someone reviews your film one should be aloud to counter opinions. I’m very happy to have had the bad review because I took all of it, honed in on it and I believe its made my movie that much better. I think Distrify is an interesting concept. I’ll let you know how it goes. *Peace*
    http://distrify.com/films/7060-kyrie/products/9887-kyrie


    Report Comment

  11. Rocco on Thu, 17th Apr 2014 9:03 pm 

    Come view the movie KYRIE for free for a limited time : New Title – New Edit. Drop me a line, and let me know what you think! :)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTON1sipMRw


    Report Comment

Tell us what you're thinking...





Comments are governed by the Terms of Use of this Site. Click on the "Report Comment" link if you feel a comment is in violation of the Terms of Use, and the comment will be reviewed appropriately.