Even Eastwood can't save this one. Yet another killer-who-knows-everything-and-is-everywhere-at-all-times thriller. This time we are supposed to believe it because the killer was a cop. So...? Doesn't mean that he has to be incredibly clever and know all the tricks in the book, now does it? At times I had a feeling I was watching a De Palma film - and that is the ultimate insult I can give to a thriller; coincidences, all-knowing criminal, etc. Now why did the criminal not kill Eastwood's older daughter (or both) when he had the chance? Once he was out of jail why didn't he start with killing Eastwood instead of those prostitutes (after all, it turned out that Eastwood had arrested him years before)? How did the killer manage to find a shovel on a grave yard, while Eastwood was chasing him? Are we supposed to believe that shovels simply lie around on graveyards just like that? "Okay, boys, digging's finished... Damn, I'm tired; think I'll just leave my shovel lying around here so that perverts have easier access to the corpses, not to mention so that chased criminals can use it in self-defense against tough cops...". Certainly not as bad as de Palma's most notorious thrillers, but it should have been a lot better.