5/10
Film is OK, but don't think it's accurate
25 January 2010
Some people love this film, Some hate it.

I grew up in Texarkana, I was in the film as an extra in several scene. I dated one of the girls "killed" in the film and I was friends with the director, Charles B. Oierce.

It's not a bad film for what it is - a low budget drive-in film. There have been better and worse. Its enjoyable.

However, some people think it's the film depicts the Phantom Killings as they happened. It doesn't. The film takes a lot - and I mean a LOT - of liberties with the truth.

For the record, the Phantom Killer assaulted one couple and killed two other couples. The motive was robbery. He was caught - his name was Yuell Swinney - but there wasn't enough evidence to convict him of the murders. Much of what the police had came from Swinney's wife - she led them to items stolen in the robbery, was present at one set of killing - but she would not and could not be made to testify against her husband. They did convict him of car theft, his third felony, and he went away for life.

But one of his earlier convictions was overturned. He was released in the 1970s but was back in prison within a year. He died years later in Dallas, in a secure nursing home, suffering from dementia.

The last attack on a "farmer" and his wife - played by Dawn Wells - was not an actual Phantom incident. It was assumed to be at the time. But nothing fit the MO and the gun was different. Also, the "farmer" was a well-known local fence and bookmaker. It was most likely a local gangland killing - Texarkana had a lot of organized criminal activity back then.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed