copycat ..... a good title

I'm sorry but I find that a really bad leap of logic. You might as well say that every single movie ever made about serial killers is the same. What exactly can you tie between Silence of the Lambs (the other Lecter movies were made AFTER) and Copycat? The killer masquerading as a dead cop? Well first of all that's not the same, in Silence the cop wasn't supposed to be dead, he was supposed to be alive and Lecter's way out of the place. In Silence neither killer is modeling himself after another. Just because Bill and Lecter have a connection doesn't make it relevant. A serial killer following the careers, and some even correspond with, other serial killers isn't unheard of. And it's something that movies like Red Dragon originated. Besides Buffalo Bill was just a former patient (or was it a lover of a former patient) of Lecter's. He wasn't trying to emulate him, make up for his mistakes, or be his 'disciple' in any way.

And while I haven't seen se7en in a long time, that film was about a religiously motivated serial killer right? Where is the parallel? The killer in that movie thought of himself as an instrument of god, doling out punishment on the world for not adhering to god's mandated 'sins'. Peter and Daryll were more typical (at least for modern times) serial killers, in it for the glory and the infamy. They didn't care about who their victims were or what they'd done, they only cared about the image, the presentation, instilling fear in their victims and the populus in general.

Frankly I found Copycat to be a really good film. It dealt with many different facets of the phenomenon. The role of the police, desperate to help but powerless to understand the motivation of the killers. The role of the psychologists who study them, how they become the target of the killer's rage, and how what they do invades their own minds. It also had a side story, about the fact that cops aren't perfect and you can't always count on 'the book' to tell you how to do your job. Because even when you go by the book, things happen that are beyond your control. Weaver and Hunt were really good in this film, they didn't come off as damsel in distress cliches. They were strong women, victims yes but never victimized. They refused to be used as pawns in both Daryll and Peter's game. Instead they went on the offensive and that is what saved their lives. Connick and McNamara played their parts with realism, two very different kinds of killers. Peter would never claim a voice told him what to do, he was too proud of his work. He was much like Bundy, the ever charming disarmer of women. Daryll was much more the antisocial sociopath type. Not charming like Peter, just out to destroy and doing anything to continue his 'fun'. He didn't care if he degraded his work by claiming schizophrenic 'voices'.

The less a man makes declarative statements the less apt he is to look foolish in retrospect.

The title of this board and the criticism made by Herr-Waldo is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Other than the fact that Seven, the Lecter films, and Copycat all feature serial killers, there isn't that much similar between the films. Each has their own identity. And all are pretty good. This film is not a copy of another; it just happens to be in the same genre as the films you mentioned. Obviously you missed the entire point of the film's title.

"You do not know who you are *beep* with!!"
-Blade 2

Hold on a second here....Copycat isn't original because it apes Seven and ALL Hannibal Lector films???
And Seven and Silence were totally original themselves were they?
Silence doesn't borrow from The Texas Chainsaw Massacre?
Seven doesn't borrow from from every serial killer film ever made?
No film these days is totally original, the fact that the film is called COPYcat should tell you something...
PS: It's not too smart claiming Copycat borrowed from "All hannibal lecter films" when two fo them were produced AFTER Copycat...
Durh!