Mel Gibson's "Apocalypto" is not a normal movie but a big make-up movie

From the moment the film starts to the moment it ends you feel you are transported into the ancient Mayan civilization, seeing full body tattoos, body art, multiple piercing and jewelry It is a very exciting motion picture to look at, so strange to watch It has the esthetic that began to appeal and it fills you with wonder

Our hero Jaguar Paw (Rudy Youngblood) is a cunning hunter whose father requests him not to tell of what he saw in forest today He is warned to strike fear from his heart and not to bring it into the villageHis wife, Seven (Dalia Hernandez) is pregnant, and their small son, Turtles Run (Carlos Emilio Baez), live modestly in a village surrounded by a tranquil rain forest...

After a night of frivolity, the peaceful existence of this small community of hunters collapses when savage outsiders begin torching and burning everything in sight killing most and taking away dozens left

Going undetected, Jaguar Paw hides his wife and child in a deep, waterless well promising to return when the attack has passed However when he is captured by his fearsome aggressors, he is tied to a pole and marched with his friends and fellow villagers to a forsaken land, stone-built, where the earth bleeds

A fortuitous switch provides Jaguar Paw with an unexpected opportunity to escape and get back to his family in peril But for that he has to make his way home through a killing field and a dangerous jungle, racing against sadistic captors hot on his trail

"Apocalypto" transports the viewers to a strange and unreachable world, to a civilization in decline, to an infernal vision of a city and its inhabitants, to shocking images of human barbarism which has always existed throughout the ages


Tonight I went to an advance screening of Mel Gibson's new film Apocalypto. This is an interesting movie for many reasons, the first being its Mayan language. I am hearing that this is actually considered a foreign film by the Golden Globes because of it, regardless of the movie originating from America. This could be written off as a gimmick, but it is one of the film's strongest points, the movie looks, feels, and sounds(despite for a few lines that needed to be edited out) authentic.

What this movie is is gory. It is one of the bloodiest movies I have seen and should be avoided if blood bothers you. Here is a great scenic moment from the film. If this sounds too much for you than stay away because yes, it gets much worse.

The captives are brought in covered in blue paint. They look up at the top of a vast temple where an executioner is thanking the lords as he rips the hearts out and decapitates their fellow men. The heads roll down the long stair case followed soon after by their bodies. The heart is put on hot rocks and thousands up people cheer. There are hundreds of heads on steaks all around.......

This is the first movie I have ever been to where people actually walked out of the theater.

Getting back to the movie itself there are quite a few good qualities as well. The acting is superb all around, I actually cared about the main character and his family. The prophecy made by the sick girl is a clever piece of writing as well as the dream the main character has. The empire of the main tribe is quite amazing and will take your breath away in both its horror and its beauty.The early scenes of humor are very nice and help us appreciate the characters and a nice break from the extreme violence that follows. The movie looks amazing, the characters designs and costumes are well done as is the sets. Finally, superb direction by Mel Gibson make all of this work together quite well.

My main problems with this movie are these: The movie is too long (2 and half hours) and includes some surprisingly campy scenes. The birth in the well did not work for me at all. The last chase sequence is far too long and could have been cut in half.

Overall I was slightly disappointed by this film. I wanted more Mayan culture and less running through the forest. However, Mel Gibson had something else in mind and I applaud him for making the movie he wanted to make. Despite my problems the film is quite good if you can make it through the gore. I would be highly surprised if this did well at the box office due to the extreme gore, other language language(Americans don't like subtitles), long running time, and of course the now infamous name of Mel Gibson attached. However I enjoyed the movie and might want to see it again. If you can believe that.


I will say that the cinematography was beautiful. Images was breathtaking. It was upbeat, and thrilling.

Major problem? None of the facts add up. The representation of a very advanced civilization has been torn apart and made to look like savages.

First of all, Mayans were very advanced in calendars and time, so the eclipse that freaked out the "Mayans" would have definitely not have happened. Another LARGE LARGE LARGE mistake is that the Mayans did NOT sacrifice humans or rip out hearts. That was the Aztecs.

The Mayan's were actually very civilized and the movie failed to capture the beauty in their buildings. They also did not paint their buildings white.

This seems to be more about how the Aztecs would have acted, for they were much more into war and fighting than the Mayans or the Incas or what have you.

Now, the Mayans and the Aztecs would never ever scar their bodies as well.

I think that the reason why many people are upset is because he misrepresents the Mayan culture so much and helps stereo type all natives of Mexico as savages that really turned me off.

If you go and see this PLEASE keep in mind that the movie holds no truth whatsoever. It may be entertaining, I admit again, the imagery was stunning. But keep in mind that you're watching a bunch of false "facts" about a very advanced civilization that already knew about the stars, the moon, the sun. They paved their streets, built grand temples and other things.

And if you have any questions about the Mayan history, go check out a book on Mexican History. Next time I hope Gibson will.

And I'm also Mexican, so I should know my history.


The first 95 minutes or so -- up to the eclipse -- is possibly the best movie to date in 2006. It's a voyage of discovery through a virgin world of alien but understandable sensations and it culminates in an arrival at a city of pyramids which constitutes one of the recent cinema's great set pieces. Bizarre, spectacular, hypnotic, fully realized -- like landing on an alien planet of savage, fascinating beauty. After the eclipse, however, the movie settles into a conventional "chase" mode which, though interesting, can't compare to the first 95 minutes. The ending disappoints in that it introduces an outside element to this previously enclosed world, and the ending can't resolve the movie's basic dilemma: how can it be both the story of a civilization's decline and also the story of a man's personal triumph.

The subtitles actually help in that lines which might have sounded silly or stilted when spoken in English somehow "work" when condensed to printed form. (Though one subtitle stumbles with a piece of discordant slang.) These subtitles also help create a distance between the modern audience and the lost world of the past being shown on the screen. And words, either spoken or subtitled, often aren't needed here because the cast has great faces and can use these faces to convey both information and emotion.

Though not a fan of "The Passion of the Christ" and though feeling that "Braveheart" was overrated, it's thumbs up for Mel Gibson's "Apocalypto."

(If only we could get rid of that ungrammatical ad-line: "No one can outrun their destiny.")


Why disguise a C-level slasher flick as an historical epic? If your true calling as a director is directing films that are thin on plot and gratuitously violent, why not just direct The Texas Chainsaw Massacre Part Deux?

This film was marketed as a lavish historical epic chronicling the last days of the Mayan civilization, and one would expect to see a film that had something to say about decadence and political corruption. Hardly a new theme, but if done properly it could have made for an entertaining film.

Unfortunately Mel Gibson fails to execute even this minor task. As in Braveheart, which WAS an entertaining film, Gibson paints his characters in black or white. They are two-dimensional "good guys" or "bad guys." In Braveheart, the English and their Scottish co-conspirators are Eeeeeevil, as are the Mayan elite in Apocalypto who are practically drooling blood from their grinning mouths. This is called pulp, which when treated by someone with an ounce of wit (i.e. Tarantino), is fair game. However, Mel Gibson isn't witty but painfully earnest, and thus his violent formula is disturbing rather than entertaining.

I won't even address this film's glaring historical inaccuracies, other than to say that Hollywood rarely delivers in this regard and one no longer expects it to.

This convoluted, meandering film was either one of three things: 1. A failed epic in love with its own pornographic violence. There was no point to the violence as there was no point to the film. 2. A subversive propaganda tool which painted the Mayans as bloodthirsty savages whose own wrongdoing earned them their downfall. The final scene showed the arrival of the Europeans, which we know spelled a new world order for Mayans who had so suffered under their own leaders' excesses. 3. A film whose only point is to say that violence is pointless and inescapable. I say this in light of the final scene in which the two mains have escaped the ruin of the city, and instinctively also veer away from the approaching Europeans. They decide to "go to the forest" in hopes of living out their lives in peace, away from the destructiveness of all civilization. The point in this case, is very bleak, since we can assume that they won't be able to escape no matter how far they run, and will likely perish from smallpox or some other disease within a few years. Or they will escape and become the descendants of generations of Maya leading into today.

But who knows what Mel Gibson is attempting to say with this picture? I certainly don't. I base my one-star rating on guesses 1. and 2. I suppose if his motivations are more in tune with 3., then we would have at least something of a theme, and as such my rating could go up to 5. or 6. But I really will never know because if he is in fact making a point such as the one I have guessed at in 3., he fails in his utter vagueness and leaves us with a film that is ultimately disappointing, if not entirely offensive!


Mel Gibson has shown his incompetence again. The Mayan Empire (actually a bunch of city states much like Greece), during the Classic Period (300-900 A.D.) was considered by many to be the peak of all of the Mexican cultures. Astronomy, language, religion, culture achieved their highest potential during this time, and had declined by 900 AD and disappeared entirely by 1200 AD. The achievements of the post-Classic period, 900-1521 A.D., were a far cry from the CLassic Period; the cities were in decay and the people scattered; nothing of the city life portrayed in the movie existed in 1519, when Cortes first entered the Yucatan peninsula. By the time of Cortes' first landing on San Juan de Ulúa island near the future city of Veracruz in 1518 (no other Spaniards had landed in Mexico other than a couple of shipwrecks in 1511 or so), the Mayan city states (no where near Veracruz, where Cortes landed) had long since disappeared. And the area around Veracruz was under Aztec control, not Mayan.

The temple of Kulkulcan in Chichen Itza; which was in it's height from 800-1200 A.D. somewhat resembles the temple in the movie, but the sacrifices portrayed in the movie were more characteristic of the Aztec Empire (Tenochtitlan, now Mexico City). Though Mexican influence (earlier Teotehuican and Mixtec, and later Aztec) was felt in Chichen Itza in the Classic and Post Classic Period, it is unlikely that sacrifice on the Aztec scale ever occurred on the Yucatan peninsula.

THis is misleading, and at it's worst, racist. If you are looking for an action movie, look no further. But if you are looking for an accurate examination of the Mayan civilization, keep looking.

To the Christian zealots who say "This is a film about the horrors of the Mesoamerican world and how the arrival of Europeans and the Christian faith that motivated them ultimately put an end to that paganistic hell on earth.", I say that the Spaniards and the Catholic church are responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths by starvation, disease and slavery. The Church enslaved millions of American natives to dig out gold and silver to send back to the Church. They destroyed literature and religion and science in the name of Catholicism. They decimated the New Worlds and destroyed civilizations greater than anything Europe has ever produced, in the name of the Christian faith. You people underline what it is that most people understand about zealots: they lie in the name of their cause. Any sacrifice by others is worth the good they reap in the name of their faith. They are hypocrites.


As with previous Gibson helmed movies the visuals are stunning. However, where this movie falls short is in 2 very important departments, plot and originality.

I won't spoil the plot (or lack thereof) but if you've seen the trailer you've seen the first hour of the movie. After that it becomes as dull and predictable as watching paint dry. You know whats going to happen long before it does, and when it does, it looks good, but it's still not very fulfilling.

The hype overstates the violence, which really isn't that graphic nor prolific and what there is fits within the story, nothing is gratuitous, neither does it do anything for the plot.

To sum it up, this is a glorified chase movie, unfortunately the chase doesn't begin until over an hour in and even then you know exactly how it will end.

If you enjoy cinematography then this is a treat. If you prefer some form of action, plot or meaning to your movies, I suggest you avoid.


Just saw Apocalypto last night with a free pass ticket. Surely one of the goriest and most graphic movies ever made. In the wake of "Passion," I think it's safe to opine that Mel Gibson likes to dwell on torture a bit too much, and this is my biggest reservation. Not that "first nation" communities in America all made nice with each other before the Europeans arrived. Of course not. There is clearly a cultural message going on, regarding violence, war, and man's inhumanity to man. I was hoping for at least some vague allusion to the Mayan/Aztec calendar, as the predictions of 2012 in the New Age community are revving up and fascinating -- but that's just my own bugaboo. Otherwise, the film-making of Apocalypto is masterful. The authenticity of the Mesoamerican depictions rivals, if not surpasses, Malick's "New World." The make-up and prosthetics, tattoos, scarification of the cast, as well as the overall look and texture of the movie, make for one of the most vivid and haunting movies you will ever see. Though it contains some earthy humor, this movie is definitely not for the fainthearted. It is a Class A adrenaline churner. Perhaps Gibson will redeem himself in the public eye after this work. Bound to be a blockbuster.


The movie was well filmed, on a great location, with fantastic backdrops, and is Mel Gibson accurate on all accounts? No, but directors and cinematographers must make changes and put in their montages what they see as a visual story.

A small tribe being abducted to be sacrificed did indeed happen in the time of the film 1517 & 1518 the Post Classical Maya period. Even though it was the Aztecs who were the strongest in the time portrayed by the film, "they 'the Mayas' were close allies of the Aztecs, they shared ideas and religion; and there were trade routes throughout Mesoamerica.' (Adams,1998)

Were there all kinds of sacrifices going on? Yes, the Mesoamericans were going through all kinds of bad prophecies, such as the hundred year drought and there had been very little rain for the crops. People were starving, the moon ate the sun, and wild animals were attacking the villagers more and more. Since the Europeans had already landed in the Antilles and had already ventured into the Yucatan coast; there was an epidemic of measles and chicken pox that were heavily affecting the American Indigenous, who had no resistance for such diseases (the little girl in the movie). These were all signs that the gods were displeased.

For the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas blood was life. It was the flow of life, the liquid that provided life for them, and for the gods as well; and if the gods did not get enough blood the gods were unhappy. So the Aztecs and Mayas were sacrificing at an alarming rate trying to please the gods. This was unfortunate for the villages and tribes in and around the Aztec and Mayan major cities. Since the sacrifices had depleted the population in the larger cities (they could only sacrifice so many of their city people without creating chaos within the city) and most of the citizens and families had already donated a child or an adult male or female to the gods. Worriers were ordered to go outside the larger cities and abduct by force several individuals (young, old, women, and children) from the surrounding villages and tribes. The Spaniards were very much astonished when they witnessed their first human sacrifice, talk about cultural clash.

Most of the surrounding villagers did not want to partake in the sacrifices and several of the small villages had already donated a number of their kinfolks to the city leaders for sacrifices. Hence the bloody mess at the temples throughout Mexico in those times was horrendous, "approximately 40,000 individuals had been sacrificed in one year in Teotihuacan alone" (Adams, 1998). Imagine about 100 sacrifices per day.

This is why Cortés had no problem recruiting 50,000 to 100,000 Indigenous fighters to help his 400 Spaniard eventually defeat the Aztecs.

The thrill of seeing a young father and proud tribesmen going to save his wife and children is what movies are made of. The setting in the jungle, the animals, the danger, the trill of victory are all in this film, and even better because of the Mayan background.

See it, let the true or untrue facts rest (were the Mayans savages or not?), and the movie is no more gory or graphic than the video games our children here in the USA play.


Mel Gibson has created a masterpiece. This was one of the most enjoyable movies I have seen in MONTHS. Ya' gotta admit... Hollywood is running out of ideas... That is why we keep seeing not only sequels, but PREquels. Mel Gibson knows how to deliver. I am a 23 year old female who hates movies that seek to nauseate the audience with gruesome & bloody scenes... This movie did not do that though. It is no harsher than Braveheart or even Passion of the Christ. Apocalypto was fabulous! Sure, there were some pretty intense scenes, but the movie would not have been complete without them. It's what helps tells the story. Apocalypto is a TRUE piece of art, a TRUE storyline, TRUE acting, TRUE suspense, TRUE feelings.... The BEST movie I have seen in a realllllyyyyyy long time. Those 2 hours are the best 2 hours you will spend watching a movie. If you want a movie that will put you at the edge of your seat in suspense... a movie that gets you involved & entertains like none other - with an eventful & meanfingful storyline, see Apocalypto!! FABULOUS. I can't wait to see how Mel Gibson's next project turns out.


I didn't catch this at the cinema, watched it on DVD last night - and I thought it was brilliant. Seriously. I'd had my eye on it, read all the reviews - a weakness* - now having seen it, I'm frankly baffled by the faint praise that many have seen fit to heap upon it. It was expertly realised, entirely convincing, passionate, intelligent. One common carp is that it is somehow shallow. I entirely disagree. I think they'd really done their research, and the story was consistent with the mythology of the time and mythologising of battle and survival in general. I liked it that luck played a part in Jaguar Paw's endeavours. That's what a lot of the great stories are based on, why they came about, as it were. And the idea of the "natural man" versus "corrupt city man" is as timeless as it gets. The civilised world may not commit ritual human sacrifice, but it is hypnotised by spectacle. Anyhow, enough waffling. This is more than anything else a superb example of balls-to-the-wall film-making that we rarely see nowadays, or ever, come to think of it. Anyone who disagrees should have their head chopped off and thrown down a long flight of steps. Excelsior! *The Guardian reviewers are spot on, I think: http://film.guardian.co.uk/Film_Page/0,,-116577,00.html


I watched the DVD knowing only vaguely that there are controversies regarding this film, but didn't know any of the particulars aside from the fact that it was gory. Well, it's a Mel Gibson movie after all, so that's a given.

In short, Apocalypto is a beautiful, deeply moving presentation of a world that existed before Western contact, and was destroyed by it. After I watched the movie, I was dismayed to read reviews that charged it with being racist, that it depicted only the blood-thirsty brutality of Mayan savagery. But this is clearly not the case. The protagonist and his people demonstrate all the virtues that allow them to wear the "white hats:" they are intelligent, brave, loyal, and strong. They abide in a loving community and show great care and love of family and children. They're also a good looking bunch.

The "Black Hats" are a dirty dozen if there ever were one -- the leader of the group reminded me of the Jack Palance character in Shane, but with a lot of human bone accouterments jangling about. And if you think this guy is bad, wait till you get to the big city and see what they're up to.

But I digress. I'm trying to defend the film against the charge of racism. Okay. One characteristic of racism in films in that the depiction of the targeted race tends to be one- dimensional. Apocalypto is generously peopled with characters of great individual distinction, not cut-out characters. Another characteristic is that in a racist film is that it is we are to regard the targeted race with such disdain that we are not allowed to empathize with the villains or wear the villain's skin. But in Apocalypto we are as deeply engaged in Jaguar Paw's heroic quest as we are William Wallace's in Braveheart.

Some reviewers have mistaken the arrival of the Spanish galleons as Gibson's intention to signify rescue and redemption from wanton bloodletting by Western "civilization" and Christianity, but this is getting things upside down. Don't we know by now that Cortes' arrival was the beginning of the brutal end of so many people and civilizations in America? If the ships were to signify rescue and redemption, Jaguar Paw would only have had to have been rescued right there on the beach. Great scene for a beach-side conversion, no? No. The film presents these dark ships as the foreboding vehicles of a continent-wide apocalypse.

Okay, I do concede that if Apocalypto is primarily a movie "about" the Mayans, it fails because it is historically inaccurate. (The Mayans were gone long before Cortes' arrival -- it was the Aztecs that he managed to destroy.) But if it is, as I interpret it to be, about the many peoples, societies, and civilizations that were destroyed, that suffered an apocalyptic end on Western contact, then it puts faces in our historical picture where there have been only caricatures before.

Update of 12/27/09: I was just reading through my reviews and have to update the fact that it took me a few days after posting the original for it to strike me that the film, while not racist, was sexist as heck. The women are not shown participating in any decision-making or the production or distribution of food or anything else. Their only real value is to serve as incubators for more Mayans. I apologize to my sisters for my blindness in this but ask them to take into consideration that I came back to correct myself without prompting or threats.


Despite the fact that Mel Gibson is a not-so-great guy as a person, there's no denying that he's a master when it comes to film-making. This movie was not just fast paced and intense, it was visually stunning. The characters are all well developed so we actually care about them (and hate the bad guys). The acting was well done; there weren't any moments that had me rolling my eyes.

The only turn-off would be the large amount of bloodshed throughout the movie. Although this doesn't bother me at all, there are a lot of people who will be nauseated by the violence. Among these scenes include people being sacrificed by having their hearts torn out, then being be-headed, and a person being completely torn apart by a Jaguar.

The music fits the film extremely well. There's not much of a running theme. It's mostly underscoring; the type of music that keeps the film moving but doesn't completely stand out.

There are many cool camera effects, especially the use of slow motion throughout the film. There are also many aerial camera angles, allowing us to see characters in pursuit of each other from the tree-tops.

In a nutshell, this film is extremely intense, fast paced, and original. If you are looking for a film experience that you wont soon forget, I completely recommend it. If you have a weak stomach and don't enjoy being on the edge of your seat for 2 hours and 20 minutes, don't see this movie.


This movie left me amazed. In my opinion it is one of the best films of all time. Some reviewers here have criticized the film for being historically inaccurate. To those reviewers I say, if you don't like the film, why don't you watch another film about the 15th century Mayans................. Oh wait, I remember. There aren't any. You'll find many films about England, and France, and Austria. And some other Eurocentric Epic, but hardly anything about any other Civilization in the world, and for them to knock a Director that actually had a little vision, to make a movie about another part of the world is disappointing. Its easy to get on the Mel Gibson hate bandwagon.

But, back to the film.

Visually stunning. I felt like I was part of the adventure, incredibly stunning camera work. The acting? The actors weren't acting as Mayans, they became Mayans. Every single performance was convincing.

The Violence? First of All, I couldn't finish watching Sin City simply because it glorified senseless violence and I hate senseless violence, and yet its on the top 100 list-go figure. This is not the case with Apocalypto, the movie is about people that were abducted to be SACRIFICED, gee, I guess there won't be blood, or violence. I happen to think it was used appropriately.

//SPOILERS Purpose of Film? Someone said this film is meaningless. This is not accurate. Opening quote: "Before a civilization is destroyed without, its destroyed within". The Film is about a Society that has become Depraved. A society that had become so corrupt, and insensitive, human life become worthless. Historically inaccurate? I think not, Aztecs, Canaanites, Carthagians,etc, etc. Again, something Never explored in films.

Finally, Hope. Never giving up.End of Old era, New Beginnings.

All in All, this Film is groundbreaking. People are always complaining about Hollywood being predictable. When a movie breaking new ground appears, its booed off the stage.

;-)


The Mel Gibson movie "Apocalypto" ranks as one of the best adventure films of 2006. Basically, "Apocalypto" amounts to a soul-stirring spectacle about human sacrifice and survival set against the last days of the Mayan Empire on the eve of the arrival of Europeans in Central America. Director Mel Gibson, who co-scripted with newcomer Farhad Safinia, does not dwell insufferably on Mayan culture so much as appropriate it as a bloodthirsty backdrop to generate suspense for this old-fashioned, white-knuckled, kill or be killed saga. Indeed, the filmmakers earned their R-rating more for the gallons of fake blood and gore that they splash over the course of the two-hour plus running time, not to mention the ghoulish sight of decapitated heads tumbling like footballs down the side of the temple, than nudity or profanity. Compared with similar scenes from "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom"(1984), the sequences where a high temple priest (Fernando Hernandez of "The Fountain") cuts hearts out of chests don't appear half as gory. Nevertheless, the faint-hearted may found themselves challenged by such unsavory subject matter. Otherwise, the scenic emerald green jungles teeming with predators and perils as murderous as mankind and the seamless computer-generated imagery of ancient Maya civilization provide "Apocalypto" with exotic locales rarely seen in Hollywood movies. In fact, the last time that Tinsel Town produced a movie about Maya culture was the forgettable and equally forgotten Yul Brynner epic "Kings of the Sun" (1963) with George Chakiris and Richard Basehart. Like his previous movie "The Passion of the Christ," Gibson lets the characters talk in their native tongue (here it's the dialect of the Mesoamericans) so that you have to put up with subtitles. The subtitles, however, take no longer than a glimpse to grasp. Actually, it's entirely possible to ignore the subtitles and just figure out everything for yourself without having to be told. Gibson gives this simple but personal story all the apparent realism of a National Geographic documentary and the largely amateur cast is so believable that you may want to spend your time watching them instead of what they say.

"Apocalypto" resembles a cross-between of the vintage Italian spear and scandal movies of the late 1950s and early 1960s and the Italian cannibal movies of the 1980s. During the first third of the action, Gibson acquaints us with a small village of hunters isolated in a distant corner of the rain forest. The protagonist, a virile twentysomething hunk named Jaguar Paw (newcomer Rudy Youngblood), has a pregnant wife, Seven (Dalia Hernandez), and an adolescent son (Carlos Emilio Baez). The movie opens with Paw and his pals hunting a tapir (basically a wild boar) and this initial episode ultimately foreshadows the dramatic finale. While our heroes are carving up the tapir carcass, another tribe traipses up out of the green and requests permission to cross through their section of the jungle. Jaguar Paw spots the panic in their eyes, and his father counsels the hunters against telling the village about it. Later, we learn that this tribe is fleeing from a band of savage warriors led by Zero Wolf (Raoul Trujillo of "Highlander 3") who wear more tattoos than any outlaw biker gang and sport some rather painful looking body piercings. These merciless marauders launch a surprise raid on Jaguar Paw's village (think "Conan the Barbarian"), take all the men and women captive that they don't slaughter, and leave the helpless children behind to fend for themselves. During the second third of the action, Gibson stages the incredible journey of hardship on foot that the villainous warriors and their captives take through the steaming jungle, across swollen rivers, and along sheer cliff sides to a faraway metropolitan Mayan city. Once in the city, Zero Wolf sells off the women and presents the mensmeared now with bright blue body paint as custom dictates--as sacrifices to the gods.

Melodrama is all about manipulation and Gibson is the master. What makes "Apocalypto" so exciting is that Gibson aligns our sympathy with the underdog hero and his seemingly impossible plight to rescue his wife and child. At the same time, he serves us up some classic villains that we sorely want to see die in the most painful way possible. Before the Mayan warriors descend upon the sleeping village, Jaguar Paw managed to rush his pregnant wife and his son to safety. He lowers them into a hidden pit in nearby rocky terrain, but the villains capture him before he could get them out of it. When he doesn't have us perched on the edge of our seats worrying about how Jaguar Paw is going to escape, Gibson ramps up the tension by cross-cutting to the predicament that pregnant wife Seven deals with when snarling jungle predators enter the pit and a torrential storm threatens to drown them. The suspense--like the excitement--never flags in this hand-to-hand combat saga. Although you know that the hero and the heroine will survive, Gibson and his co-scenarist keep putting them into one hallowing situation after another. One of the best scenes shows a jet-black jaguar chasing our hero through the jungle while a group of homicidal headhunters hell-bent to kill our hero are in hot pursuit, too. Seasoned moviegoers will spot how the last third of the action resembles the Cornel Wilde movie "The Naked Prey" (1966), the Jean Claude Van Damme thriller "Hard Target" (1993) and the classic "The Most Dangerous Game" (1932) where an outnumbered hero must triumph over tenacious thugs.

Like his Academy Awarding epic "Braveheart" and his popular "Passion of the Christ," Mel Gibson proves again that he is a consummate filmmaker who knows how to take an oft-told tale of kinship and revenge and turn it into an evening's worth of entertainment .


This for me has got to me Mel Gibson's finest directorial effort to date. From the guy who gave us The Passion Of The Chirst gives us Apocalyto! Set within the decline of the Mayan world , it tells the story of a young native who risks life and limb to save what he holds near and dear to him. From the trailers one is intrigued and thats what has really wanted me to go and check it out further, Mel Gibson does a masterful job of doing research on the life , times and languages of the Mayan culture (how historically accurate it actually is, that is debatable). The acting , make-up , scenery was brilliant and extra kudos for the actors for making the interaction seem so dame real! Anybody who has seen Passion of The Chirst will tell you that Gibson has a small penchant for blood and this is no exception here as we are shown blood by the loads and no holds barred violence. Rahat Fateh Ali Khan (family member of the great late Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan) lends his voice for a chilling a haunting score. My only complaint was that it was a little over 2 hours long so it does require a clear, rigid mind if you are going to watch it however the film moves at such a fast pace your mind won't really wonder very far at all. To conclude Apocalypto may at the end of the day may just be another action movie , but having said it is an action movie which is like no other and shall leave you feeling intrigued , something that action movies hardly ever do for me. I recommend this for people who want to see something different , trust me it will be an experience!

APOCALYTO - 8.9 OUT OF 10

'A great civilisation is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within' - Robert Durant


You have to see this movie! It has all consistences of a great movie-a good story, things to laugh and things to cry!... But to understand it better, you have to be a parent...I think... Well at least I know, it wouldn't touched me that deeply if I wasn't! Great actor play also-it makes you believe that this is actually happening, and the actors are real Mayas. And if somebody has something to say, about the movie, being too "natural" and too "real", I can tell that the life itself it is, so the movies should be, like this one!...Or else you wan't believe it! It's really great and I have nothing more to say, except: I love Mel Gibson! He really has something to say and got nothing to hide! Exceptional work! I hope I can shake your hand someday!


Among all the stars in the moviedom, Mel Gibson is a special one. I can hardly do a summary for his cinematic career 'cause his works are really hard to categorize and may I say --- "in a mess". However, he always managed to surprise me. However controversial his films may be, they have reasons which I'm willing to accept.

This film is a milestone to be recorded in cinematic history for its ancient theme, unprecedented language, insufferable contents and all other pleasant enough aspects of film-making.

Living in this modern world, we hardly bother to ask what we are and where we're from. We know Darwin's theory. We know life changes and is not easy. But we never know in detail what happened to our ancestors as individuals. We just sum them up into a few paragraphs on some history book.

This film is about Maya, yet it also applies to every other ancient civilization. It threw me into the ancient jungle and carried me on this incredible journey of knives and arrows, ignorance and intelligence, death and birth, love and hatred...

Despite all the blood and tension, I have to admit the primitive did a good job to carry on the human evolution --- at least, we are here with flesh and blood.

I had this imagery that if the whole evolution thing is a huge army and all humans are just allocated at random by God into some squads categorized by eras, and I ask myself, "If my soul happened to be allocated into the Mayan 'Squad', would I survive and had a life in peace and love?"It's a rather frustrating question since I'll never know the answer. Well, most possibly the answer is negative...

Anyway, we don't necessarily need the answer, but we do need the consciousness and introspection because when we project ourselves against the primitive background, we can always discover new things in our body and soul.

In that case, this film itself is an apocalypto lest we forget how different yet common we are compared to our ancestors.


I liked the movie and before writing a review I read only negative comments on IMDb to see why people hated the film.Most of them claim that the movie is historically incorrect,based on false facts.Here are two arguments of the haters of the movie:

1.The Mayans didn't make human sacrifices and didn't rip off the hearts of the victims.That is something the Aztecs did.

2.The Spaniards arrived 500 years later.

OK, I didn't know if that was true so I decided to take 20-30 min. of my time and do some research on the internet.And guess what!!It turns out that Mel Gibson did his homework right and those who write the hate it reviews didn't!The Mayans DID make human sacrifices, they DID rip off the hearts of their victims, they were no better than the Aztecs. They began with human sacrificing about 300 A.D.This is a fact known since 1973(the year scientists managed to encrypt the Mayan hieroglyphs).Besides:who sais that the bad guys in the film are too Mayans?!!They may be Aztecs or Toltecs!The Aztecs were at that time at the peak of their civilization, their territories went deep into the south.

"The Spaniards arrived 500 years later" You really don't know when the movie takes place until the end when the conquistadors show up.Then we see, aha: the year is 1511 + something.Is this possible?Why not?The end of the great Mayan civilization was about 900 A.D. After that we have the post classic period until 1511 (the year of the arrival of Cortes).Gibson doesn't claim that the occurrence's in the film take place in the early Mayan history.To all the haters of the film who have a problem with not presenting the great achievements of that culture(mathematics, astrology an so on):That was BEFORE the happenings in the movie!And besides, that was not the story of the movie.Not showing the greatness of the culture doesn't mean that Gibson denies it! "The Mayans were presented as savages" - that is because they were(check out their rituals), or what is your definition of a savage?There is another moment in the film:the bad guy threatens Jaguar Paw he would skin him alive and then wear his skin.I first thought, well that was original of Gibson, but then I found out on the internet that skinning your enemies and wearing their skin was an ACTUAL RITUAL of the Mayans.Yes they were savages, and I don't care how many Mexicans(who think they are the legacy of the Mayans, which they are not) feel offended by this movie.

Another point is the gore in the film.After reading some reviews I noticed that people who liked "The passion of the Christ" have a problem with the gore in this movie...Excuse me!?!!So you don't have problems watching the Romans beat the crap out of Jesus but mind some Mayan heads being cut off!

My recommendation to all who want to write a negative review: make some research before doing so!That is the only way to find out how much truth there is in this film!I, for example found also out that they were using exact the same type of weapons at that time, like knifes made of obsidian. I would also recommend to see this film along with another great film:The Mission(1986).If you liked "Apocalypto" and want to see a true story about what happened next, you should see "The Mission".If you saw "Apocalypto" and hated it, "The Mission" will make you fell better. Yes, I agree that Mr. Gibson is a Christian fanatic, but unlike many others I wouldn't interpret the ending as pro-Christian.Why?Because there was a priest on a boat?

The film is not perfect though.Mr. Gibson, if you want to make a realistic movie, you have to stick to this idea the whole way:No human is faster than a puma!There were hundreds of beheaded bodies in that pit, that was too much to be believed!The little girl having the plague(!!!where did that come from?) and making prophecies was also unbelievable.But this is still a movie! And in my opinion it deserves 7 stars for being good but not special.


If you, like me, love exciting and well-done historical epics, look no further than Mel Gibson's fantastic Mayan adventure film. I saw this movie for the first time about a year after its theatrical release, and I seem to remember it receiving mediocre reviews at the time it was released. I don't know where the bad press came from, as this amazing film had me on my seat's edge from start to finish.

The movie opens in a Yucatan jungle in the 16th century, where a tribe of Mayans tries to live a peaceful life. The village is attacked by warriors from a more advanced, city-dwelling Mayan tribe, and people are butchered and slaves are taken. One of the captives, a young man named Jaguar Paw, manages to lower his pregnant wife and young son into a crevasse to hide them from the pillagers, but when they are left with no means of escape, Jaguar Paw realizes he must survive and return to save them. What follows is a heart-pounding chase through the jungle as Jaguar Paw races to save his family and his civilization from extinction through civil strife.

The film is spectacularly made, with excellent production design and make up that truly places the viewer into the Mayan world. The actors, drawn from real Mayans, were utterly convincing in their roles, aided greatly by Gibson's decision to have all the dialog spoken in the Mayan tongue. For those who are turned off by foreign language films, don't worry. It's not a dialog-intensive movie, so you won't strain your eyes with the subtitles.

What I really liked about this film (and what I think caused it to get some bad press) was how it pulled no punches in its depiction of life in the Mayan world. In our politically correct society, it is often our tendency to depict the societies of indigenous New World peoples as utopian ways of life that were brutally shattered by the evil, conquering Europeans. This film does not glamorize tribal life, but attempts to portray it with a good mixture of pleasant serenity and brutal violence. You don't have to be an expert in Mayan culture to know that tribes were constantly fighting, killing, and enslaving one another, because that's how all society has been since the birth of mankind. And it's certainly not racist to portray something truthfully, the way it most likely happened.

Another thing - please don't let Mel Gibson's recent obnoxious behavior deter you from watching this film. Whatever your feelings about Gibson, the man can certainly direct a good movie, and this one is no exception. I just hope he directs another epic very soon.


I know that viewers from the UK and USA have different opinions of this film. Most say that they do like this film or it was OK and then add things they didn't like about it.

I personally loved it, and would not have made any changes to it, including subtitles, running time etc. One of my favourite scenes is the escape and chase back to the village. It is one of those films where you really feel involved. You want him to get revenge and you want him to get away, and those bad guys in the film really get to you.

This is one of the few films I could watch more than once. I would describe it as a feel good film because it takes you through the motions and you want some sort of satisfaction at the end, which it delivers perfectly.


This movie is very much an R-rated title, but suitable for teenagers under the right circumstances. If a parent/teacher would take the time to preview the show and explain to their charge what they're about to witness, it would be a valuable experience for the youngster(s). Hey, crazy things happen every day in the real world, right? I would argue that the violence and nudity are absolutely crucial to accurately convey the authenticity of the period. Naturally, much in the way of costumes, makeup, etc. had to be created from archaeological examples. I believe this movie is edutainment in the purest sense: A fictional tale, which relates the utter brutality, beauty and social grace that were the Mayan people. The sets, costumes and camera work really shined through, especially in the cityscape scenes. I can't remember more vivid imagery!

Mel Gibson took full advantage of an opportunity to bring this culture in the spotlight. Hopefully, he'll straighten up his public image so as not to overshadow his professional one...


As it begins, Paul (William Dame) is an airplane mechanic who is suddenly accosted by two older crooks in trenchcoats. They knock him out. He awakens to find himself in an older mansion, where a woman, Stephanie (Catherine Dee), seems to know him despite the fact that he's never seen her before, and an older transvestite, "Roberta" (M.R. Murphy), is keeping Paul and Stephanie captive, apparently with the intent of watching them have sex. Just who is Roberta? Is that really her motive? How did Stephanie get there? How long has she been there? Why did they pick Paul?

Forget that the title is a misnomer and we never get to see Stephanie stuffed into an incinerator or even an attempt to do this. For fans of the ridiculous, this is a little gem resurrected by Troma and Brentwood/BCI Eclipse for their recent "Toxie's Triple Terror" DVD releases. To appreciate the film, you have to not only not mind filmmakers breaking their "generic (genre-related) contract" with the audience, but breaking any kind of implied contract about narrative forthrightness. The name of the game here is really "pulling the rug out from beneath the viewer", but amusingly, neither the apparent scenarios nor the rug-pulling are very sophisticated, making Stuff Stephanie in the Incinerator usually play like a more pedestrian "so bad, it's good" horror film gone haywire after viewing far too many "rubber reality" films, ala Mulholland Drive (2001), The Butterfly Effect (2004), etc. That Stuff Stephanie in the Incinerator predates all of the rubber reality films, which could reasonably be said to begin with Jacob's Ladder (1990), doesn't make it prescient so much as retroactively, accidentally related. In 1989, this probably seemed like so much nonsense rather than anything groundbreaking or postmodernist.

Being less generous, it's easy to imagine instead that writer Peter Jones and writer/director Don Nardo continually didn't know where to go with their script, so every once in a while they used a variant of the old, "No, that was just a dream" tactic and basically started over. At least this variation on that ploy gives an "excuse" for bad acting, which is deliciously abundant in the film--delicious because it is bad enough to be hilarious. Maybe the script wasn't even done when they began, and as they were shooting they were continually unhappy with the tenor of their footage, so they periodically changed gears. Whatever the cause, if you've a taste for bizarreness, absurdity or camp, you're going to want to watch this film. In fact, it is a must-see for you.

While I'm sure other writers are giving away the nature of the "reveals", I think the film is a lot more fun if you do not know what to expect, so I'll refrain from describing the plot in any detail. That doesn't disallow describing some of the characterization.

Paul ranges from amusingly gruff to buffoonishly pompous to slightly sinister. Dame (as Paul) gets his best lines, with the funniest delivery, in the first section of the film, where he continually breaks the mood. From the audience's perspective, the beginning seems like a slightly pretentious low to no budget film, ala Insaniac (2002) or Last House on Hell Street (2002), for which Paul gets to voice the concerns and protests of the viewer, if the viewer drinks a lot of Budweiser and lives in a trailer.

Stephanie seems most concerned with continually getting laid, and later with money, no matter what level of reality is revealed. There is nary a male character she doesn't seem interested in at some point. This is made more amusing by the fact that while she's attractive enough, her facial structure makes her something like an attractive Neanderthal (I don't really mean that as insulting, but I'm sure it will be difficult to not take that way). At least the film was shot in the days before boob jobs were so ubiquitous. We can be thankful that Nardo didn't know any strippers well enough to talk them into doing the film--I actually like more "plain" and "interesting"-looking women like Dee (who plays Stephanie) better. The poster artist, who displays a very active imagination, might not agree. At any rate, at one point this character gets to provide an unconvincing "voice of sanity" for the audience, but it turns out to be just as much a false reality as the rest of the film.

Roberta, who turns out to be a more minor character, is most charming in transvestite mode, where s/he comes across like Tootsie (1982) with fewer acting lessons. Later, when s/he is just a guy, we keep hoping s/he'll put the bra and wig back on. Perhaps Murphy should have been given a bigger role, but maybe we should be glad he wasn't.

The actors, although not good in any traditional sense, are certainly fun to watch. The technical elements are more difficult to speak about so highly. Nardo's direction, in terms of staging, is sometimes competent but never impressive. Occasionally it's more incompetent. Some scenes are so dark you can't tell what is going on, and too often it's difficult for the viewer to piece one location's relationship to another location. That is important to get right for narrative flow. There are also a couple characters introduced but mysteriously just dropped (think of the gym scene). But maybe Nardo was concentrating on getting the "right" performances from the principals.

My rating may seem high to some given my comments, but for this one, I'm rating how fun it is to watch if you enjoy the ridiculous. Often, a film like this would get my "so bad, it's good" rating of 5, but I don't really think this is a bad film--there are too many signs of competence. It's a shame that none of the cast or crew seemed interested or able to pursue other films. There is a lot of potential here.


This movie will have you shaking your head in bewilderment more than once, but all is explained in the end. This is a tightly plotted story that is an excellent rental! The situations are switched around so many times you won't believe it. This is a very very cool movie!


This movie was made for a very small budget ($100,000 at a time when the average movie cost $15 million). It was meant to appear to be a psychological thriller, yet, ultimately, it's something else; the kind of "now you see it -- now you don't" that normally doesn't happen in inexpensive, quickly made movies. The film suffered from distribution problems, eventually being bought by TROMA, which purposely made it look, as in all previous TROMA films, like a trashy horror film, which it is NOT, renaming it from IN DEADLY HEAT to STUFF STEPHANIE IN THE INCINERATOR. The potential viewer then expects to see a campy grossout, but that is not what happens at all. So,if you run into this film, give it a chance. It's not great, but it does have a clever spark that is unusual for a supercheap indy.


Less than awful. My cat produces better viewing fare from his behind without even trying. The people who made this atrocity should compensate viewers for the time lost watching it. It's just BAD film making across the board. Pitiful acting, terrible sound quality, no perceptible direction or production qualities (they must have been drugged out porn capitalists with money to burn) it's hard to believe that there were any professionals involved in this thing at all. Perhaps the makers of this poor excuse for a movie were simply high on their own egos. That would be my best guess. It's the sort of thing I would be embarrassed to find under my name on an internet search. Not even worthy of irony.


Filled with several plot-twists and unconventional classical music, 'Stuff Stephanie in the Incinerator' focuses on three main characters, all of whom seem to be wealthy and have a flair for the theatrics. Their hobby, is thinking up different characters and scenarios, then living them out. What the film-makers succeeded in here, is not letting the viewer know if what they are watching is real...or fantasy. But sadly, that's about all they got right. To me, the essential ingredient in any good (or even bad) film is the writing. And in this case...it was terrible. I don't mind bad acting, no-budget production, lousy editing or any of that stuff. But if the story doesn't grab me (and this didn't), it's all a complete waste of time.

I definitely don't recommend it.


MASK is the 1985 comedy-drama based on the true story of Rocky Dennis, a sensitive and highly intelligent teenager who, because of a debilitating disease, has a severely disfigured face that has made him an outcast outside of his family and the social circle surrounding them (basically a biker gang, who are savagely protective of Rocky). The film focuses primarily on Rocky's relationship with his mother Rusty (Cher), a free-spirited independent woman whose history of drug and alcohol abuse and sexual promiscuity has been such a concern to Rocky that it's sometimes hard to tell who's raising who in the Dennis household. The film is basically unfolds as a series of vignettes, highlighting the ups and downs of Rocky and Rusty's relationship, which seems to rise above everything else that happens in their lives. No matter what Rocky and Rusty go through, their love for each other rises above everything and makes all their fallacies fade to the background. Peter Bogdonovich's evocative direction is a big plus here, knowing where to mine the laughs and the tears and the film contains plenty of both. Cher gives the performance of her career as Rusty Dennis (even better than her Oscar winning turn in MOONSTRUCK) and an unrecognizable Eric Stoltz hits all the right notes as the soulful and intelligent Rocky. Sam Elliott is solid as Rusty's on-again, off-again boyfriend Gar and Laura Dern shines as a blind girl who Rocky falls for. Mention should also be made of Dennis Burkley as a slow-witted family friend and of Richard Dysart and the late Estelle Getty who register in one scene as Rusty's parents. Don't miss this lovely emotional drama that perfectly blends laughter and tears to maximum effect.


Some articles or short biographies about Peter Bogdanovich that I've read assert that his career has not amounted to as much as it could have. His 1985 masterpiece "Mask" should disprove that. It tells the story of teenager Roy L. "Rocky" Dennis (Eric Stoltz), who suffered from craniodiaphyseal dysplasia that left him with an enlarged face. He and his biker mother Rusty (Cher) do what they can to live their lives normally, understanding that it will be an uphill climb.

One of the impressive parallels is the relationships that they develop. Rusty is involved in a relationship with fellow biker Gar (Sam Elliott), and they're pretty much the same kind of person. Rocky attends the camp for the blind where he befriends Diana (Laura Dern); she can't see what he looks like, but she accepts him for being a nice person.

So this is definitely one that I recommend. It not only shows the triumph of the human spirit confronting adversity, but affirms the talent of all parties involved. Really good.

Also starring Estelle Getty, Richard Dysart and Harry Carey, Jr.


It's easy to point out that this story is based on actual events once the cameras start rolling. It is also backed up by excellent performances by Cher and Eric Stoltz.

"Mask" is a tender, heart-warming story of a young teenager named Rocky Dennis who is very intelligent and emotionally sensitive as well. However, he is scarred badly due to a rare disease that has disfigured his face since he was born. As always people who pass him by or approach him a first glance feel slightly intimidated by his deformity. But by not letting these fears get to him, he becomes well over with his peers as they learn to accept him for who he is, not by what he looks like.

Rocky also gets a boost of confidence from his mother, Rusty Dennis, played with sheer excellence by Cher. Rusty is a gorgeous, single mother with problems of her own too. She spends most of her time hanging around with biker gangs, she drinks, smokes, is addicted to drugs, but in spite of her problems, she continues to love her son and will bend over backwards to defend him from anyone who puts him to a lesser degree. For example, when the school principal who recommended that her deformed son be placed in a "special" school and how she told him off to his face that he will thrive with the normal students and threatened to sue him, shows that her love for her son will always be first before her. But with his progress and his strong academic showings, Rocky graduates as valedictorian of his class.

Ever since he was born, Rusty delivered tough love towards her son, not to the point where he'll suffer a nervous breakdown, but just as way to keep him motivated and to blend in with people his own age like as though he was a normal child, without taking advantage of his deformity. And Rocky continued that legacy, from the morning he wakes up to face the world, inflate his self-confidence, keeping the glass half-full and just be happy with the world around him in what little time he has on this Earth. And eventually through tiring persuasion to get his mother to clean up her act, the audience finds more ways to love Rocky for what he really is. You love him because Rocky is a kid who loves people back which to this day is a precious commodity that you rarely see these days.

I have seen "Mask" many times and every time I watch the movie, tissue paper is never behind. It is a coming-of-age story that deals with triumphs and failures of having an incurable disease and is handled in a believable and sensitive approach. But the great center in the story is not entirely centered on the kid's physical illness, but the bonding between a mother and her son.


An excellent portrayal of the last year or so in the life of Rocky Dennis (played by Eric Stoltz), a teenager who lives with a hideously deformed face as the result of a rare disease. This is a movie that you cannot help but be pulled in by. It's funny in places, emotional virtually all the way through and bittersweet at the end. Rocky clearly had challenges to overcome - and not all of them revolved around his face. His mom Rusty (Cher) has a drug problem and has a poor relationship with her own parents, and he spends his time hanging out mostly with a rather tough looking group of bikers, at least some of whom are also into drugs. And yet, this is his world, and - for all their problems - these people are his family; they're the ones who accept him and love him unconditionally and look out for him. Seeing this relationship with the bikers (and especially the voiceless Dozer, played by Dennis Burkley) is almost as fascinating as anything else in the movie. Rocky has been told he doesn't have much time to live, but he does have dreams: a bike trip to Europe with a friend, and he wants to fall in love with someone. It's almost as if the dreams keep him going. He goes to a summer camp for blind children as a counsellor, and falls in love with Diana (Laura Dern) - a beautiful but blind girl who's able to see the beauty inside him. But then he goes home, and it all falls apart. His friend moves to Michigan, and the dream of Europe is gone; his new girlfriend's parents don't want her to have anything to do with him, and his dream of love is gone. With his dreams shattered, there's not much left for Rocky to look forward to. The shattering of his dreams is perfectly depicted by the scene in which he pulls the tacks off the map of Europe where he's been marking all the places he wanted to visit. You know it's happening, but the scene when his mom goes into his room and finds him dead in bed still can't help but put a few tears in your eyes.

Director Peter Bogdanovich took a chance on casting Cher. She really didn't have much acting experience in 1985, but she pulled the part off very well (although given the circumstances in which Rusty lived, I thought Cher looked a little too good for the role.) Stoltz was convincing as Rocky, and Laura Dern was completely believable as the blind girl who falls head over heels in love with Rocky. Overall, though, I thought perhaps the strongest performance was Sam Elliott's as Rusty's sometime lover Gar. He looked the part, sounded the part and acted the part brilliantly.

Apparently the movie takes a few liberties with Rocky's story. From what I understand, Diana didn't actually exist (although some think she may have been a composite of several girls in Rocky's life) and, while touching, the closing scene, where Rusty, Gar and Dozer visit the cemetery and Dozer puts flowers on the grave, is also a creation - Rocky's body was donated for medical research. There is no grave. Still, you can't help but be deeply moved by this absolutely engrossing story. It's well worth 9/10.


Trying to beat the odds in order to live a normal life is always common for certain people. In "Mask", Roy L."Rocky" Dennis, 1961-1978(Eric Stolz) was born with craniodiaphyseal dysplasia, a rare cranial bone disease that inflated his head. lives with his biker gang mother Rusty(Cher) and family. She was wild, out of control, and very much a loving mother in the middle. She sees a smart, understanding, and determined young man under that visage. It was great when Rocky told that teen that he would "take off his mask, until he takes off his". It goes to shows that people with disabilities got feelings too. Rocky wanted nothing best but going to Europe, and visit the counties he wanted to go. Had a girlfriend who was blind. But everything took a dive. His friend had decided to live with his divorced father, and his girlfriend went to a blind school in another city. Rusty, his mother was a positive figure in his life. Her strong will, and big heart helped Rocky overcome the obstacles. Only his disease did him in. A strong, heart-wrenching movie, that gives meaning, you can do it! No matter what! 5 stars!


This is the best performance by Cher I have seen. One the best movies by all actors. Very realistic!!! I really don't understand why you need to have ten lines if you just want to make a statement about a movie that you really enjoyed. So here goes...I think the Cramps are a really great band, if you ever go on YouTube check it out. My African Cichlids just a babies we were afraid that the little sucker was going to die, he made it through about three days and he is growing stronger and bigger. My super, smoking, sexy, hot boyfriend made two turkeys today we have yet to eat them....smells good, also mashed potatoes, stuffing with sausage, greens beans, nice rolls and butter and we didn't even need gravy in a can...homemade gravy. Oh, by the way Mask was a great movie and totally recommend it.


I have been wanting to write a review of this movie for a long time because it made a major impression on me. Although I heard that there were many differences between the real life Rocky Dennis and his movie counterpart and in spite of melodrama and some cloying touchy feely cuteness , "Mask" often feels like real life , which can be both comforting and disturbing, especially considering that real people can and did have the disease presented in the movie (with frighteningly realistic makeup). Nevertheless, the movie really does go the extra mile. Cher and Eric Stoltz give the impression that they actually BECAME the characters. I almost disbelieved it was them although I saw other movies of theirs. The characters were three dimensional and the script was simply great, offsetting the heaviness of its subject matter with a surprisingly effective sense of humor. Rocky´s problems, social, physical and otherwise, were presented in a well balanced context that never wallowed in the problems but did not trivialize them either. In the end, it delivered the message that your problems are only as big as you make them as long as you never give up in pursuing your goals. To be sure, Laura Dern here is as mousy and awkward as in most of her other movies and Sam Elliot is mostly just there to look cool but all in all, this movie deserves 9 stars out of 10. It is sad on a macro level, cheerful on a micro level, and all around unforgettable.


I've seen this movie countless times because it is well balanced start to finish. It is filled with 'favorite' scenes that a viewer can look forward to every time it is watched. Most of all I found that ,being based on a true story, it isn't noticably exagerated or even oversimplified.


"Mask" is so realistic, touching and true that there are no words to describe it. It's as if someone simply took a camera and filmed a slice of life. Yet incredibly, the film avoids the "feel" of a documentary. Also incredibly, the film somehow avoids making Rocky Dennis' deformity the central theme, and shows how someone with a severe and disfiguring disability can live very much of a normal life, given a good attitude and some positive hopes and dreams.

Acting performances are incredible all around, but for one exception: Laura Dern. How and why she's still acting is beyond me. Both Cher and Eric Stoltz turn in absolutely incredible performances, especially Cher. Generally I dislike her in movies, but this one was the exception.

If you haven't seen "Mask" and you enjoy movies about the good and the bad in everyday life (e.g. "Ordinary People"), "Mask" comes highly recommended. 9/10.


This is a fine film about disability and how people around the disabled person readily accept him into their group. Casting is excellent and Cher is superb. A very thoughtful film.

The film portrays a motorcycle gang and it shows that tough people can be very considerate and kind too.


I'm very impressed by watching this movie. The Rocky Dennis story is sad, but the courage of this boy impress you, and make you think about how stupid people are when they take an opinion about others paying attention only to their physical features. I love Eric Stoltz very much for his wonderful performance. Cher is very good too, as Rocky's mother.


If the lead actress was going to win an Oscar, it could have been for this, not Moomnstruck, because I preferred Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction much more. Anyway, this is the true story of Roy L.'Rocky' Dennis (a very convincing Golden Globe nominated Eric Stoltz), who suffered the extremely rare disorder Craniodiaphyseal Dysplasia, commonly known as Lionitis due to the disfiguring Cranial Enlargements that it causes. Obviously the story sees his journey through all the things a normal boy of his age would do, except it being with a not completely normal boy. Throughout the film, he collects cards, goes to school and achieves three graduation diplomas for his great skills (another thing that made him different), volunteers to help people in a camp, where he meets his true love Diana Adams (Laura Dern), and much more. His mother Florence 'Rusty' Dennis (Cannes Film Festival winner, and Golden Globe nominated Cher) is one of the problems in his life, she is a no nonsense mother with a drug habit and prostitution that sometimes stops him getting anywhere and can cause arguments, but he is happy when she is tender, protective and hanging out with her true love and good friend, Gar (Sam Elliott). Oh, in the film Rocky suffers many horrible head aches of some kind, and this is probably what killed him in the very sad ending. I didn't see the very ending, but I got the idea of how tragic his death was to his mother. Also starring Estelle Getty as Evelyn, Richard Dysart as Abe, Micole Mercurio as Babe, Harry Carey Jr. as Red, Dennis Burkley as Dozer, Lawrence Monoson as Ben, Ben Piazza as Mr. Simms, L. Craig King as Eric, Alexandra Powers as Lisa and Kelly Jo Minter as Lorrie. I can kind of associate with the story, I have a social problem called Asperger's Syndrome, it may cause problems in my social life and skills, but I do like the fact that in one of my schools, I became a student known by almost everyone in my final year (11), and the film story seems rather similar to mine in places, and it is a very good film. It won the Oscar for Best Makeup, it was nominated the BAFTA for Best Make Up Artist, and it was nominated the Cannes Film Festival Golden Palm award for director Peter Bogdanovich. Very good!


This is a beautiful story between a normal person and a goddess, this is a classic. I first saw this on AXN, the animation looks just like You're Under Arrest. But as I watched it, I found it interesting, and I wanted to see more of it. It starts out with Keichi Morisato, who decides to order some lunch, but accidentally dials the Goddess-help-hotline but when he tries to tell them it was a mistake, and all of a sudden Belldandy comes out of nowhere! This is a wonderful show and worthwhile to see for anyone, and a memorable role and this is one is the most recognizable of Kikuko Inoue, who voiced the older sister of Akane in Ranma 1/2, the Boss of MGS 3 and Rosemary of MGS 2, and Kikuchi Masami, the voice of Tenchi, and Aya Kisakawa, the voice of Yuki Sohma. Recommended to all anime fans and non-anime fans.


Oh My Goddess is very addicting and it is a great gift for girlfriends. A must see! I was addicted to the movie set and I gave this to a friend and she likes it! This should be the top 10 best-animated films. This movie set (5) has comedy and romance that any other movie I have seen. I see how the main characters, Keiichi and Belldandy, really captured your heart. I really like how it started yet the ending can't be forgotten. With other characters, such as Skuld and Urd, makes the saga more interesting. I would also say that it captures the same style from the Manga (comic books) that is very funny and romantic. Just look at the intro and you get into it. I can't wait for the movie.


Famous with the name''Oh My Goddess! '' instead of ''Aa! Megamisama!'', this anime was based in Norse mythology, where the Norns are three dísirs by the names of Urd (the past), Verdandi (the being) and Skuld (what is to come). I personally prefer the manga series then the OVAS, but both of them are very good. What annoys me as hell is the way Belldandy always let people take advantage of her...she is so lovely and sweet, and at the same so fragile and sensitive. My favorite goddess is Urd, for sure! She is sexy and very confident.

The varying anime series feature the main characters and are based on the same basic plot line as the original manga.

Keiichi Morisato, one day, called the Goddess services by accident when he was ordering something to eat. Belldandy, the goddess who answered his call, tells him that he can wish anything that he wants. But Keiichi thinks that everything she is saying to him is a prank, and then wishes for Belldandy to stay with him forever. Belldandy makes his wish come true, and from now on she will live with him, to his surprise. The story shows their relationship growing, as well as new characters, like Belldandy's sisters Urd and Skuld, who are going to live in Earth with them.(They two were missing Belldandy a lot!)


I found this 'Oh My Goddess!' VHS today while trying to find my 'Rat Race' VHS. I seriously thought I had recorded over it. Back then when I thought I recorded over it, I was very devastated.

I remembered that I absolutely loved this animation, but I thought I just loved it because I was in sixth grade and that I enjoyed just about anything. It's been almost a decade since I last saw it, so I thought I'd rewatch it.

The sound quality was horrible, but after a half an hour, it didn't bother me anymore. The story captured me, and so did the animation. I mean, here's a good saying: 'nice guys finish last.' Not only do they finish last, but they get the prize winning. It's such a feel-good anime, and I know that just about anybody would enjoy it. However; if you find goodie-two-shoe type of girls annoying, then this isn't the animation for you. Though, she may seem like a goodie-two-shoe, but everything is explained at the end. Like why she did what she did and so on... Very good animation.

OK yes, it's true, this is a cute-sy chick flick, and if you like love stories, then this is an anime for you.


Personally witnessed the 5-parts variant of this anime and every part gave me groovy experience (we've got a 2-DVDs release - running time is 154 minutes - with 5 parts in total, which have a good "connection" between them). The story, the animation, the music, the Japanese actors' voices, the characters' development, the additional features of the DVDs, the comedy, and the drama were all to my liking. It is no "Ninja Scroll", but it is definitely not worse - quite different but also very atmospheric.

The humour in this feature comes very unexpectedly (like those "bugs") but when it comes, it is so childishly spontaneous. And "when sorrows come, they come not single spies but in battalions" - the drama here rivals the best Shakespearean tragedies.

Also a few occasional scenes are extremely stylish. For instance: 1) the scene in the first part where Belldandy uses her magic - great timing and great music; 2) the scene in the second part where Urd appears (jumping out of the TV-set) - the change in colour is brilliant; 3) the scene in the fourth part where the ancient tree is shown - wonderful animation and fantastic church organ music piece; ...well, this list can be continued.

The only thing I did not realize is: why is it written on the official DVD release here that it is not recommended for people younger than 18 years old? Our release has no MA (meaning sex/bloody violence/hentai) material at all. It's a serial that can be easily enjoyed by the whole family without making anybody uncomfortable.

The antipode of this serial is "Urotsukidoji". But that's another story.

Guess it's quite clear that it is 10/10, great and easy-going. Thank you for attention.


This is a wonderful story with very interesting characters topped off by some awesome animation. The english dub even has some well done voice acting to boot.

If you consider yourself a fan of anime this is required watching.


The Oh My Goddess series is my favorite anime story of all time. The animation is absolutely gorgeous. The music is nice and catchy. The love story will put tears in your eyes(not guaranteed). The ending is a pleasant surprise that puts everything together. If you don't like anime, you'll still like Oh My Goddess. This stuff is great, fun entertainment for people of all ages.


I love this movie!! Has a very concise plot and the most awesome soundtrack and artwork I've ever seen!! Definitely one of my top animes. I've seen hundreds but this one tops them all. Go buy/rent it!! I vote 10.


I don't have much of an opinion on this flick. Because what's there to analyze? Gratuitous violence. Gratuitous gore. Gross-out effects strictly for shock value. Gratuitous nudity and close-ups of big breasts. What we have here is a feminist's nightmare. What we also have is an absolute blast!!!

I'm sure women won't enjoy this as much and will probably b*tch about the overdose of female nudity, but for all you guys who just don't give a damn and just want to kick back and have a good time: You will love this movie!! This is like a mix of Wes Craven and Howard Stern. A supreme guilty pleasure!

I enjoy deep, artistically brilliant films like "American Beauty" and "Magnolia," but there's no reason I can't enjoy a campy, shallow, sleazy horror flick like this. I don't ONLY enjoy these types of flicks, but I can enjoy it as long as it's done in a fun, tongue-in-cheek, unpretentious manner. I just want to get that straight. OK, I'll go on. :)

Dennis Miller provides great comic relief in his lead role. Those who are fans of his schtick should look forward to this movie. The horror sequences, though sometimes cheesy, are great fun to watch. There's a spectacular sequence at the end with excellent usage of the song "Ballroom Blitz." There are other great classics like "All Right Now" and "Jailbreak." That's why I bought the soundtrack. It's awesome!

So this movie fits the "guy flick" stereotype like a glove. If you're not in the mood for excessive violence, gore and female nudity--don't watch this movie! Don't say I didn't warn you.

My score: 7 (out of 10)


Ok, I am a female, so I really got annoyed by all the nudity in it of women... but, besides that, I think people are being too hard on this movie... If you rent a Tales From The Crypt movie, don't expect something very good... but I was a little dissapointed when I saw this, because I think Demon Knight is about one of the best horrors made, and I was surprised that their second film was far different than Demon Knight... This one, Bordello Of Blood, was more funny than anything (quite funny humor I must admit at some points in the movie) with gore, that's all it was, funny and bloody, I was shocked that this movie really didn't have a real plot to it (none that I realized anyway) except obviously, there was vampires, and they wanted them dead... Did I miss something? In Demon Knight, there was a strong plot, great acting, (Especially, Billy Zane...) And funny, gory, exciting, etc., but this was just... pretty plain. If you are expecting a good vampire movie out of this, go watch something else... may I recommend John Carpenter's Vampires? A more serious, believable vampire movie =), but hey, COME ON... this movie isn't THAT bad... is it? The whole idea of it was dumb, and I think made for men, and that isn't fair to us female fans of Tales From The Crypt... am I missing something? Well, maybe the "boss" the cryptkeeper IS a guy, I guess he has say-so about what is put in the movies...


Before I write this interview, I wanted to just explain that I have been a Dennis Miller fan since I was 11 (1994), and he was the only reason I saw this movie. I also think he was one of the aspects of this movie that held redeeming value. In addition, purchased it new for less than $10 a few years ago, and it is in my Halloween movie collection. With that out of the way, I'll start my review.

Vampress Lilith (Angie Everhart) is brought to life again after a long rest in one of the far corners of the world by Reverend Jimmy Current (Chris Sarandon) and his partner Vincent. The two establish a bordello disguised as a funeral home to attract "evil" local young men. The men can "get stiff among the stiffs," but men start disappearing. This disappearance of local young men hits close to home for Katherine Verdoux(Erika Eleniak) when her rebellious younger brother Caleb (Corey Feldman) goes missing. So, she hires a Rafe Guttman (Dennis Miller) a wisecracking, seedy private investigator with good intentions and a quite unusual case--all involving this mortuary with secrets. Rafe and Katherine put themselves into a mystery that crosses the boundary of the living and the dead--rather, the undead.

This movie, thought quite funny, is a bad movie. That's just how it is. Going into this movie, the title itself is an indication of how trashy or bad it really is. But man, is it a fun trip! I found myself laughing at pretty much all the right scenes and all the right lines. Its as though the lines are tailored for Miller himself, it is perfect shtick for him. Most of the movies he's been in had parts written especially for him, but this was perfect. My first impression of Rafe is that he's a jerk, but I discovered (rather quickly) that he is rather good-natured and good-intentioned, and that he truly wants to help Katherine out.

There are two scenes I absolutely loathed about this movie--the scene where Lilith encounters Rafe in his office (I turn the channel off or fast-forward the tape), and the opening scene of the movie where Lilith is discovered by Rev. Current and Vincent (this is only watchable once). Otherwise, this movie is quite funny and interesting if you plan on getting into it. My biggest beef (spoiler) is that we don't even meet our hero until roughly 20 minutes into the movie! When you're first billed, doesn't this mean you'll show up earlier in the film? I guess someone missed one of the most important parts of film-making, or at least credit order. But, its OK, really, it's not the worst thing about the film.

This is essentially a bad movie. I read another review that says that it seems Dennis Miller is letting the viewers know this. He sure is! This is one of those so-bad-it's-funny kind of movies (why it used to be in the horror section of the video store I have no idea). However, Dennis Miller is hysterical in it!! I loved his moments--he had a lot of good ones.

I liked when he goes to the "Cunningham wake," and watches as the men lift the coffin out of the room, but struggle with it. Guttman, observing the scene, says "Wow, she really was a heavyweight." He does make some of the most classically bad facial expressions I have witnessed in a long time (honestly, after seeing this, I want to know what acting school I have to go to just to learn to "Act the Dennis Miller Way"). My favorite scenes are the Super Soaker scene (I won't divulge on this too much, not to spoil it, but it is a classic scene not to me missed), the scene where he sneaks back into the mortuary to investigate, and when Rafe heads into the coffin drop to visit the Bordello.

So why 7 out of 10 stars? One point deducted for the opening scene, which tends to be long and drawn-out. Watch this once, and you'll understand what is going on. What redeems this film is that after this point in the film, it becomes better, and the plot begins to move a little. One the same point, the entire first twenty minutes of the film is a complete drag. Skip the introduction on the next viewing. Another point deducted for the scene where Lilith encounters Rafe in his office--this scene is just a complete turn-off to me (2, 4, 6, 8--You can watch me masturbate!--yuck). And a third point deducted for the nudity. Yes, I know, it's a bordello, yes, they're supposed to be nude. But, I 'm a female, and I don't take pleasure in watching naked women prance around. But, I'm flexible, so I pushed past that dislike and ignored it. The bad acting isn't even a negative--it adds to the movie's silly nature.

This is a great Halloween movie, but non-Dennis Miller fans may be turned off by it. Maybe not, I don't know. The acting is pretty bad, but that's the point--it's not Oscar-caliber material. I highly recommend this movie--it has its moments that make is memorable (probably not for all the right reasons, but it tries). Some classic scenes make it funny, and you just may watch it more than once (I have!). Just try not to read too much into it. It really is quite an enjoyable diversion.


This movie is funny as hell and has tons of gore, why don't people like this? The great Chris Sarandon is also in this(Fright Night) and we get to see one of the Coreys play a fun vampire. Oh yeah, there are hundreds of hot women with breast implants running around naked and exploding. This movie is awesome!


A wise-cracking sleazy Private Eye Rafe Guttman (Dennis Miller) is been hired from a born again lady (Erika Eleniak) to find her punk goth brother (Corey Feldman). Rafe discovers an bordello, which it's also a funeral home. Then he meets the seductive Lillith (Angie Everhart), who's actually Queen of the Vampires. Her sexy employees are also vampires, which they seduced lonely or horny mens for survival. Now Rafe has to destroy Lillith before it's too late.

Directed by Gilbert Alder made an watchable tongue in cheek horror/comedy from the popular HBO series. Which it was inspired by the horror comic books of the 1950's of the same title "Tales from the Crypt". The cast seems to be having a great time here, including Chris Sarandon (Who played an seductive vampire in "Fright Night") and Phil Fondacaro as Vincent. Especially when Miller and Sarandon are destroying Vampires with Supersoakers. This is the second film from what it meant to be a trilogy. Which the first movie was "Demon Knight", it was a modest box office success. When "Bordello of Blood" flopped at the box office, the third film never happened sadly.

Perphas the problem with the picture, it's the script by the director and A L Katz. It's never as good or amusing as we hoped to be. Although the story credit came from Bob Gale (Back to the Future Trilogy, Trespass, Used Cars) and Oscar-Winner Director:Robert Zemeckis (Beowulf, Cast Away, The Polar Express). Probably if Gale and Zemeckis wrote the script instead, this could have been a much enjoyable movie. Which they wrote excellent scripts together. The film is occasionally funny and Miller does his best by making this fun. There's enough campy sleaze, dark humour, in-jokes and gore by seeing this uninspired picture worth a look. The motion picture soundtrack of the movie is a lot better than the movie to some degree. William Sadler and Oscar-Winner:Whoopi Goldberg appears in amusing cameos. (***/*****).


Blood, breasts, vampires and Chris Sarandon. How can you go wrong?

"Bordello of Blood," the second "Tales From The Crypt" feature film, supplies the viewer with ample amounts of all of the above, leaving room for little else. What it lacks in story, it more than makes up for in its cheap thrills, and as far as midnight guilty pleasures go, this one is about as good as it gets.

The story revolves around a good-girl (Erika Eleniak) whose delinquent brother (Corey Feldman) goes missing. Upon hiring a wise-cracking private detective, it is revealed that a local morgue is housing a brothel run by a gang of beautiful but deadly vampires. Armed with super-soakers full of holy water and with the help of a guitar-slinging reverend (Chris Sarandon), the two set out to put the joint out of business once and for all.

Dennis Miller is essentially playing himself, but keeps the humor pumping through the film's ridiculous premise. Chris Sarandon, likewise, is in top form as the genre hero he truly is. As mentioned before, there's plenty of bare-flesh and red-stuff to go around, and if that sort of thing is your bag, you'll have a blast with "Bordello of Blood." Take it for the cheap thrill ride it is.


Well this is fun. Admittedly you have to be in the mood for a cheesy, somewhat silly B-movie horror flick but if you're in the right frame of mind this will do the trick.

Also, maybe it's better that you're somewhat fond of Dennis Miller, since he basically carries this vampire flick. He's never out of character and if you've seen him once on "The O'Reilly Factor"...that's in short what you'll get.

The story here...well, Miller plays a P.I. who uncovers a brothel full of vampires. In the great "Tales from the Crypt" tradition, this is full of great gore, low-brow humor and and a twist ending to boot.

The cast here is great, with lovely eye-candy's courtesy of Angie Everhart and Erika Eleniak, the slightly-better-half of the Corey's (that reminds me, I have to dig up "Licence to Drive" one of these days) and the sorely underrated Chris Sarandon hamming it up as a crazy preacher doin' the Lord's work in inventive ways.

While not as successful as "Demon Knight", "Bordello of Blood" is a fun horror flick that packs in a good dose of silly humor and gore. What's not to like?


What at 1st I thought was going to be a disappointing film, really surprised me and had my laughing as well as almost getting scared. Dennis Miller stole the show, even with the bordello full of beauties, Erika Eleniak, Angie Everhart and others, Dennis is in top notch form as the new Bob Hope in this gore & breast fest of one liners and jabs at the vampire world in general.

You don't need to know the plot, you won't even care, if you want to laugh and get a bit scared, this is a great film to do that. Corey Feldman plays a misguided brother of Sweet Erika and Dennis Miller plays the Private Detective who is as funny as he is broke, hanging out at police stations looking for work...He needs to gain some respectability and Erika gives him the chance...

You need to watch this film if you are a fan of the genre, Dennis had to be ad libbing, and as usual he is a excellent with puns & one liners...plainly the man is a comedic genius.


Goody-goody two shoes Katherine Verdoux (blonde cutie Erica Eleniak) hires sleazy private investigator Rafe Gutman (a deliciously smarmy and sarcastic Dennis Miller) to finding her obnoxious missing punk brother Caleb (a perfectly grating Corey Feldman). Rafe traces Caleb to a remote whorehouse on the edge of town that's disguised as a mortuary and populated by luscious lady vampires led by the evil and alluring Madam Lilith (ravishing redhead Angie Everhart having a whale of a wicked time). Director/co-writer Gilbert Adler really pours on the tasty gratuitous female nudity, gleefully over-the-top graphic violence, and often crudely amusing dopey puns. Miller has a ball playing the slimy anti-hero; he keeps things bouncy and funny throughout. Moreover, the solid supporting cast likewise does the trick: Chris Sarandon as slick, sanctimonious televangelist Jimmy Current, Aubrey Morris as Lilith's eccentric henchman McCutcheon, Phil Fondacaro as obsessive explorer Vincent Prather, William Sadler as a pompous mummy, and Kiara Hunter as enticing dominatrix bloodsucker Tamara. WARNING: Possible *SPOILER* ahead. The definite sidesplitting sick highlight occurs when Lilith's vampire harem gets slaughtered while "Ballroom Blitz" blares away on the soundtrack. Good, trashy tongue-in-cheek fun.


Bram Stoker's Dracula -------------------------------------------------Nosferatu -------------------------------------------------------------The Lost Boys ---------------------------------------------------------Fright Night ----------------------------------------------------------

I have this thing for Vampire movies and I've got to say, I believe this one was a classic.

Although it may not be so intriguing to those who are looking for an intellectual movie, if you like old classics, this may be the movie for you.

Completed with comedic lines, gore that just doesn't impress the people of the millennium, and a classic Crypt Keeper ending twist, Bordello of Blood is a good watch.


A lot people will disagree that this is no where near as good as Universal/ Tales from the Crypt first movie 'Demon Knight' - I personally think its just as good. OK so its not the best vampire flick ever made ( the lost boys, was better) but its pure fun - Did you honestly think any of the actors would take there roles that seriously in a tales from the crypt movie?? Angie Everhart is great as the wise cracking vamp and Erika Eleniak is not much different from her bay-watch character, so you can kind of get the idea what its going to be like - go in open minded and just go with the flow. These are the sort of films Corey Feldman ought to be in!!


This is obviously a tongue in cheek scary movie, with lots of little jabs of humor at all walks of life. It plays few favorites, except perhaps favoring blondes, but it doesn't take itself serious enough to be a propaganda movie.

It starts with a bit that comes into play later. Characters disappear and then reappear at the end. Meanwhile, the main characters are fairly enjoyable and amusing. So are the minor characters.

A bordello of bloodsucking meanies finds victims from the town. A private investigator and a Jimmy Baker type evangelist lead the way into fighting them.

It is mostly disjointed, and has some trivial chuckles, but no guffaws. It comes up a bit short, but everyone tries in this movie, and the performances are grand, which provides most of the chuckles.


Okay, this is definitely the dumbest movie I've ever seen since Satan's School for girls. No good violence, no vampire gorieness, no nothing. The graphics absolutely SUCKED. I hated it, on a scale of one to ten i'd rate it a two for originality. Okay, the gorieness part was untrue, there was a whole lot of ketchup (for the blood) you could tell it was ketchup, all they had to do was put some chunky stuff in there. lol. And it ended with the people walking away, and the girl of the whole thing was all happy and stuff that she got away from the vamps, then she showed the guy an "upper" part of her leg and she ended up being bitten and she didn't know it and she bit the guy while kissing him and then it ended. BOOOOOOOOOOO! I hated it...


Poor horror recommended only for real fans... other people would hate it. I still can't believe that Robert Zemeckis took part to this fiasco called Tales from the Crypt. A combination of some horror and some funny scenes, with a non-concludent plot and few twists and turns... this is good to watch only if you like special effects, with hearts torn out of chests, blood spreading everywhere and thirsty vampires. Still a horror must be a horror and if you try to combine one with comedy the result will s*ck. Still i liked the idea with the water guns :) funny. Vote: 4 out of 10. Vote: 4 out of 10.


This is simply one more extremely bad vampire flick that occupies space in the "Horror" section of video stores. The notion of "plot" barely even punctures this movie. But Dennis Miller is, well, Dennis Miller. It is only because of him that I rented the movie, and only because of his wry, sarcastic comments that I finished watching it. If you're a Dennis Miller fan, then perhaps you should see Bordello of Blood. But don't rent it for its horror value--there is none.


Dennis Miller was funny. The film was pretty good, but I would have preferred a more serious undertaking. Lots of good looking women, gruesome makeup, and campy devices made for a good time. Miller's character appealed to me; I like a tough, wise cracking detective with a heart of gold. I found the ending totally satisfying.


Let me first start this off by saying any movie with Corey Feldman in it will automatically lose one star from me. That done let me repair that by saying any film with Erika Eleniak in it will receive one bonus star.

Tales From the Crypt's second feature is little more than a campy vampire tale. It is the tale of the Queen of the vampires 'Lillith' (erotically portrayed by the best looking redhead in film, Angie Everhart).

Dennis Miller, is his wise cracking self throughout this movie. I wondered whether there was a script or not for him, as he just kid of flows through the film with jokes in every second line..perhaps he adlibbed the whole thing. Well, his character is a hardluck P.I. whom happens across a lovely lady in distress, the ever so religious Erika Eleniak.

Eleniak's brother (Feldman) is missing. The cops are too overworked between meals so she decides to hire Miller. He finds out that her brother went to a vampire whorehouse.

Chris Sarandon who played a T.V. Reverend in this movie plays a confusing character to me. Sometimes he seems the Swaggarty Bakerish type of corrupt evangelist, sometimes he seems like a crusader for God. Hard to tell. Regardless he didn't have a major role in the film.

There is plenty of nudity in the film, and combined with Miller's and Everhart's (who looks gorgeous did I mention that...but could not tell a joke and act well) wisecracking made it a pretty campy affair. With all the nudity, they couldn't have shown it from one of the major stars like Eleniak or Everhart?? Come on Cryptkeeper get with it!

It surprised me the way the Tales From the Crypt people have gone, especially after Demon Knight.

It was cute seeing William Sadler return for a cameo.