The film opens to shots of a very fake looking model of a run down abandoned lighthouse on Snape Island, the credits appear over this sequence. Two fishermen, John Gurney (George Coulouris) and his son Hamp (Jack Watson) weave their way through and around the jagged rocks that surround Snape Island. They seem uneasy. Thick fog covers the island. They dock their boat. They begin to search the island. They find a severed hand, and a body in a shallow pool of blood stained water. Inside the lighthouse they find a woman's body and severed head. Next, in an old shed Gurney finds a boy impaled to the wall with a sword. He investigates the shed further and is attacked and killed by a screaming, naked young girl. She runs in to the fog, Hamp knocks her out with an iron bar. Back on the mainland she is taken to hospital for treatment. Her name is Penelope (Candace Glendenning), under hypnosis by a Dr. Simpson (Anthony Valentine), she tells a tale of how her and her friends Mae (Seretta Wilson), Des (Robin Askwith) and Gary (John Hamill) traveled to the island. The police think that she killed her friends, and as far as their concerned the case is closed. Meanwhile the sword that was used to kill Des turns out to be made of solid gold and an extremely valuable Phoenician artifact, four archeologist's are assembled to investigate and perhaps find an ancient burial ground. Adam (Mark Edwards), his ex girlfriend Rose (Jill Haworth), Nora (Anna Palk) and her husband Dan (Derek Folds) hire Hamp and his Nephew Brom (Gary Hamilton) to take them over to the island. A private investigator named Brent (Bryant Haliday) who has been hired by Penolope's parents to try and prove her innocence also travels with them. Once at the island things start to turn sour almost immediately, their radio equipment is broken stopping them from contacting anyone on the mainland, their boat is blown up, and they start to hear strange noises. It starts to become clear that not everyone is telling the truth as to why they are on Snape Island. As the night draws on Snape Islands terrible secrets are revealed, but will anyone survive to tell the tale? Written and directed by Jim O'Connolly I really liked this film. The island and run down lighthouse reek of atmosphere, the creaking sets look great. The script has decent characters, a few good plot twists and turns and it keeps moving at a fair pace. The twist ending is a bit silly and underused, though. There's a great scene with some funny dialogue that's worth a mention, when the group arrive on the island and Brent disappears. Adam questions Brent's motivations and claims he doesn't trust him, Nora buts in to cast further doubt on Brent and says "and he carries a gun" her henpecked husband Dan says "how do you know?", she replies "I noticed the bulge in his pants" to which Dan accusingly say "yes, you would!", great stuff. The murders are quite gory, severed limbs and heads, stabbings and a machete in someones face among others. This film also contains one of the worst special effects I've seen in a long time, as the group travel from the mainland to Snape Island the filmmakers used a boat in a studio and a back projected sea, which looks and feels awful. And the statue of the Phoenician god looks like it was made by a primary school art class. The fashions are also very 70's, silly looking sideburns and flares, the women in this film look attractive though, but I'm not sure that a mini skirt and high heeled boots would be a good choice of footwear considering the rocky and rough terrain. Photography, acting and music are all fine. We get some sex and nudity too, which helps things along nicely. A solid British murder mystery horror film with a great atmosphere that's well worth a look. Overall a lot of fun and certainly recommended.


Sexy vintage British horror tale packed with traditional atmospheric fog, shades of Gothic and hot young flesh. From the firm buttocks of the hunky men to the smooth perky breasts of the women, this film exploits the 70's free love era.

Three interconnected tales revolve around an old lighthouse island purported to be closed but hiding deep secrets. They are . . .

First: A man, his wife and their child escape the near by village to live in isolation. Something happens. Second: Free spirited young Americans who are for the most part naked during their flashback sequences, and we're all happy about that, visit the island for a little hot sex and weed. Surely this movie was made by content bisexuals because both sexes bare enough flesh to make your engine hum. Someone murders three of the hot and horny kids (while they're all naked). Third: A research team is sent to the island because one of the boys was murdered with an antique sword only found in southern Europe. The sword it appears belongs to a cult that worships the God of Orgies, lust and firm male butts. The team is comprised of four young hot archaeologists, and two locals, one in particular is a hungry stud (Gary Hamilton) who is by far the best looking 70's hunk I've ever seen naked on screen. There's a lot of "whose been sleeping in my bed" antics before the truth about the island is uncovered.

The underground worship chamber is by far the funniest horror set I have ever seen.

All in all for film history's sake and a nice slice of 70's nudity mixed with chills and thrills, this is the best of it's kind.

Did I mention hot men and sweet women are starked naked most of the time?

Catch it!


Folks investigating a strange series of murders on a tiny island are being attacked and killed by an unseen presence.

This moody British horror film was made several years before the "stalk 'n' slash" genre kicked off, yet this atmospheric chiller possesses a number of elements that would later become popular in the modern horror genre. At the same time it has the sense of an old Gothic horror film as well, with its gloomy atmosphere and dark setting. The story may be simple but it combines enough scenes of shocking violence, creeping suspense, and steamy sex to keep one engaged throughout. A little campy, yes, but it only adds more to the fun of this guilty pleasure.

The cast is adequate, highlighted by such veteran actors as Bryant Haliday, Jill Haworth, and Mark Edwards. In addition the gore effects are also well done and provide for some effectively chilling scenes.

For fans of the slasher genre or 70's horror in general, Tower of Evil is an enjoyably eerie trip!

*** out of ****


This is a horror-movie with great atmosphere. The film is pretty bloody consider that it have been made in 1972. The effect are cheap, but they have been made with style, and the some of the actors are really great (but not all). The first part of "Tower of Evil" is a bit dull, but the rest of the movie is exciting.

I liked it, but it's not for everybody's taste.


This is a movie for anyone who loves English horror films from the early 70's--and that should mean you!! A fog enshrouded island, a derelict lighthouse, plenty of blood, sex and dated slang--oh yeah it's here in abundance!! Don't listen to the other reviewers when they say this film would have been better if it had been made with today's effects and a larger budget. This film becomes better because it was made on a tighter budget, when the crew had to come up with inventive ways to create atmosphere, menace and a sustained mood. All of these things drip from every frame of this film and the cast is actually very good and even features George Couloris (of Citizen Kane fame) in a short but blood filled cameo at the start of the film and Jill Haworth, who had prior to this film starred in such acclaimed flicks as "Exodus" and the Broadway version of "Cabaret". Forget those films though this is the highlight of her career--everything else was just practice for this baby!! Some might say I'm going too far but that would be wrong. The twists in this film are truly fun and surprising and the musical score adds a real sense of unease to the well directed carnage and misty vistas (hats off to Jim O'Connolly!) So what are you waiting for--this is now out on DVD and looks crisp and vivid. Get it and see how good horror films were not all that long ago!


I've just seen Tower of Evil for the first time and found it rather scary in parts. I enjoyed watching this, despite reading bad reviews about it.

A group of young Americans drop off at a deserted lighthouse to spend the night there but all but one of them are bumped off, the survivor being a girl who kills a sailor, thinking he was the murderer. After she is rescued, another group go to stay there to see what really happened and is isn't long before killings start. We discover the killer to be a man who didn't get over the death of his wife and became a recluse on the island and as a result, he has mutated. He is killed at the end but his even more mutated son then appears, kills a man and the whole place then burns down.

Tower of Evil is British made and is rather scary once on the island, where most of the scenes are shot in the dark.

Quite a few familiar stars are in the cast: Bryant Haliday (The Projected Man, Devil Doll), Robin Askworth (Horror Hospital, Confessions of a Window Cleaner), Dennis Price (Twins of Evil, The Earth Dies Screaming), Derek Fowlds (Oscar Blaketon in Heartbeat), Anthony Valentine (To the Devil a Daughter), George Coulouris (Citizen Kane) and Jill Haworth.

If you are a fan of 1970's horror, this is for you. Quite creepy.

Rating: 3 stars out of 5.


SPOILER ALERT! A group of researchers travel to a remote island of the English coast to investigate the brutal murders of three Americans. They uncover a half-dead man, his completely dead wife and their cycloptic son. Also in the mix is an ancient ruin where sacrifices have taken place. A real piece of junk directed by Jim O'Connolly. The island, in long shots, is a miniature and the whole film is decidedly, and obviously, studio-bound. The cast is a bland mix of no-names save for Jill Haworth, slumming it after working with the likes of Preminger, Marais and (on Broadway) Hal Prince. Anna Palk, a Stephanie Beacham lookalike, adds some spark as a bitchy pothead. As bad as they come.


I saw this on the box a couple of weeks back, one of BBC2's occasional late night horror showings. It appears less often than Hammers output or other more famous British horrors so it was a first time viewing for me and I enjoyed it a good deal. The plot is pretty neat and the setting is ace, with treasure seeking archaeologists heading to an accursed island where murders have recently taken place. Predictably enough, they are not alone... The alternate versions listing for the film mentions that the film was somewhat trimmed for its original release which is unsurprising, since the film has a nice amount of bloodshed for a British film of the period, as well as some nudity and even a spot of entertaining thrusting sex. Fortunately its gets shown uncut on television and though it doesn't have any spectacular content, its still pretty toothsome stuff. Sadly the writing and acting aren't much good which makes for a few moments of unintentional humour, with Gary Hamilton perhaps the worst acting wise and Robin Askwith and Derek Fowlds (Bernard from Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister) the best. The opening 20 minutes, before the expedition is underway, are the most striking, with colorful touches and a slightly wacky approach that the film later loses, though there is good smattering of creepy moments and everything mounts to a pretty fun finale. So all in all its no classic, but with attractive women, a good mood and an ample dose of neat and sometimes even shocking moments, its a worthy piece of old fashioned and shonky good times, worth checking out for British horror enthusiasts or 70's low budget lovers I'd say.


A fisherman and his father set foot on the foreboding Snape Island to discover the aftermath of a massacre, not to mention a severely traumatized (and appreciably naked) female survivor who stabs the father to death. The subsequent investigation leads to the discovery of an ancient artifact on the island, and then a museums' expedition to the island to explore it further. (All of this while doctors attempt to break through the survivors' catatonia). The team finds themselves menaced by a mysterious assailant.

I found this an enjoyable horror / mystery with a definite edge to it. Director Jim O'Connolly creates good atmosphere and tension, and pulls off a great reveal of the crazed island resident. The island is a very impressive study in blatant doom and gloom; it looks ominous right from the get go. The movie has great settings and just the right look. Doses of grisly violence, sex, and intrigue also add to the mix. The movies' little twists may not come off as all that surprising, but they're enjoyable nonetheless.

The solid British cast does well at selling the material. Standing out are such performers as Bryant Halliday, Jack Watson, and Dennis Price. Both Jill Haworth and Anna Palk are quite sexy, as is Candace Glendenning in the small role of the traumatized Penny.

Creepy, raw, and brutal horror in a nicely bleak location, "Tower of Evil" is a good deal of fun.

7/10


I have heard that Tower of Evil is one of the films responsible for the decline of the British film industry in the 1970's; and while I don't know if this is true or not - having seen it, I can say that there's a good chance it is true. The fact that this film is such a mess is made more disappointing by the fact that it features a good basis for a horror film. We follow a group of Archaeologists who go off to a remote island to find buried treasure. Their trip is set to be anything but pleasurable, however, as it turns out that there's a deformed killer stalking the underground cave system. Nudity and gore feature prominently (especially considering the time of release), yet it's all rather dull. Tower of Evil features a deep, dark void where all the intrigue should be; and the characters aren't any better. We are forced to watch a bunch of promiscuous stoners lumbering about the poorly designed sets, and despite the fact that this is supposed to be brainless 'fun'; staying awake soon becomes a major problem.

I make a habit of seeing obscure horror films, and usually this turns out to be a fruitful endeavour, which makes films like this even more of a nuisance. It's unoriginal, it's dull and although most films like this aren't life-affirming experiences; this one doesn't even manage to lampoon the 'fun' element that most B-movies get right on. Director Jim O'Connolly directs his cast of unknowns lethargically, who in turn repay this by acting lethargically. Nobody on the cast list stands out, and despite the mention of Dennis Price as a 'guest star', nobody manages to elevate this above the nonsense that it clearly is. The atmosphere is the one saving grace. Despite its obvious shoestring budget, Tower of Evil presents it's central location nicely, which always bodes well in a horror film; even a very tatty one such as this. Regarding this film, I would say that it's only worth seeing if you absolutely must see every seventies horror film ever made. If you're happy to miss a few, then I recommend making this one of them. Nudity and gore aside; this is one shoddy movie.


Ok, I will start by saying I absolutely adore, Jill Haworth! She was an amazing actress appearing such acclaimed films as "Exodus", and "In harm's way." She also starred in the first Broadway production of "Cabaret" as Sally Bowles. For some stupid reason, the early 1970's got rid of loads of talented actresses reducing their casting choices. Jill Haworth, should of stayed around and been acting to this very day! I met year two years ago and she is still stunning and amazing. She is saucy and sexy, in this film, that pre-dates "Friday the 13th" but still has some of the same scares. RIGHT ON JILL!


In "Leonard Maltin's Movie Guide", he gives this film a savage review and in hindsight I probably should have listened to him, as this is a portion of my life I probably wasted. That's because this is a perfectly dreadful film in just about every way--particularly in how the characters were written. Heck, my cats could probably write better characters and dialog! I was also quite surprised as I watched the film, as it had a very significant amount of nudity and sexual content. That surprise was because it was shown on Turner Classic Movies--a channel that rarely has nudity but even when it does, there's far less than in this film. Oddly, the nudity made little sense because the film was set on an island in Britain (and you DON'T want to run around naked there--especially at night--it's just too cold!). Also oddly because if you DO want a soft-core pornographic movie, you should certainly hire better looking ladies. I didn't want to see a skin flick but couldn't see why these flat-chested and mediocre ladies were chosen. As I said, I don't usually watch films with this much skin in it but for those who want this in a film, you'll be pretty disappointed--though the men seemed a bit more photogenic in this regard.

As for the plot, it was pretty stupid but had possibilities. The problem wasn't just than having Phoenicians and the pagan god Baal in the UK was silly but the characters were just pathetic. Here's the story in a truncated form. 3 of 4 young nudists are murdered and the 4th kills one of the rescuers. They aren't sure if she was the one who murdered the others or if she just panicked and killed the rescuer because of her mental condition following the massacre of her scantily-clad friends.

A psychiatrist uses a form of shock therapy (using chemicals and goofy lights) to get this survivor to tell her story, as once she's in custody, she'd become catatonic. The folks are able to learn that she believed they were attacked--but by what they still don't know. What I would like to know, though, is how this lady not only knew what she and her boyfriend were doing (this mostly involved getting naked and her saying 'she wasn't THAT kind of girl' when he later wanted to have sex?!?) but she also detailed what the other couple was doing on another part of the island at the same time!! While they still don't know what happened, an 'expert' announces that one of the victims was impaled with a Phoenician sword associated with funerals and Baal worship and they MUST search the island for treasure. Oddly, no one in the group that then heads back to the island appears to be an archaeologist or anthropologist--just a motley crew of adventurers who look nothing like the sort to investigate--particularly the slutty lady whose only interest in life is sex. Why they would bring this nympho along is beyond me, but the others, too, seem completely out of place. There's no 'Indiana Jones' here--or anyone remotely like him. Also, while this makes no sense, what makes even less sense is why such a small group goes there--and they have no backup plan! Think about it--a group was slaughtered there and they aren't sure who did it. The mass murderer might still be on the island waiting but they don't even consider the possibility or bring weapons or a cop!!! But, fortunately, they did bring a horny lady who talks incessantly about sex and who lifts her skirt at the first available moment on an island where mass murder just occurred!! I could try to say more about the plot or the rest of the idiot characters, but frankly it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

So, what we have is a dumb plot, horrible characters who make no sense and who are dumber than eels and lots of nudity featuring not especially attractive people. Need I say more?! This is just a terrible film and I can see almost nothing interesting to say about this low-budget bucket of bile. It only manages a 2 because at least, on rare occasions, it does offer a few decent chills (aside from those experienced by the nudists at the beginning of the film).

Oh, and by the way, this isn't a huge plot problem because they guy was not supposed to be a forensics expert, but at the beginning when the two men discover the massacre, one says to the other "how long have they been dead?". The other guy says "...about a week"--even though the bodies showed no evidence of critters nibbling on the corpses, putrification or discoloration at all and there was fresh blood all about the bodies. Maybe this man's not an expert, but he apparently was an idiot--especially since this moron returns to the island later in the film!


I actually haven't seen this a thousand times, yet it feels like I have. It's just so predictable and boring that it seemed pointless to even watch the end. This is why I stopped watching with about 15 minutes left on the movie. What's the point? I just didn't care.

The only redeeming value this movie posesses is the fashion style of the two leading ladies. They have some really awesome clothes! I bet their clothes would be worth a lot of money today.

I gave this movie 3/10 because of the clothes. Sounds lame, but these clothes were really that good!

Another reason I gave the movie more than 1 star was the audio. They do a decent job making scary sounds that actually freaked me out a little bit. There's a part where something is squeaking and it's dark and no one knows what it is. The sound itself was harmless, but if you let your imagination run away, it was actually scary!

I also liked the sex scene between the sex-crazed lady and the hot young guy. He was pretty hot! I liked his tight pants. The scene was good because it wasn't all hair flipping, long kisses, and loss of innocence. It was actually kind of sly and rough. They did a good job making a sex scene that didn't make me wanna hit fast forward.

That's it. Boring movie. Who cares what the ending was? You already know.


This is a great contender for the best of the worst. People go to investigate a murder and look for treasure on Snape Island. The gore is pretty graphic if you see a decent version of this movie and the atmosphere is very spooky. An island with just a lighthouse and some spooky caves underneath is a great idea and they use the suspense well. I have NO idea why it got banned in Finland. It is a very funny film as well. Loads of mistakes and a stereotypical cornish sailor named Hamp.

''SPOILERS''

When one of the girls come in and say 'Dinners Ready' with a bunch of plates there is nothing on the plates at all and why does she drop them all just because she can hear what sounds like a flute playing?!

A character named Brom breaks every horror movie rule ever...He drinks, Smokes crack, takes bribes, lies, has sex, tries to steal a bunch of treasure until he gets killed!

Hamp the sailor doesn't smile throughout the entire movie until near the end and he gets killed.

The boat that there sailing to the island looks like its floating way above the water!

Robin Askwith trying to be american. Now THATS comedy!


"Whilst searching for ancient treasure on a lighthouse-island off the British coastline, an archaeological expedition becomes isolated from the mainland and is stalked by a monstrous assassin." Most people blow up or fall over out-of-sync with the gunshots/knife-wielding.

This works as a comedy, but only if you're drunk enough. Otherwise it's one to avoid.

The highlights are a Kevin Keegan lookalike, some attractive women for the gratuitous sex scenes, and a couple of deformed retards who are presented in the way all good film retards should be - as comic relief.

In conclusion, this is in no way a film to spend money on, except perhaps via your electricity bill when it's shown, inevitably late at night as filler in between phone-in quiz shows and news programs.


Fake looking, horrible acting, weak directing and a disappointing killer/monster. Sounds like a typical '70's horror fare but difference is that this movie is just plain bad instead of entertaining like most other typical Brithish '70's horror movies.

The story and the concept of the movie really aren't that bad. It however is ruined by the poorly over-the-top acting actors and the weak and at times just plain stupid directing from Jim O'Connolly. Also the fake looking sets and the pointless many sex- and nude scene's make this movie a poor entry in the horror genre. Lot's of horror fans of '70's movies will be disappointed by this also because it isn't really an entertaining one to watch. There is quite some blood and gore but that all is simply just not good enough to satisfying the average horror fan.

Another disappointing aspect of the movie is the killer/monster of the movie. The suspense is build up well and the killer/monster isn't shown for a long time. However when he finally is shown it's a huge disappointment. He is incredibly stupid looking and even worse is the killer/monster at the ending who they for some odd reason gave a mask instead of just make-up. It was incredibly stupid and fake looking and just totally ruined the ending.

It's a real shame because like I mentioned before the story had more than enough potential. The movie and its story however make some odd choices as the movie progresses and the acting and directing truly make this movie an even worser one to watch. Some of the ideas in the movie are good but one has the feeling that a different director would had handled this movie differently and would had made this a better one to watch for sure.

Will not even the most hardened '70's horror fan like this movie? Hard to say. Perhaps, if he/she is able to appreciate some of the ideas and concept of the movie. They will probably still find some joy in it. But even they must come to the conclusion that this movie is a disappointing and just plain bad one.

3/10


A bunch of kids are found murdered on a remote island. Only one is alive and totally insane. It's determined that she killed everyone else. Another group travels out to the island to see what happened and find out that she didn't do it. Something is loose on the island and starts to hunt them down...

A pretty dull horror film. All the characters are unpleasant (you WANT them all dead), the acting is bad, there are horrible 1970s fashions and the killings are (for the most part) pretty mild. Also you see a bunch of British actors all trying (badly) to fake American accents (the kids who are killed first). Heck, one guy had to be dubbed in! There is plenty of nudity--the girls show their chests, the boys only their butts. What really kills this film though is the confused script which has the characters doing incredibly stupid things.

SPOILERS AHEAD!!! They all know a killer is with them on the island so they immediately separate leaving the women alone; a woman stands and just screams endlessly as her boyfriend gets hacked up in front of her (this happens TWICE!) and a woman tries to escape from the killer by running upstairs. Also these people seem to get over the deaths of their companions very quickly. Look how Dan gets over his wife's death and how they all react to Bron's dead body. SPOILERS END!!!

The DVD transfer from Elite is great--widescreen, good print and in strong color...but the movie just isn't good. I heard this helped kill the British film industry--it's easy to see why! I give it a 4.


Children's Cartoons have long been showcases for slapstick silliness and poorly written humor. Doug stands out in stark contrast to the rest.

This movie is sharply written, humorous with a message that is not laid on in a schmaltzy manner. The creative script is intelligent enough to keep the attention of adults while still entertaining children.

Doug himself is a likeable protagonist. He isn't really one dimensional, the kid has feelings. Its fun to watch him deal with the pressures of dating, (albeit at the ripe young age of 12...) he and Patti actually have a sort of chemistry (as far as cartoon characters are concerned.) I was actually able to watch this movie without feeling silly for being there....its dark elements are nicely balanced out with some traditional cartoon absurdities. All in all, its a surprisingly intelligent, fun, ride.


*Contains Spoilers*

"Doug's 1st Movie" was one of the best Disney movies I've seen in a long time. I saw the movie the day it came out in the movies and remember waiting on line for a long time to get tickets for it.

The movie takes place after the series with Doug and his friends looking for the "Lucky Duck Lake monster". They find the monster at Skeeter's house (I love that scene) and help the monster adapt to human civilization by helping her wear clothes and go to school. But alongside this part Doug is getting ready for Valentine's day and trying to prepare for the Valentine's day dance with Patti.

One thing that I was unhappy about was that Doug and Patti didn't kiss at the end of the movie. I was really hoping they would since it was Valentine's day. But at least the movie revealed the truth about the "Lucky Duck Lake Monster".

Overall I loved this movie (10/10 stars) and watch it whenever I get a chance to.


This is an interesting movie. I really enjoyed it and was perfect for the kids and also a great film for the young at heart aswell. The plot is gripping with the Lucky Duck lake monster and the fact that his secret love for Patti is almost over in just over 1hr and 30mins which is just perfect for the kids who want to go to bed soon. But over all a fine film and I will watch time and time again. Hopefully there will be Dougs Second Movie, now that would be great


This movie is awesome! It's really a great movie for all die-hard Doug fans (like me). Doug fans (as well as kids and adults, not to mention teenagers) will really like it. The movie answers all questions that Doug fans have like, is there really a monster in the lake? And will Doug and Patti get together? The animation is a step higher than the TV show which is great! I had teenage friend who saw it and laughed! It's funny, sweet and smart! Lots of fun to watch!


This is one of those kids' films that adults can't sit down and watch as well. Okay, it's got nice morals, but pleeeeease, no DOUG'S 2ND MOVIE !!!!! Boring attempt to stretch a tiny DOUG episode into a feature-length production...didn't work. 4/10


I'll admit it, I'm a guilty fan of the TV show. Doug is a geniunely likable character, and the movie is entertaining. Its not going to win any awards, but for a good babysitting movie, or ever something to do when you're bored, you really can't mess this one up.


Disney sure does spend alot of money on so called quality childrens programming. Just like Hey Arnold and alot of these poorly drawn cartoons. All they do is just take 3 episodes of the regular cartoon and string em together and call it a movie . you could sit your kids in front of the tv and watch the same thing for free.. they dont improve the animation ,its the same lame stuff as weekday afternoon stuff. doug is a very poor cartoon and the characters dull stupid and idiotic.

your kids would do better watching Zoom ...


I am not a big fan of vacanta mare's humor. I much rather prefer divertis, but the movie itself is indeed not bad all things considered. It has been far too long since a straight romanian comedy was made. The director is american and this was definitely a plus. The trademark vacanta mare humor is toned down a few notches and the result is a spoof that is funny at times, hilarious at others and flat here and there. All in all it was above may expectations, and certainly better than the last few AMERICAN spoofs I've seen.


This movie is far from a masterpiece, but it's worth seeing. It's more of a satire than a fiction comedy, an extreme view of some of the less pleasant realities in today's Romania.

It's really a pity that the best jokes are hard to understand by someone who doesn't speak Romanian and have never lived here. The way they surprise, highlight and exaggerate some sad but true facts in our current society reminds me of one of our best classical novelists: I.L.Caragiale. The differences come from the different moments in time, but the style and message are very similar, showing the worst of our society in today's style and way of thinking.

Maybe in "Garcea si oltenii" some of the more trivial expressions could be avoided, it's clearly not a movie to view with your kids and some people got a bad impression because of that, but we should keep in mind that the whole idea of this movie is to illustrate and make fun of what really the current way of life and thinking is for far too many Romanians

It's a satire, not a documentary! It's black humor from start to finish and it's not a single scene that doesn't correspond to everyday events we see around here.

Without any grate expectations regarding the quality of the settings or any cool special effects (it's a low budget movie), I say: see it, be amused, disgusted, revolted or upset about the jokes, but also be honest and think about how many of the situations they are making fun of are based on things happening to you, around you or to a significant number of people living in Romania today!


An American director combined with VM humor: that should be the key to success.

Well, not a single chance. The plot is stupid, the scenario and the lines are equally annoying. One or two jokes are not enough for 1h30. Maybe I'm not the best jury for this movie (I'm bored to death by "Leana si Costel" series and I hope it will last less than "Santa Barbara" ;-).

However, simply because it's below the expectations is not a ground to consider it automatically the worst. I saw American movies supposed to be good because of directors, scenarists, actors and/or main characters and they were worse than this Garcea. We can afford it too.

That's mark 2!


i can't believe it! this movie is worst than xXx, worst than Fast and Furious, worst than Gone in 60 Seconds!!! DO NOT SEE IT! I repeat: DO NOT SEE IT! See something else instead...even POKEMON is better than this bucket of crap!!! Bad acting, bad jokes, cliches....BAD! i give it a 0 out of 100.


I wasn't expecting much of it since i only went to the theatre to see Alexandra Mutu who was sooo hot, but i was far worse than i had expected it to be.A poor plot, poor characters(except Garcea who makes you laugh a few times only because of the stupidity), crap acting and crap directing.The beginning made me wanna know what the heck i was doing there in the first place, the Skol beer advertising was horrible and the character - director interaction from the movie, which was intended to be fun was just bad taste.The TV show is far better.


this is not a movie. it's nothing, absolutely nothing. don't waste money on this garbage, don't waste your time, keep away your children. this "movie" is one big mistake. i've seen the worst "actors" in the world, a so called "director", a so called writer. i've seen everything that has nothing to do with the idea of film. and do you know what's the worst thing about this "movie"? in 2003 it was the most popular film in Romania. it was first place in box office by the tickets sold in cinemas across country. for the people all over the world: don't put all the Romanians together. some of us are more intelligent than "garcea si oltenii" fans.


After the popular song "dragostia din tei" I find out that Romanians are actually good at making movies too? Who remembers "Johnny English". It was a funny cliché of James Bond and it was extremely funny because of making funny of the established series. We all know other notable parodies. Now this Romanian movie here includes so many parodies that makes you laugh the whole movie. Nazis, cold war Russians, Japanese ninja and of course, James Bond try to get their hands on a magic stone that can destroy the world. With a touch of genius, here James bond is portrayed as a negative hero and the actual hero of the movie is a dumb Romanian policeman called Garcia. You have to see the parts where the policeman, out of crazy luck, wins some fierce fights. The guy is soooo funny! Also I think the same actor plays a woman at the same time. The woman seems pretty dumb too as well as her husband... I think this is the best parody I've seen; go and watch this DVD, you won'T regret it!!!


Radu Pietreanu and Mugur Mihaescu are known in Romania from an TV Show, named 'Vacanta Mare', the source of inspiration for this movie. The TV Show is awful like the movie.

Mugur Mihaescu in transvestite role is not funny at all. The acting is also very poor.

See this movie ONLY you are an devotated fan of the show 'Vacanta Mare'.


I saw this movie and it was not a successful one but i liked it because it was O.K. and fun also and it is fun just for who have seen Garcea before and know who is he so you should see this movie i am not a fan of romanian movies but this movie is O.K.


Man, don't even get me started...

I wanted to make the title "Don't buy this DVD" but I noticed there's no such thing as a link to either a DVD or a VHS at Amazon or anywhere, so until that lil'icon there turns from grey to full color, you're pretty much safe.

Should I start with the acting? Actually, I can't even say it's bad acting, cause there's no acting at all... Naw. This film doesn't even deserve a comment. It gives me a headache to even ponder what makes it so bad. The plot is so poor (if you've got at least half a brain), the acting so miserable and the cracks so stupid, it makes you think the writer (or writers) and director have spent the last few years in the loony bin and have a very different perception about what's funny or acceptable in a movie. And, before you ask, no: It's not the kind of it's-so-dumb-it's-kinda-funny-flick. It's bad, period. Real bad.

The only reason you would choose to see this, I figure, is if your sister was dating Steven Seagal and you wanted to somehow prove to yourself there are even worse filmmakers.


This is what I call a move made for fun. There's nothing serious about it. But there's some very good reasons why anyone should see it:

1. The plot is crazy and very good (though not really original) 2. The movie is beautifully directed by Sam Irvin. 3. The characters are funny as hell. 4. And last, but NOT least, there is an incredibly beautiful blonde in this movie, Alexandra Mutu. She is awesome, really.

I think these reasons are enough for anyone to watch this movie. For it is just better than so many comedies out there.


this is by far the best Romanian movie

Mugur Mihaescu plays incredible the two characters : Garcea , a funny but stupid cop , and Leana , who's married with Costel (bou cu basca) and has two childs Axinte and Lila . Her hobbies are drinking , drinking , and least but not the last drinking.

Radu petreanu plays also very good as Costel and the Russian colonel.

The characters are very original and funny , like the retarded childs(axinte&lila) or the governor of sadova city etc

This is a very spicy comedy , and I recommend it to everybody who wanna see a pretty good movie =)) .


It is THE BEST comedy. You must to see it. There are the more comedy in 1. It don't have a rival.


You tell me that this is good comedy? It may be so, if you accept that acting like a stupid moron, trying your a** out to make people laugh, may be called some sort of comedy, maybe. But we are talking about cinema, not some street circus. This is a plot less piece of crap filled with cheap jokes, bad acting...in fact everything in this "thing" is so bad, I can't even dare to call it a movie

it may be inspired from Romanian reality, so what? I may take a picture of a dog crapping and will be equally better, I may even call it a metaphoric and elitist movie...

Sad, very sad


This is the BEST ROMANIAN MOVIE ever made!!! I laughed for 90 minutes non stop. It's impeccably well directed and it has that Hollywood magic touch. The plot is so unpredictable you can't get bored, and the actors are very good, especially Mugur who plays 2 characters and he transforms himself from stupid policeman into greedy peasant woman, and the roles fit him like a glove. I saw this movie in a theater and everybody was laughing and really enjoying all the gags. It has a lot of visual humor and it's not meant for dull people or for those who lost their sense of humor.

IT'S A COMEDY! The BEST Romanian one to date! Alexandra Mutu is just perfect (skin, make-up, clothes...she just sparkles) my favorite scene is a night scene with her and the stupid policeman(played by Mugur)... so perfectly directed...sweet and funny and also a little vulgar...I just could not stop laughing. CONGRATULATIONS to VACANTA MARE! Finally a breath of fresh air in the Romanian filmmaking business!

Guys you should go watch this movie if you haven't already! It's worth it!


If you've seen "High Plains Drifter", "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" any other Leone films or "spaghetti westerns" you will appreciate this film. (I guess this is an "udon western"? Sorry, I had to throw that in there.) For those who have not, you may not understand why the film goes to such extremes throughout the scene sequences. Everything from the bumbling sheriff to the mindless and spineless random gang characters as well as the leader of the 'reds', offer comedic escapades that are quite hysterical. Then we swing to the very dramatic and tragic scenes of loss, murder, pillaging and revenge. Japanese themes and references are inherent because the director is well...Japanese! The dialogue is all English and purposely so. I'm not sure if this was for comedic reasons or to reach out to a larger audience, but it is effective and an interesting choice on Miike's part. It is subtitled which, depending on how you view it, either detracts or adds to the film. It does help in some cases, but in my opinion, I think it would have been better to leave it out altogether. Overall, its a very fun film but expect to be taken up and down emotionally. Production, cinematography, scenery, costumes, art direction and sound design aren't even worth mentioning because they're all done so well, you don't notice them. Its about as close as you can get to a Western-Samurai Japanese-Western!


If Sergio Leone's Once Upon A Time is considered an ode to the American Western with all it's fundamental elements all packed neatly in an 3 and a half hour package of visual splendor than Takashi Miike's Sukiyaki Western Django is an ode to the Italian Western through and through with all the style, violence and sound that Leone brought to the art of cinema and Sergio Corbucci used to create his most famous work "Django". A visual feast, Miike's tribute to Corbucci's work is the poetic equivalent of Tarantino's own tribute to the Italian Western (and some other cult genres) Kill Bill.

Set around, in a strikingly offbeat way to, the 12th century Heike/Genji clan wars Sukiyaki Western Django is the tale of a mysterious gunman (played by Hideoki Ito) who comes into a nearly deserted once prospering town now controlled by the two rival groups. In a sense this is the Italian West going back to its roots, it's no secret Leone was greatly inspired by the works of Akira Kurosawa with Yojimbo serving as the blueprints for the maestro's own breakthrough with A Fistful of Dollars. Corbucci's own Django used the same basic premise and now Miike follows. After some flashy display of skill, and some attempts from the two clans to persuade him to join one of them the Gunman is persuaded by Ruriko one of the few residents who remain to help the townspeople. A series of flashbacks reveal much of the background and motives behind the two clans arrival. They also open the pathway to a subplot revolving around a tragically destroyed Genji/Heike family which plays a major part in the main plot. For those of you who deem themselves Tarantino fans will have much to be happy about as Tarantino plays a bad-ass, poncho-wearing gunslinger named Ringo who introduces us to the Heike/Genji conflict and plays an important part later on.

Style is of the essence and style is what Sukiyaki has. Though a tribute to Django this is nevertheless pure Miike cinema, expect that same weird humor, surreal kinetic action, with some sexual cues (although much restrained compared to some of his previous endeavors) he's become renowned for. It's a non stop joy ride beautifully shot, the impressive set design and backgrounds, the great costumes and yes a machine gun in coffin scene, pure poetry. This is not about realism, it is not about creating a believable world but about a world that responds to the mood that adapts according to it. The final showdown represents a collision of two worlds, two genres it is the ultimate fusion of samurai and western films, the duel between the gun and the sword. There are some lovely little references only noticeable to the more vigorous Django fans, and a truly awesome ending.

What might be my only gripe with Sukiayki is the choice of language. Having the Japanese cast speak in broken-down English does sort of lessen the experience not by much comparing to some of the horrendous English dubs in some Italian Westerns but still it would have been preferable using a Japanese language track with an optional English one. That's to say the dialogue itself is a pastiche of noticeable one-liner clichés, over the top silly yet listening to entire dialogues stitched together from over used lines has a remarkably refreshing effect on those lines.

Koji Endo composes the soundtrack, it is not his first time working with Miike and hopefully won't be the last. For the film he combined, the typical Morricone-sque western music with that of the Japanese samurai flick in a modern just lightly rock adaptation.

Sukiyaki Western Django pays homage to what is now a dead genre. Dead but not forgotten. Not by Takashi Miike who uses the tools of the Italian Western to bring forth his own vision, his own take on a story well known and loved and it is a true gem.


I'm not entirely sure I understood the plot of Sukiyaki Western Django, mainly because I couldn't understand the dialogue very well, but I still can say it's unlike anything I have ever seen. In a time when ridiculously unoriginal films are hailed by critics and average viewers alike, it's great to see something truly different come to the screen. Sukiyaki Western Django takes the oldest subgenre in American cinema, the western, and spins it until it is original againand it works.

I have never been a Takashi Miike fan at all, honestly. I have only seen this and Audition, but Audition was boring and cliché enough for me never to give him a second thought. Sukiyaki Western Django, however, shows his true capability as a director and that he isn't just another run-of-the-mill carbon copy like I originally thought after viewing Audition.

Sukiyaki Western Django is very dialogue heavy, but it still packs a lot of action and a lot more character deaths than is standard for this type of film. People are calling this movie gory, but it isn't. The blood is pretty generic and typical, though maybe a little more than your standard action flick. This didn't really disappoint me as much as it does in other movies, because blood isn't really needed in Sukiyaki Western Django. It carries itself with style and a lot of intense action.

I think the reason this film is getting so many negative reviews is because people don't get it. You really have to be a fan of the genres it imitates to understand it fully, even though the plot is simple. Two rival gangs, and one man, a gunslinger, they both need. The rest is a mix between action and art that simply stunned me. The town itself is so diverse it almost becomes its own character, and in a way it is. The aesthetic of some of the action scenes go so much further than the typical slow-mo Matrix rip-off you're used to and really creates a style all its own. The technical beeps in the background gave off a really cool surreal, modern feel that isn't overdone or annoying.

The acting worked for the genre, even though most of it is terrible and hard to understand. The entire Japanese cast, minus Tarantino, worked because they all spoke English, which just added to the cool-weirdness. I'm sure if your high school English class tried to analyze every figurative detail it would take weeks. Just put it this way: as far as the formula goes, Sukiyaki Western Django is both original and complex to the point of insanity. I simply cannot understand how this is by the same man who wrote/directed Audition.

Overall, I'm going to quote something I heard someone say after they viewed Sukiyaki Western Django: "Well, that was different, but I wouldn't call it entertaining." That is the view a lot of people are going to have, and I can't deny people will think that just because I personally disagree with it. It comes very close to being too top-heavy with aesthetic for its own good, but, for me, it was still very entertaining and awing. I can't say anything else except that you need to see this and make up your own mind. It is original, that's not my opinion, and if you're like me and enjoy more than the typical Hollywood movie you MUST see this. If you can care less about originality and just want another typical western you've seen time and time again, don't bother.

It really matters what your opinion on entertainment is. But I loved it.

8/10


I was really looking forward to this movie for months now. The idea of Japan's most internationally famous directors making an English language western sounds like a must see. Well...

Language was my first problem. You can tell that just about every actor doesn't know how to speak English, and that his/her lines were fed to them. I'd guesstimate that no more than 30 minutes out of the nearly 2 hour long movie were action scenes, so this movie was very full of dialog and story....only I could understand maybe %20 of it. It's really bad, probably as bad when Quentin Tarantino speaks little bits of Japanese in this film to a native Japanese speaker. Except this wasn't a few lines, but the whole movie being broken English. In Sukiyaki Western, the Language gets in the way of the story telling(I had no idea what was happening a lot of the time), and the acting. I'd much rather have had Japanese dialog with English subtitles...or at least English subtitles anyway, which were not available to me.

The language is really a minor issue for me, because the whole movie itself was pretty poor. The script was simple and bland. I think they dumbed down the dialog to make it easier on the actors, because it was something I could have written up in the time it took to watch the film. Also, there were many failed attempts at humor. The jokes failed because the actors could not deliver them naturally.

There was no character development, I didn't care about ANY person in the whole movie. The hero, if you can call him that, is a completely unneeded character. Another thing, and I don't consider this a spoiler....every single character in the whole movie was a blubbering idiot...like a bad guy from a Saturday morning kids show.

The action was minimal, and the finale didn't do anything for me at all.

The costumes. Yeah a couple of the leaders looked cool, aka they looked like members of a J-Rock band. None of the clothing was authentic, and I don't think it was supposed to be, but I thought the red Old Navy neck sweater on one dude was too much. The white gangs' leader dude wouldn't take much work to look like a hot girl.

To it's credit, there was some cool style and cinematography going on, and if the whole movie was like the first 5 minutes, minus Quentin because he's a bad actor, This movie would have been awesome.

It should have been 90 minutes, tops. It should have been awesome stylized action with heads rolling and arterial spray, then the bad acting, script and story could be overlooked. Instead it was 2 hours with tons of bad jokes and a few unsatisfying shootouts.

I wanted to like it, and i know a lot of you people spending $50 on a Japanese import DVD might feel obligated to....but this was just a poorly made movie.


When one thinks of the cowboy Western names like John Ford, Sam Peckinpah, Howard Hawks and John Huston might come to mind but Japanese new wave and cult director Miike Takashi would probably be the last person you would think of being on that list, that is until now. With his recent "Sukiyaki Western Django" Miike pays loving tribute to the western genre and infuses it with his own unique spin and a decidedly Japanese flair.

Set in what appears to be a dusty post-apocalyptic wasteland, the story deals with a bitter rivalry between two vicious clans - the brutal Heike (whose color emblem is a bloody scarlet red) and the flashy Genji (whose banners are a snow colored white). They have taken over a remote mountain village in a region oddly called "Nevada" (using Japanese Kanji equivalents).

Both factions have learned of a mythic gold depository in the surrounding area and have torn the village apart to find it but to no avail. The local inhabitants have long since fled and those that have stayed behind have been living in terror ever since.

A mysterious gun fighter with no name (Ito Hideaki) rides into town and offers his services to the clan who offers to pay him the most. While both clans make tempting bids, the gun fighter rejects both offers and is instead swayed to hold off joining either faction by the town's salon madam, Ruriko (Momoi Kaori).

Ruriko tells the stranger of how the town was taken over by the clans and how her son, Akira was killed by them. Akira was a former Heike clan member who had fallen in love with the beautiful Shizuka (Yoshino Kimura), a member of the rival clan. They had hoped that their union would help encourage peace between the two clans but instead Akira is murdered by the Heike's ruthless leader Kiyomori (Sato Koichi).

Devasted she returns to her clan with her young child Heihachi, where she is forced to become a harlot to the clan's charismatic and mercurial leader Yoshitsune.

As the conflict comes to an impasse both sides scheme at how to gain the upper-hand. Kiyomori tells his clansmen that it is divine destiny that they will win the conflict and sites Shakespeare's "Henry VI" and the English conflict of the "War of the Roses" (where the red side wins) as his bible. He is so sure of this that he adopts the name "Henry".

On the Genji side, Yoshitsune has found the location of a hidden cache of weapons including a functioning Gatling gun which he hopes will give his clan the advantage. He sends his chief henchman, Benkei (Ishibashi Takaaki) to retrieve the weapon.

The gun fighter learns of this plan from Shizuka and relays the information to the Heike clan.

For her betrayal Shizuka is brutally murdered by the Genji clan and the gun fighter is severely injured. Nursed back to health the gun fighter teams up with Ruriko, who reveals herself to be the legendary gun fighter "B.B." who was a protégé of one of the first western gunmen in Japan, "Bingo" (cameo by Quentin Tarantino) to destroy the clans and bring peace to the town.

Miike and screenwriter NAKA(Masa)MURA borrow liberally from other westerns particularly the landmark "Italiano-Westerns" of Sergio Leone (Fist Full of Dollars, The Good, The Bad & The Ugly") and Sergio Corbucci (Django) as well as the so-called "Acid-Westerns" of Alejandro Jodorowsky (El Topo) but adds in his own unique aspects and New Wave flourishes to create a Japanese version of the classic western albeit with a decidedly Japanese look and feel. The name is both a play on "spaghetti" (Italian) westerns and an anecdote where "sukiyaki" (Japanese nabemono or "stew") combines various elements in a pot.

Much has been said of Miike's decision to script the dialog entirely in English but I think the cast should be commended for actually pulling off what might have turned into a comical disaster. It also helped that Miike had the good fortune of hiring actors who have either lived or studied extensively abroad.

Ito Hideaki (Crossfire, Limit of Love-Umizaru) plays the titular Clint Eastwood role as the "man with no name"/gun fighter. His performance is good but one note as he doesn't really have much range and his lines are minimal. Sato Koichi (Cheerful Gang Turns The Earth, Tennen Kokekko) is pure evil as "Taira No Kiyomori" who fancies himself after Shakespeare's "Henry VI". His performance brings to mind Mifune Toshiro's Kikuchiyo in "Seven Samurai" (manic, bestial, and cocksure of himself).

Fashion model turned actor Iseya Yusuke (Casshern, Memories of Matsuko) turns in another fantastic performance as the vicious yet wickedly handsome "Minamoto No Yoshitsune", a man who fancies himself as the embodiment of the Japanese "Samurai spirit". Iseya is quickly making a name for himself playing quirky roles and whose intensity and presence reminds me a lot of the late Heath Ledger.

London born Yoshino Kimura (Sakuran, The Backdancers) brings much passion, dignity and raw sexuality to her part as the tragic Shizuka. Momoi Kaori (Bounce No Ko Gal, Memoirs of a Geisha), who was also educated in London, is clearly at home with the English dialog and turns in a terrific performance as Ruriko.

Ishibashi Takaaki (one half of 80s comedy duo "Tunnels")steals the spotlight as Yoshitsune's sexually ambiguous henchman as does Kagawa Teruyuki (HERO, Tokyo.Sora) as the cowardly and opportunistic sheriff who seems almost possessed at times.

Following the heals of great modern western-themed movies and remakes of late like "No Country for Old Men" and "3:10 To Yuma", Miike's "Sukiyaki Western Django" is a fun and unique take on the western and as it's name suggests offers a clever take with a Japanese bent. Like trendy Asian "fusion" cuisine, "Sukiyaki" takes the best of both worlds and offers up something new yet oddly familiar. Bon appetite!


"Sukiyaki Western Django" is pretty much what you would expect from a Western by Takashi Miike...it's violent, it's funny, and it's just plain weird at times.

It looks kind of like the old west, except the buildings are distinctly Japanese. It feels kind of like the old west, except some characters are in cowboy garb while others are in what appears to be feudal Japanese American Indian gang war duds. And the dialog? "Don't you know your Shakespeare?" There are two feuding families, the White & the Red, and caught in between is our hero, whoever he is, and an old woman, her daughter, and a little boy. The daughter, having married outside of her clan, and the boy, of mixed background. The story itself is a bit hard to follow, but the action makes up for it.

There's a lot of gun play, a lot of crossbow play, and a lot of fancy shooting from both weapons, along with things like hitting one's target through a hole just blown in one victim. And grandma, well, she's apparently a highly trained martial arts & gunslinger kind of gal, and she learned from the best, Ringo (Quentin Tarrentino) who also taught her how to make sukiyaki that wasn't so sweet.

If you've seen all the old Spaghetti Westerns, this is a new twist on them that's well worth seeing. There's an astounding amount of wild and weird action, and there's also some ridiculous comedic bits, like a bunch of men using the sheriff of the town as a shield, and looking exactly like a conga line.

Great action, interesting humor, and a decidedly different take on the western theme. Plus, the Japanese have a sense of poetry too, and there's even a bit of room in here for that, before the action kicks in again. If you like Miike & you like westerns that are QUITE a bit out of the ordinary, check this out. 8 out of 10.


This film makes us realize what a powerful genre is the western. It is so powerful that it left its American roots and became universal. I understand why the actors in this movie speak English, you can't accept any other language. Even the Leones and Corbuccis are dubbed in English. It comes to my mind a famous Brazilian composer who sings about playing cowboys as a child, and his horse would only speak English. There are references in the film about TGTBTU, Django, Fistful, Once Upon a Time in the West,My Darling Clementine(Shakespeare) but the one that touched me the most was about "Duel in the Sun", a film that tends to be neglected nowadays. Apparently making fun of the westerns Sukiyaki has a lot of tragedy as it tells the story of the rival clans, in a time and place where there is not much value in human life. There are great tragic comic scenes like when a man tries to catch a sword that is going through his head, or when an enormous hole is made on a man. Tarantino is very funny with his Japanese fake accent. The shootouts are absolutely great.


"SUKIYAKI WESTERN DJANGO" is the ideal cure against western of any kind. It has it all - including even queer cowboys and Gatling machine gun (hello, "3:10 to Yuma"!). And much more than that: war of White and Red Roses, Gollum for a sheriff, chest, full of gold, old lady - gunfighter (who happened to be also animated eight-handed woman and Quentin Tarantino's lover), Tarantino himself, rather weather-beaten and riding steampunk-crafted wheelchair, raining bullets, Japanese mountains in the autumn, fight in the snow and so on. Just imagine "Kill Bill" cut to 2 hours, without all the dull stuff but with all the goods delivered straight to the point. Everything funny, hysterical, strange and enchanting you can squeeze out of old good Westerns plus amazing Japanese aesthetics (watch the leader of Whites. The Red is fun too, but, my gosh, White is amazing!) plus non-stopping action plus brilliant choreography - in short, it's your regular must see. 12 out of 10.


Obviously, this film is not for everyone. It is quite a postmodern movie with lots of background meanings. There are hidden connections not only to the movies "Sukiyaki" is a remake of, but also to the ancient Japanese "Heike Monogatari" (The Tale of the Heike) and even Shakespeare's "Henry VI". So, this work could be compared to the Japanese poetic genre "haikai no renga", а comic though quite emotional poem. This movie is not a deep philosophical opus, it is quite light and easy to watch, though it is for "those, who know". I am quite sure "Sukiyaki" will take a deserved place in the connoisseurs' movie library like some other "experimental" movies (i.e. "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead").


You can always be guaranteed in a Takashi Miike movie of seeing things that you've never seen before. I just saw Sukiyaki Western Django at the Toronto Film Festival and it continues that tradition.

This is Miike's take on the American Cowboy Western and it was fun to see what he does with it. It appears to take place in the middle of a war, but I could not tell if this was a real historical war and whether it is a Japanese war. But it's fought with guns not swords and dressed as cowboys instead of samurai. He's taken the essence of the western, takes it to extremes and adds his own unique Miike humour.

All the actors were speaking English. Only the female actress spoke perfect English; the others spoke it with an accent, although I could understand what they were all saying. It was also accompanied by sub-titles in English. When it comes out on DVD, I would probably turn off the sub-titles. Also I hope they don't consider dubbing with American actors. It would ruin the movie. I quite enjoyed listening to them speak English in their own voices even with (or maybe because of) the accent.

Quentin Tarantino makes a significant appearance and is quite funny and at times unrecognizable. It mixes in with the rest of movie and doesn't feel like just a "guest appearance".

I quite enjoyed this movie. When will Miike do a Hollywood musical?


A strange movie, I must say. But before I go into the movie itself, I feel the need to talk about the case.

That's why I actually bought this movie, originally. Because the case was so...pretty. And Quentin Tarantino's name on it sealed the deal for me. The cover design is so well done and beautiful and artistic and many other synonyms of those, which provides the perfect segue into the movie itself.

It starts out with, of all people, Quentin Tarantino. The background is noticeably fake, a setting sun over the horizon painted onto a backdrop. I was a bit taken aback, at first, and I never really understood why, but I rolled with it. With the first words spoken, however, it became painfully apparent what this movies main problem would be.

You see, despite the fact that almost all of the cast uses Japanese as their primary language (I haven't verified this, but it's pretty obvious), the filmmaker, Takashi Miike, shot the whole thing in English. Thankfully, there are subtitles, but the lack of understandable speech presents a great barrier. It's basically the story of two clans, the Heike, led by Kiyomori/Henry (Kōichi Satō), and the Genji, led by Yoshitsune (Yūsuke Iseya), that are battling over a town for a fabled treasure. A mysterious stranger (Hideaki Ito) rolls into town, much like Clint Eastwood in those old movies that we love oh-so-much. This is a beautifully done movie, with many breathtaking scenes, exciting, lovable characters (for the most part), and plenty of blood and gore. Oh, and a rape, so keep the kiddies away from this one.


Despite having trouble with some of the incomprehensible dialog (and no I can't read the Kanji/Hiragana subtitles), I thought Sukiyaki Western Django was a solid action movie, that left no stone unturned in its thorough plot line.

Quentin Tarantino had only a small role throughout its entirety, but there is a heavy influence of his style indicated here with the many back-stories that this movie has to offer.

Sukiyaki makes for a good shoot em up, action movie. With the many characters that are intertwined with their side stories, I didn't sit through this feeling at all distracted.

The dialog was a little bit troublesome for me from some of the Japanese actors, that tried to not only annunciate their English, but to also provide the old western slang along with it. Overall, it was tolerable, but I had to rewind through some of the dialog to understand. But it wasn't enough to get me at all disinterested.

Sukiyaki Western Django is one of the most abstract films I have ever had the pleasure to watch. The fact that this movie was supposed to take place in "Nevada", which clearly wasn't Nevada was actually quite humorous, and the direction did its best to persuade me into believing it wasn't really just a small village in the middle of Japan.

The cast was entertaining all around. The protagonist stereotyped "the new stranger in town" and he didn't reveal much about himself except that he knows how to use a gun. However, the sheriff with the "Gollum" complex, the red haired Shakespearean boss, the creepy guy with the over-sized gums, and the sharp shooting Benten were all intriguing characters that kept this movie going. Some of the action sequences are rather memorable and somewhat comedic. Expect mass casualties along the lines of a Greek tragedy in the end.

In an overview, I recommend Sukiyaki Western Django, just to see this movie as unique work of art. It's not the best movie I have ever seen, but it is a worthwhile watch.


This movie will be loved by fans of old Akira Kurosawa samurai films crossed with old westerns with a touch of Tarantino story play. It is a little like Yojimbo meets Pale rider.

First I want to clear up a significant error that most reviewers are making comparing this movie to Spagetti westerns. This movie is NOT a copy of a Spagetti westers. In fact most Spagetti westerns ARE copies of old Samurai films many written by Akira Kurosawa. This movie has similarities with Fistfull of dollars which came out in 1964. But Fistfull is a almost word for word copy of Yojimbo which came out in 1961, just substitute a gun for a sword. Anyway BOTH Sergio Leone and Akira Kurosawa made wonderful movies.

OK let me start by saying the story only starts slow...and kind of cheesy with the whole Tarantino sitting around a campfire with fake Mt Fuji in the back. But all the old westerns and samurai films should have trained you to be patient in the first 15min.

The filming is brilliant has just enough color in the background, just the right amount of lighting, nice mix of angry close-ups on hero and bad guys faces. Where the movie excels in a way Kurosawa would be proud is the well used special effects mini explosion bullets, exploding blood packs and my new favorite big bullet holes.

There is a lot of clever little homage bits like Eastwood's poncho and Van Cleef's long shot gun.

The only points off are for the dumb part by the sheriff. It would have also been better with more sword fighting.

Near the end there is a nice homage line "This is for Akira"


Short Version: Japanese culture and American Wild West collide. The two concepts flow together very well. Plot is solid if a bit thin, but contains a few twists. Tone is laid back with some dramatic moments that'll keep you grounded. Characters are amazing and unforgettable.

Setting: The movie mostly takes place in a Wild West style settlement, the kind with one street and houses on either side. However, the architecture, the inhabitants, and the atmosphere of the town are all Japanese. Two warring clans, the Reds and the Whites, have taken over, but remain on their own sides of the town for the most part. A lone gunslinger wanders into the town, offering his services to the highest bidder. He soon realizes, however, that both clans are evil and need to be extinguished, and so the plot goes on.

Honestly, when you cut away all the fluff, the story boils down to a three-way war between the two clans and a couple of expert gunslingers. Fast-paced action and broken English can make the story hard to follow, but if you pay attention, there are a few twists and turns that'll keep you engaged.

Tone: The movie is moderately light-hearted. A couple of characters give some comic relief, and a good chunk of the movie is not rooted in reality. On the other hand, the motivation behind the characters is real enough. There are a few scenes and a large piece of the story that really comes into play later during the movie that grounds you. I'm not saying it's the perfect blend of mindless action with superb storytelling, but it does a pretty good job.

Characters: Personally, the characters went a long way towards selling the movie. There are a ton of them, and each one is unique and unforgettable. Both clan leaders are rotten in their own right, combine that with a Japanese Clint Eastwood, a sheriff with a very Gollum-esquire split personality disorder, a gun-toting granny, and Quentin Tarantino. You can't go wrong.


It's a waste of talents for all the three leading actor/actresses involved. Yes, I know it is a Sci-Fi film, but there are still too many holes in the plot. The special effects are rip-off from Hollywood too. I saw the Chinese-dubbed version, and the dialog doesn't turn out too well either. Overall, a movie you can do without.


During a party a bald person goes crazy and kills a couple of people, but the wrong man gets accused of these murders. So, now Jerry Zipkin is on the run to prove his innocence. But also across town more weird murders are alarming the authorities. When trying to uncover evidence to clear his name, Jerry he finds out that 10 years ago, a group of people from the same college Stanford University have taken a new form of LSD called Blue Sunshine, which now has suddenly caused them to lose their hair and change into homicidal maniacs.

Hook, line and sinker it totally took me by surprise and made me sit up. This rewarding flick that's a very groovy slice of the 70s. Has become a cult film over the years and has been on my must-see list for ages. I was livid when I eventually came across it. Director/writer Jeff Lieberman (his debut as a director) delivered in what he set out to achieve in 'Blue Sunshine' and I wasn't disappointed in what I got, at all. He comes up with an effective and energetic shocker, that sets itself out by the excellent performances from a cast of mainly no-names (with the exception of Zalman King) and a original story, which seems to get better the more it moves along. Don't be expecting a fully loaded horror film, with gore and horror throughout. It's rather a psychological, sophisticated mystery thriller that works in some decent surprises and jabs that are spine tingling good. There's such a nice balance in this slow grinder that just pulls you along for the intriguing, but disquieting ride with our protagonist. So it's basically a well-paced story that's more a mystery with dabs of horror themes, the material isn't too shocking but some of the violence is nasty or just plain maniac, but not overly graphic. The most startling scene in the film would have to be the opening killing and some implied violence or I should call it the aftermath of a murder spot in house mid-way through the flick will cause a tingle. Crafted into it, is a tight script that doesn't sway of course, but sufficiently adds to the bigger picture.

For a low-budget production is stands up remarkably well and it's rather sad it's gone by with little impact, because Lieberman shows impressive talent here. The thick 70's vibe takes real control, but the cheesiness doesn't overshadow it, with a scene occurring in a groovy disco when a bald guy goes out of control because of the music. Which it's really making fun of the type of music in doing so? Although the score doesn't fall into that same fate as it's eerie as hell, by raising the hairs on your skin. These moments definitely added to the unsettling mood that's created and help build up those scenes with the bald psychopaths becoming rather freaky. Surely it would turn you off drugs! The camera-work was highly distinctive with its many shots. The only downside for me was the abrupt ending, but that's a minor squabble compared with the rest.

Ultimately a satisfying shocker that hits all the right keys. An outstanding cult classic.


As a follow-up to his wonderful tongue-in-cheek nature-strikes-back horror movie "Squirm", the always original cult director Jeff Lieberman concocted this provocative thriller. It seems that the people who took an acid named Blue Sunshine 10 years ago at Stanford University are all of a sudden suffering delayed reactions. They're experiencing dramatic hair loss, and lapsing into psychotic episodes. Out to seek the truth is Jerry Zipkin (Zalman King), who's erroneously assumed to have committed some murders actually committed by a friend at a party.

Lieberman always has a knack for humor in his films, and this is no exception. Here he maintained in me a level of curiosity and interest, although I knew the whole set-up of the movie going in. The movie is marked by some good set pieces; particularly horrendous is the sight of a murder victim shoved into a fireplace. The plot is genuinely intriguing, and Lieberman plays with the conventions of this type of film by having his protagonist *not* be terribly likable, and by having the supposed "villain", a politician running for congress ('Lost in Space's' Mark Goddard) not being really evil at all but just a guy whose bad decisions in the past are now coming back to haunt him. The mood is always kept intense and reasonably creepy, and the director also maintains a snappy pace, with no dull sequences to have to sit through. The picture also has a purely 1970's vibe; hairstyles and wardrobes and of course a climactic disco sequence strongly evoke the era.

Future soft core director King is an acceptable if not especially dynamic lead; the supporting cast includes Deborah Winters, Robert Walden, Charles Siebert, Ray Young, Ann Cooper, and Bill Adler. The crazed friend at the party is played by Richard Crystal - Billy Crystals' brother, Stefan Gierasch and Alice Ghostley make very welcome guest appearances, and future prominent film heavy Brion James makes one of his earliest screen appearances as the drunk at the party who thinks he's a bird(!).

Other elements adding to the films' creepy feel are Charles Gross's eerie music and the striking sight of the victims in their bald or balding skulls.

I recommend checking this out. It's a great early film from a director who always succeeds in crafting well made independent films with a difference.

8/10


The second of director Jeff Lieberman's trilogy of perfect B thrillers, the others being Squirm (1976) and Just Before Dawn (1981), is a clever shocker given some interesting spins.

A young man stands accused of murder when one of his friends goes crazy during a party. He flees the police, discovers that other similar killings have taken place and that a brand of LSD is behind it. But what can he do to stop the power of 'Blue Sunshine'?

Highly stylish, off-beat psychological thriller may just be the best testament to Lieberman's film making talents. Lieberman gives this film a haunting atmosphere, moments pure strangeness, and startling violence. Lieberman's story is a weird tale, tense with mystery and powered by an original concept. Charles Gross provides a beautiful and truly odd musical score that complements the mood of the film perfectly.

The cast is quite good as well. Zalman King is the best as the film's rather unlikely hero.

Blue Sunshine has become a bit of an underground classic, much like the other films of Lieberman, and it rightfully should be a classic. For those seeking an original horror-thriller with some weird twists, you won't find better than this!

**** out of ****


BLUE SUNSHINE is one of those films that I've been meaning to get to for a while and just never got around to. Well, having now seen it, I can say that I'm pretty glad I did. It's a pretty cool (but strange) film that even with the poor acting was still entertaining.

A bunch of Stanford University students ate a batch of bad acid and 10 years later are like freakin'-out, man....They start losing their hair and gain super-human strength and go all psycho on anyone around them. Jerry Zipkin is on the run from the fuzz after one of his main-men freaks out and kills a couple of chicks at a swingin' party, and Zipkin is inadvertently thought to be the bad-guy. Rather than turn himself in, Zipkin decides to investigate the matter on his own, which all ties in with this batch of bad "Blue Sunshine" doses, those that ate 'em, and a local politician who had somethin' to do with it too...it's just all way too far out and groovy, man....

...But seriously - BLUE SUNSHINE is a pretty cool slice of 70's weirdo cinema. Some of the scenes with the bald head freaks are actually kinda creepy, and in some cases just flat out comical. Not a great film by any stretch, but worth at least a one time view to the "cult" fans out there...The Synapse disc also has a short-film called THE RINGER that is another strange bit of 70's weirdness that deals with consumerism, drugs, music, the naiveté of youth, and "THE MAN" - and is pretty interesting too. Give this a look too. 7/10 for BLUE SUNSHINE


Jeff Lieberman is quickly becoming one of my favorite unknown directors. Not only did he direct the enjoyably silly nature run amuck movie "Squirm" and the very cool backwoods slasher flick "Just Before Dawn", he also directed "Blue Sunshine", an excellent example of what I have dubbed "LSD cinema" about the excesses of the 1960's coming back with a vengeance.

One of the elements that makes "Blue Sunshine" stand out from the crowd is the acting. Zalman King, who was also in "Trip with the Teacher", one of my favorite trash flicks gives an excellent performance in the lead role. Likewise I rather enjoyed Mark Goddard's performance as Edward Flemming, a former drug dealer now running for Congress. Beyond the acting, "Blue Sunshine" also contains some very creepy imagery, a nifty score that serves to heighten the overall mood of the movie and a tightly written script that manages to do what few movies have been able to do, create an effective and memorable anti-drug message while avoiding being overly preachy. Lieberman's direction is allows the movie to move along at a good pace, allowing the movie to build slowly and the audience to get to know the characters while at the same time not being overly slow and boring. Overall "Blue Sunshine" is an excellent movie from a sadly unknown director, check it out.


So I was going through The Psychotronic Encyclopedia of Film many many years ago and one movie jumped off the page and into my head. It was called "Blue Sunshine," and the description was quite simple, something like "Tainted LSD causes people to go bald and become blood-thirsty maniacs." Naturally I was drooling...

It took me over ten years to track the movie down and I must say- it was worth the wait. "Blue Sunshine" is both the title and the type of LSD with supposedly scary side-effects. The movie begins with a very clever sequence in which we tilt down from the full blue moon to three seemingly-unrelated sequences... in time they'll come together. Its clear from the very beginning that director Jeff Lieberman has every frame planned, and this holds true throughout: the movie is built like a brick house- simply, logically, building tension, with no wasted scenes or dialogue.

The cinematography is great as well: Lieberman lights the whole frame, and you notice little details and textures that add to the mood. This lighting style also helps the movie stay young- aside from the fashion and cars you'd have no idea it was filmed in '76. But the best part of the movie are the scares- in major and minor keys... a man losing every hair on his head in one shot... a psychotic murderer forcing a woman's body BACK into a roaring fire as she tries to crawl out... a babysitter going insane while the children she's watching chant "We want Doctah Peppah! We want Doctah Peppah!" The disco finale is classic, and makes a sly statement about disco music and 70's culture as a Blue Sunshine user goes bats in a shopping mall nightclub. The movie ends rather quickly, and while some people complain about this, I prefer a clean break over a drawn-out exposition-filled "wrap-up." "Blue Sunshine" is not for everyone... if you don't like psychotronic movies (exploitation films, horror movies, sci-fi, etc) you won't be interested. But if you're looking for a good nightmare seek this movie out! GRADE: A


This surprisingly intriguing horror film has people turning into bald,blue-skinned killers after dropping contaminated LSD ten years before."Blue Sunshine" is more fondly remembered for it's bald,thirty-something,ex-hippie murderers who are easily the most bizarre descendants of the living dead yet to reach the silver screen.This film is not easy to categorize:it's a horror film mixed with drug movie and also features paranoid urban legends and bizarre conspiracy theories.The title of this movie is taken from the name of a bad batch of 60s acid that seems to have some rather unfortunate long-term side effects.The film is badly lit and there are some dull spots,but "Blue Sunshine" is a must-see for experimental cinema enthusiasts.7 out of 10.


I knew about this film long before I saw it. In fact, I had to buy the DVD in order to see it because no video store carried it. I didn't mind spending the $12 to buy it used because I collect off the wall movies. The new limited edition double DVD has great sound and visually not bad. I found myself laughing much more then

jolting in fear, although there were a few scenes were I was startled.

If you enjoy off the wall 70s sci-fi/horror movies, you probably will eat this one up. I was a little dissapointed at how abrubtly it ended. I wanted the movie to keep going, see how things pan out. The DVD revolution has brought so many

lost clasics back to life, it is truly wonderful. Blue Sunshine is one of those lost "missing links" of the cinema. Enjoy!


This is a film that could have been so much more but unfortunately the script lacks any real drive or ambition to be memorable and the blame goes entirely to the director who wrote this. Story is about a bunch of friends who are having a party when one of them goes berserk and has his hair fall out and then proceeds to murder three women. Jerry Zipkin (Zalman King) is blamed for the murders and runs off to elude the police so he can investigate what has happened. With the help of his faithful girlfriend Alicia Sweeney (Deborah Winters) the trail leads to a politician named Edward Flemming (Mark Goddard) who attended Stanford University ten years before.

*****SPOILER ALERT*****

Flemming use to sell LSD while at school but this drug is called Blue Sunshine and everyone who took it then is now ten years later feeling the effects by having their hair fall out and becoming a homicidal maniac that kills anyone in their path.

This film is written and directed by Jeff Lieberman who also made "Squirm" and if you view this expecting to see something outrageous and wild than forget it! Aside from the beginning when a woman is shoved into a fireplace there is really no moment that make an impact. The film has no real ending to speak of and when things are winding down a message pops up stating that a special task force was formed and that there are several more unaccounted people that have taken Blue Sunshine. I guess the film wanted to make a statement against taking drugs but this has the same effect as Nancy Reagan saying "Just say no". I kept thinking of what a director like Roger Corman could have done with a premise like this and Lieberman deserves all the blame for making this totally "Blah". The script makes no effort to describe what makes Blue Sunshine different or how Goddard got a hold of it ten years earlier. Corman would have made an exploitation film that viewers would still be talking about today and it would have been full of nudity and graphic events but alas, Lieberman instead directed a film that is completely forgettable. You know a film is in trouble when the main highlight is spotting a young Brion James in an early role. Excuse me Jeff...do yourself a favor and rent "Big Bad Mama" with Angie Dickinson and find out what you can actually do with a low budget film!


I've learned not to go into Jeff Lieberman's films with high expectations, as although I liked his latest film; horror-comedy 'Satan's Little Helper', both Squirm and Just Before Dawn did nothing for me, despite high expectations before seeing them. However, Blue Sunshine is surely the director's best film, as it works on both a visceral and psychological level. The film is something of a crossover between the zombie horror subgenre, and a drug fuelled mystery plot. The most effective side of the film, horror-wise, is definitely the idea of silly choices you made as a kid coming back to haunt you as an adult. The plot focuses on a batch of drugs called 'Blue Sunshine', which was distributed around a certain college ten years ago. Now the drug is coming back to haunt the users by way of hair-loss, headaches, nightmares and an insatiable desire to kill people. We follow Jerry Zipkin, a young man that ends up at the centre of the trouble and decides to get the bottom of the mystery, which centres on a politician trying to get elected by way of a publicity drive.

I suppose the main reason why I'm not Jeff Lieberman's biggest fan is because his films often lack bite and don't move swiftly enough. This one is no different on that front, except this time; instead of merely focusing on a bunch of worms, or yet another troupe of deformed, deranged backwoods killers; Lieberman has the advantage of an intriguing mystery to base his film on. While it's always obvious where it's going, the director manages to get the audience to care about what's going to happen, and as drugs and their effects are intriguing subjects anyway; there's always enough to keep things ticking over. Lieberman also injects sequences that see various characters lose their hair before trying to kill anyone and everyone in the vicinity, and these too make the final package more intriguing - the sequence that sees a nanny take out her lust for violence out on a couple of irritating kids being the highlight in that respect. Overall, it has to be said that the film isn't perfect - not everything is perfectly judged, and it could have been streamlined better. Furthermore, it ends prematurely and feels a bit lazy; but even so, Blue Sunshine is an excellent little flick and comes highly recommended.


A group of college kids who took the acid "blue sunshine" in 1966 are now getting headaches, losing hair and killing people in the most violent ways. Jerry Zipkin, ineptly played by Zalman King spends most of the film delivering his lines like he has to go to the bathroom.

King gets the blame for several of the murders because he is trying to find out who has taken the blue sunshine, arriving just before the homicidal effects kick in. Of course simply telling the people about it could save them but this little fact eludes him. Instead of feeling sorry for King we wind up wishing he took the acid and would off himself saving us from his bad acting.

A few people in this film went on to other acting gigs.....it is very easy to see why King did not. This film is an opportunity missed. It has a great premise and tons of potential but it is pretty much ruined in from the start by very bad acting...mostly by King. I wonder if Zalman King took some acid in 1966 and made this film in 1976 when the effects kicked in and removed his talent. If the knob of the TV is broken and you are pinned under the sofa and are waiting for someone to show up to save you....then you might want to catch this film, otherwise use the remote and do the right thing.


I saw this movie over twenty years ago, back when CBS showed late night movies instead of Letterman et al. I thought it was the worst, most poorly produced and thought-out movie ever. Nothing I have seen since has caused me to change my mind. It does not even fall into the "so bad it's good" category. My roommate and I were ridiculing almost every aspect of this disaster.

One example: the drug at issue, "Blue Sunshine," supposedly made the victim's hair fall out. The "falling out" consisted of the victim's entire head of hair coming off, all at once, in one piece -- obviously a wig being pulled off. The movie did not so much come to a logical end as, suddenly, the camera pulls back and announces that the movie is over.

I remember that the closing credits announced that the film had been produced by "The Blue Sunshine Corporation," leading me to suspect that it was a tax loss project designed to be bad, a la the plot of The Producers. If so, it succeeded.


After years of hearing from film magazines about how wonderful Blue Sunshine was, I decided to give it a shot when it appeared on TV one night. All I have to say is wow. That was possibly one of the most painfully dull experiences I've ever had. The writing is shoddy, the actors all appear as if they came to this film from the porn business and the film meanders along at a pace that would put a slug to shame. The only saving grace that I found in this film was a snazzy little score that unfortunately also seemed somewhat out of place. And praise be that Zalman King has left the acting business for directing because I would rather watch his erotic flicks than sit through another painful Jerry performance.


OK, so the stars are a poor (very poor) imitation of Martin & Lewis. Yes, the movie is a lot on the low budget and bad side. Yet, it's Bela Lugosi! From great movies like Dracula, Island of Lost Souls and The Black Cat to bombs like Plan 9 from Outer Space, Bride of the Monster and Mother Riley Meets the Vampire, Bela makes it worth your time in one way or another.

I like this film. It's silly and not very good, but it makes me laugh. Therefore, I'm entertained and that's the whole idea.


No doubt, this was an obvious attempt to rip-off Martin & Lewis at the height of their popularity. That said, this is a funny movie. Perhaps if M&L had stayed together, stuck to basic comedy, like this, their pictures wouldn't seem so dated today. Alright, so 'the Duke' is no 'Dino'...but Petrillo gives rise to the thought that perhaps we really didn't need Lewis. Ray 'Crash' Corrigan is in the gorilla suit.


Okay, once you get past the fact that Mitchell and Petrillo are Dean and Jerry knockoffs, you could do worse than this film. Charlita as Princess Nona is great eye candy, Lugosi does his best with the material he's given, and the production values, music especially (except for the vocals) are better than you'd think for the $50k cost of production. The final glimpses of the characters are a hoot. Written by Tim Ryan, a minor actor in late Charlie Chan films, and husband of Grannie on the Beverly Hillbillies. All in all, WAY better than many late Lugosi cheapies.


I remember seeing this film as a kid and wondering who these two guys were who were doing this bad imitation of Martin and Lewis. Duke Mitchell and Sammy Petrillo mercifully left the cinema after this horribly bad film which only left poor Bela Lugosi work for someone like Ed Wood.

The sad thing I believe was that Bela probably took the part because he was going to be billed in the title of the film, the way his rival Boris Karloff was billed in Abbott and Costello Meet the Killer, Boris Karloff. Even though that wasn't one of A&C's best it still was miles above this grade Z shlock.

Bela tries to make it work, hams it up in his best sinister manner. But even he noted that the classic horror film was killed by Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. It would not be revived until Hammer Films over in the UK started putting out those Peter Cushing/Christopher Lee bloodfests.

Of course no songs were written of the caliber of what Dean Martin was singing at Paramount and Duke Mitchell is a bad high school version of Dean Martin. I can't remember any of them, probably that's a blessing.

For Bela Lugosi completists only.


Duke Mitchell and Sammy Petrillo were a low rent Martin and Lewis. Mitchell had a some talent while, judging from this film, Petrillo had less then none. Petrillo is so bad, so annoying, so painful to watch, he takes Jerry Lewis' schtick to lows one would think were not possible. I had never watched this movie from start to finish until recently laid low by an illness, and all I can say is it made me sicker. Don't get me wrong I love bad movies but this is something else, or Sammy is, since if one could remove him from the film then you'd have something someone might want to watch. He doesn't speak he growls or whines in a way that I can only compare to a petulant child does moments before he's sent to his room until he's 40.(His parents should be held accountable for crimes against humanity for not eating their young)

How many people saw this and asked for their money back?

After seeing this I must take back anything I've ever said bad about Jerry Lewis, since as annoying as he can be, at least he is funny.

The plot has something to do with Mitchell and Petrillo ending up on a jungle island where they meet Lugosi (Half an hour in and after bad Petrillo mugging and a well sung but badly written song) who wants to do experiments on the pair.

Truth be told as long as Petrillo is silenced this is a good grade z movie, but he's as bad I have to put this with the lowest of the low.

One out of ten, because I can't go lower.


Deed I Do worst part of great movie! I enjoyed the movie. Those guys were like a caricature of Martin & Lewis.

But don't blame the song as poorly-written, as one person did. The 1926 song 'Deed I Do was mugged and hammed up and butchered by Duke, the only disappointment of the film.

I'm familiar with this old song because I found it at the archive dismuke.org last year, recorded by Al Lentz's Dance Orchestra. I found this info about it elsewhere online: 'Deed I Do. Words & Music by Walter Hirsch & Fred Rose, 1926.

The best part is, I bought the DVD for a buck at Wal-Mart. For a buck, you can't go wrong!


I remember seeing Duke and Sammie in person hawking this film in front of the theater on Broadway in Manhattan in the summer of 1952. I was on vacation so I decided to see this film and the blatant ripoff of Dean and Jerry. It was hilariously bad. However today I find this film to be a collectors item. It is worth seeing just to see how they copied Martin & Lewis and because of the wonderful Bela Legosi. The film is a curiosity and rates with the likes of Plan 9 from Outer Space. I bought the DVD and watched it again. It was so bad that I really enjoyed it and laughed my head off. The DVD is available for cheap and is worth buying as a collectors item.


I've always loved this above average lost in jungle comedy team movie. This movie showcases Mitchell and Petrillo and for the life of me i don't know why they were not more popular.Being clones of Martin and Lewis,they come off as quite professional in this B- Movie.Songs are good and i like this movie better than any "road" movies but then thats a matter of taste or lack of it.Bela Lugosi and the Ape actors just add to the fun.1 scene that cracks me up is the witch doctor eating a banana through his giant mask.Then again Sammy doing stand up to the natives who seem Hawaiian gets me going too.The question is did Mitchell and Petrillo make more movies?


It's easy enough to take pot-shots at a movie like this, especially if you try stacking it up against other stuff. It's a long way from the best or worst I've ever seen. Of course, Bela Lugosi can do no wrong. Just watching him laugh, or hearing the line, "What an unusual cranium." makes the movie worth a look. Obviously, Petrillo did an excellent take on Jerry Lewis, and his repetition of Lugosi's line about the "unusual cranium" was my biggest laugh in the movie. Duke Mitchell's task of imitating Dean Martin has taken a lot of hits, but it had to be harder to do Martin without going "over the top" than it was to do Lewis, where going "over the top" was exactly what was called for. Personally, I could care less whether I was listening to Martin or Mitchell sing, but that brings up another point. For decades Hollywood mindlessly insisted that movies include musical numbers and romantic sub-plots that nobody could possibly care less about, as anybody who's ever watched a Marx Brothers movie can relate to. OK, it's not great, but it's fun.


As the only film Mitchell & Petrillo did together, this was an obvious attempt to duplicate the feel and tempo of a 1952 Paramount Martin & Lewis movie in virtually every detail. One wonders if there wasn't legal action against the producers of this picture for the obvious cloning of Martin & Lewis!

Sammy Petrillo has the Jerry Lewis of 1952 nailed down perfectly and even above that--as a caricature! Duke Mitchell wasn't as good a Dean Martin, though, but a passable leading man and singer. Lugosi fans will like the big role he has in this picture. Too bad they weren't given other picture offers. The female and supporting players are all quite good. For a cheapie that was shot on a budget of $50,000, it has good production values--even the gorilla transformation scenes! Since this film is in the public domain, it turns up often in dollar DVD displays at many discount stores.