Horror Movie Reviews

Anguish begins by introducing us to Michael Lerner as John, an eye doctor, and Zelda Rubenstein as his overprotective mother. It turns out Lerner has an obsession with cutting out people's eyes, possibly because he's losing his own eyesight, and he also happens to have some kind of telepathic bond with his mother.

But wait, the camera pans back to reveal all this to be a movie that an audience is watching. The main focus is now on two girls in this crowd, one of which happens to be frightened out of her mind by the picture. When she sees Lerner on-screen enter a movie theater and kill off the audience, she begins to believe someone amid her own crowd is about to do the same. What do you know, she's right.

Anguish has a good premise, doesn't it? Too bad it fails to gel. First off, there are the hypnosis scenes in the first twenty or so minutes. Rather than being disturbing or visually entrancing, it's just hilarious. Watching Lerner wave his hands in front of the screen while he spins over and over is a pretty funny sight. The yellow-tint cinematography is more annoying than atmospheric, making the film look as if though it were covered in butter.

Once the twist reveals itself to be movie-within-a-movie, things don't get better. Our protagonist, named Patty, happens to be a terrible actress who isn't the slightest bit convincing. Sure, many slashers star actresses who aren't particularly talented, but they can usually get by with good looks and gratuitous nudity. Admittedly, around the forty minute mark, things do get slightly suspenseful once the killer in the "real" audience starts knocking people off one-by-one, but it's pretty disappointing to see him use a gun rather than a knife, and the theater is too crowded to gain maximum creepiness. Almost as detrimental is the fact the film is set during daytime, which destroys the chance for inescapable atmosphere.

The last fifteen minutes degenerate rapidly, not making much sense at all, though I gather that was director Bigas Lunas' intent. The final scene is a big shaggy-dog joke and you get the feeling Lunas is trying to make some kind of commentary on how blurred fiction and reality can get, but it's all muddled nonsense. As I recall, only one horror film ever accomplished such a task, John Carpenter's In the Mouth of Madness, a fun, unique rollercoaster ride that was genuinely frightening not only with its explicit frights, but the implications of them. That film also managed to develop a sense of chaos while following a srange form of logic. On the other hand, Anguish is an entirely forgettable slasher that's no better (and less enjoyable) than some of its more "low-rent" cousins (such as the Friday the 13th and Slumber Party Massacre series).

A middle-aged momma's boy runs rampant in a movie theater cutting out patron's eyeballs, while the movie onscreen depicts the same man as an optometrist who is driven to his evil acts by his overbearing, overweight squeaky-voiced mother. (The film's movie-within-a-movie THE MOMMY).
An interesting idea is well played out even if the end result is rather awkward. There is one funny scene of one of the victim's slobbering before having his throat slit with a scalpel. Presumably it's just a matter of taste. All in all, ANGUISH isn't a bad movie, I just expected it to be a lot better.

Bigas Luna's movie-within-a-movie is handled expertly in this suspenseful horror/thriller about an audience watching a movie about a serial killer who is in the midst of a murder spree in a theater. Little does the audience know someone is actually emulating the same crime in their theater! Stylishly directed entertainment, Anguish's high point is its middle half-hour segment, a long, superbly directed sequence that cuts back and forth between the theater's bathrooms, the lobby, the audience and the movie they're watching. Loses some momentum in the last ten minutes, and the final scenes, while pretty scary, are still a little cheap. Still recommended for horror fans seeking a creative, suspenseful slasher with a twist.
*** 1/2 out of *****

This DVD was made using a "master" which was cropped in on the sides and then severely cropped down from the top and up from the bottom to yield the much sought-after concept of "letterboxing" at an aspect ratio of 1.85:1 which is altogether too narrow. Films made at this time in Britain were to be shown at 1.66:1 at the most, and as a result of the cropping-on-the-sides and cropping-top-and-bottom what you see on this DVD is missing QUITE a bit of visual information on All Four Sides. You might as well be watching the actual film through a mailslot in a door. This is not the first title Anchor Bay has cropped inaccurately, erring unfortunately on the side that says, "make it fit Academy ratio, even if we show less than we should". At one time AB argued it cropped to Academy ratio to conform to anamorphic standards, but that's bogus. A film can be shown anamorphically at 1.66:1. What IS a big shame is that this title will probably not be re-released in a more complete visual form. The audio commentary from paricipants Roy Ward Baker and Martine Beswick is most welcome, however, and a good enough reason to watch. Just know that visually, you're missing a lot of what you should be seeing -- this entertaining film isn't framed properly, and quite a bit of visual information available even in the Lumiere VHS version is missing from the DVD. Release to DVD is no insurance against bad handling, unfortunately, and even by AB, which is doubly shocking.

I enjoyed this movie. By modern standards, the gore is subdued, and the acting is first rate. It runs a tight one and a half hours, and the plot zips right along. As the movie extras reveal, the sets were borrowed from other, higher budget movies, so there is nothing cheap about the look of the film. I'm glad someone thought enough of this film to put it on DVD.

If you're a horror fan over the age of 35, you probably remember some of the old horror flicks from Hammer Studios. Some of them were creepy, some of them silly, and some of them downright awful. But a few of them were really good. 'Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde' is one of the good ones that horror fans should rediscover.

Dr. Jekyll (Ralph Bates) sits in his laboratory, lamenting the fact that man will never live long enough to cure many of the diseases that afflict humanity. Jekyll discovers that by injecting female hormones into a male fly, he can greatly extend the life of the fly. He tries the experiment on himself. Then he notices that the fly is no longer male. Oops.

Jekyll's alter-ego, whom he explains away as his sister, Ms Hyde (Martine Beswick), quickly becomes responsible for all kinds of mayhem. The running dilemma in the movie becomes "Who will win the battle for control of Jekyll's body? Man or woman?"

I didn't really expect much from 'Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde,' but I must admit I was pleasantly surprised. Sure, the film has plot holes everywhere, but director Roy Ward Baker focuses on the story and keeps it moving well with a few interesting (and humorous) romantic subplots. Yet the most remarkable element of the film is in its casting. Bates and Beswick bear an uncanny resemblance to one another, making the film's premise believable and enjoyable. So sit back, and enjoy a really fun horror film from the imaginative 70's. And tell yourself that those Hammer films weren't so bad after all.
97 minutes
Rated R for violence and brief nudity

Ray Barrett and wife Jennifer Daniels inherit his brother's Cornish cottage, after the brother's unusual demise by the mysterious "Black Death." The locals aren't too friendly, especially austere neighbor Noel Willman, a reclusive gentleman famous for writing about obscure religious cults around the world. Willman's lovely daughter, the inexplicably shy and subdued Jacqueline Pearce, is as friendly to Barrett and his wife as her father is hostile, and inadvertently engages them in what rapidly becomes an ugly murder plot - the same one that claimed Barrett's late brother.

This is one of Hammer's better low-budgeters, which suffers from a few flaws: it's slow moving and a bit padded; the music (as in many films from the same studio in the same period) is overly melodramatic; and the suspense is half-shot from the opening teaser, by explicitly showing precisely the mystery Barrett and Daniels are attempting to solve (though not quite all of its details). It plays like a turn-of-the-century supernatural murder mystery, which is essentially what it is.

However, it's splendidly acted by all involved, especially Willman and Pearce, who suffer from a guilty secret and a resultant family curse beyond their ability to explain to outsiders. The sets and props are gorgeous, the scenery beautiful, the atmosphere heavy. Pearce's makeup is magnificent, even if the papier-mache shows - it's a truly striking effect, and properly underused. There are some very creepy and highly memorable scenes, most notably the finale and one in which Pearce - in a genuinely unspeakable condition - writhes around on her bed while an insidious Malaysian manservant chants over her body.

Anyone enjoying this film should also check out Plague of the Zombies, made by the same production team and many of the same cast members.

In a small rural village in Cornwall, a series of villagers have died from the Black Death. No, it isn't 1348, but consider the symptoms: black discolourations of the skin, foam crusting the mouth, and swelling.

The latest victim is one Charles Spalding, and it isn't long before his brother Harry and his wife Valerie, arrive in Claggmoor Heath to live in Charles' cottage. They are strangers in a small village so naturally, the locals don't take to them well. Only Tom Bailey, the innkeeper, is decent and kind, providing them with a cart and provisions. And he is the only one who decides to help Harry find out what is going on.

On their first evening, the couple meet Mad Peter, whom they "invite" to dinner. They hear a flute playing out in the moors, and Peter tells them he heard that the night Charles died. He flees, only to return, dying of the same symptoms as Charles.

Other residents include Dr. William Franklyn, a martinet and intimidating personage who studied primitive religions of the Far East. He has a strange grip over his lovely daughter Anna, a sensitive young woman who is somewhat troubled. And then there's the Malay servant whose relationship to the Franklyns belies something more than just master-servant.

The effects of the title creature are well-realized--the back of the video cover is a good indication.

Jacqueline Pearce (Anna) is best known as Servalan in the Blake's Seven series, was Chessene in Doctor Who-The Two Doctors, and appeared in White Mischief. And Harold Goldblatt, who has a few minutes in the beginning as the solicitor, plays Professor Dale in Doctor Who-Frontier In Space.

As for Ray Barrett, someone should have told him to lighten up and quit playing it so straight.

There are shades of Bram Stoker and Sherlock Holmes' The Speckled Band in this Hammer production without Dracula or the Frankenstein monster. It is low budget but is an effective atmosphere builder, with hardly any filler scenes.

Very good Hammer horror film about a wealthy man who keeps his beautiful daughter locked away from other people. He also has a sinister Indian servant who seems to have a strange hold over him as well. A young couple rents a cottage near the estate and discover the countryside is plagued with weird murders that leave the victims disfigured and foaming at the mouth. It turns out the girl is under a bizarre Indian curse incurred by the father on a visit to India that causes her to turn into a hideous reptile creature. The cellar of the estate has been converted into a "natural habitat" environment replete with steaming sulphur springs so that the snake-woman can writhe and shed her skin. The servant is there to keep the curse active. Very creepy outing with Jacqueline Pierce memorable as the unfortunate snake-girl. Good cast also includes Jennifer Daniel ("Kiss of the Vampire") as the wife-half of the neighboring couple who attempts to befriend Pierce. Most watchable and a good companion piece to "Plague of the Zombies" for collectors.

Not much to be said for "Trick Or Treat", really. It's a dumbed-
down little artifact that may provide some mindless time killing
for aging baby boomers (nostalgia factor) and 10 year olds. Not
a dvd for horror fans as there is absolutely nothing scary or
suspenseful going on here. On the up side, it's not awful as far
as '80's teen fodder goes, and is actually a notch or two above
most of what this genre was offering. There are a few laughs to
be found here and there, not much else.

The storyline in this movie is very cheesy, lets get that straight. But, anyone growing up in the 80's will be able to relate. The high school the story takes place in reminds me of mine. A bunch of idiot jocks and stuck up cheerleader types. I was 15 when this movie came out. I remember when it came out, but I only recently saw it. I grew up on the music of Fastway, Dokken, Dio, Ozzy,Maiden, kiss and Priest. Although the storyline isn't the greatest it reminds me of high school again. Ozzy as an evangelist is a gas.

Sure the movie is cheesy, but that is part of its charm. My favourite line has to be when the one chick (I think her name was Genie Wooster) tells Eddie that he is creepy, and when he says he doesn't understand, she replies "If you weren't so creepy, you would know what I mean". The reason why I love this line so much is as follows: It reminds me (and I am sure many others) of stuck up people in high school who had the same attitude. I can think of one, in particular right now.

So despite the movie's lack of appeal to awards committees, it does have some great moments, and although it does not have mass appeal, I don't think that was its purpose. It reaches out to the lost children of the world by showing them that they are not alone.

Besides, it is just a fun movie. Where else will you get to see Ozzy Osbourne preach about the evils of heavy metal music?

I would also highly recommend another cheesy 80s horror movie called "Basket Case".

This movie makes perfect sense to me now.....It should be titled "Director runs out of original ideas and writes a few stories that could have turned into full length movies if he had been able to carry the plot further, but ultimately fumbled and then gave all 3 short stories stupid, pointless endings, so he could still put them on a video and make a few bucks off of his work."

I will admit, I have witnessed the downfall of John Carpenters movies over the years, and this one is not perfect either. Although I must say this movie was very original, and it brought me back to some fond memories of Tales From The Crypt. If you liked Tales From The Crypt I highly recommend this to you, but if you take a different approach to horror, and would like to see something more terrifying, I suggest some of John Carpenter's old work, "Halloween" for instants. Overall it was a great movie, but it just doesn't fit John Carpenters normal pattern. Although I do recommend that all horror fans at least give it a chance, and rent it.

John Carpenter (the master of Halloween [1978]) who plays a coroner tells you a new story. A woman starts her first night as a gas station cashier. She is all alone. One customer she meets is David Naughton (An American Werewolf in London) whose character was born in Haddonfield (Yes, the one in HALLOWEEN) where this story is set. Later a homeless man asks for the key to the bathroom. But the woman mistakenly forgot the key inside her booth. More suspense. Later she finds the homeless man murdered. More suspense. There is a killer at the gas station. She thought she was alone. But that's not all. John Carpenter will have two more stories to show you. The second story stars Stacy keach and Sheena Easton. Keach is a middle-aged man who is upset that he is going bald, just has thin hair. He tries everything with no success. Then he goes to a professional hair company. The third story stars Mark Hamill and Twiggy.

I always enjoy a good splatter flick and while I wouldn't necessarily call The Guardian a "good" film, it sure as hell is an entertaining one. The plot's pretty silly, with Jenny Seagrove as Camilla, a newly hired caretaker of a young couple's (Dwier Brown and Cary Lowell) infant son. Camilla appears to be the perfect nanny, sweet and loving, but actually, she's a Druid who needs the baby to prolong her immortal life, or something to that effect (the movie really didn't explain too much, and if you think I gave anything away by mentioning her as a Druid, the opening subtitles already state that info). She's also got a weird relationship with a big tree in the forest.

The film's got a lot of stupidity here and there, especially the young couple, who don't bother checking Camilla's references before hiring her, or the fact that this caretaker happens to be able to move around so many residences freely without too much suspicion (okay, for a while, at least). And considering the fact Camilla's a Druid, where'd she get this tree? This is set in L.A., not Europe. As I said before, not much is answered, and I guess I should be grateful because I can't imagine any answers that wouldn't delve the material into further silliness.

But I credit director William Friedkin for handling all this with a straight face. Some of this stuff (particularly the scenes with the tree) could have been played as camp, but I'm rather glad Friedkin plays this seriously and, as he did with The Exorcist, he manages to craft some truly suspenseful and frightening moments here. Still, the film does slide into scenes that simply can't be taken very seriously; you'll know what I mean when you see the chainsaw scene near the end of the movie.

Unlike The Exorcist, he shows no restraint with violence, preferring to give us several enjoyably gory death scenes and a LOT of blood spattering everywhere. There's also a decent amount of nudity present, courtesy of the rather lovely Jenny Seagrove. She's not quite as effective a horror villainess as, say, Mathilda May in Lifeforce, but gets the job done. Dwier Brown and Cary Lowell are okay, a little flat during some scenes and certainly not aided by a script that makes them act like idiots, but are convincing enough as caring and concerned parents.

Surprisingly very little music is used, with Friedkin trying to use the sounds of the wind and other such natural elements to create goosebumps. It's a good attempt, and while it works during two very lengthy, suspenseful sequences, he's still no M. Night Shyamalan. Considering the rather negative critical response The Guardian received, it's easy to see why Friedkin hasn't made a genre film since. But I enjoyed almost every minute of it would recommend it to horror fans seeking a quick-paced, gory thriller.

The movie starts with a text about druids who worshipped trees and sacrificed human victims to them. After that there is a prologue where a family's nanny does this. Then we get to know the heroes of the movie, Phil and kate, just moved to Los Angeles and expecting a baby. After the baby boy is born, they find Camilla, who seems to be the perfect nanny. But under the charming surface lies a dark secret... You figure out the rest...

This movie is occasionally a little silly and without the info about the druids in the beginning, the story wouldn't make much sense. But that doesn'r matter. The Guardian is a nice and entertaining movie. A sequence in the middle of the movie and the ending are especially good. Jenny Seagrove is very good as Camilla. While not a masterpiece, this is an entertaining movie, definitely worth watching and a fun addition to your movie collection.

When a Wealthy Young Couple (Dwier Brown & Carey Lowell) hires a Attractive Nanny (Jenny Seagrove) for thier new born baby but the Nanny has a Secret of Unspeakable Horror.

Directed by William Friedkin (The Exorcist, The French Connection, Rampage) made a Strong Supernatural Horror film. Seagrove delivers an Strong Performance in this. DVD's has an terrific anamorphic Widescreen (1.85:1) transfer (Also in Pan & Scan) and an digitally remastered-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD Extras are the Original Theatrical Trailer & an fine Commentary Track by the Director & Interviewer Critic:Dennis Bartok. This one is Friedkin's most underrated & personal film. Based on a Novel by Dan Greenberg (Novel's Title-The Nanny). Screenplay by Greenberg, Friedkin & Stephen Volk. Grade:A-.

Aside from a ludicrous scene early on depicting a lethal injection sentence being carried out in what looks like a nurse's office in a suburban elementary school (which, as we find out in the commentary track, was actually filmed in a church basement!), "Mommy 2" is an entertaining, clever thriller, and a good follow-up to "Mommy". I especially liked how writer/director Max Collins didn't give us more of the same. Whereas "Mommy" was more of a horror thriller about a deranged mother, "Mommy 2" is essentially a straight-up murder mystery, where Patty McCormack's "Mommy" character- supposedly rehabilitated through the wonders of modern chemistry- is just one of many suspects in a series of brutal killings. In addition to the well-told mystery story, the DVD emulates the first "Mommy" DVD and includes a load of extras, my favorite of which is a terrific commentary track featuring Mr. Collins and his actors and crew. And, hey-- when you're done with the "Mommy" films, be sure to check out Mr. Collins' latest DVD thriller, "Real Time: Siege at Lucas Street Market". Story and extras wise, it's a blast, maybe his best DVD yet.

Mommy 2 very different from Mommy 1 in which Mommy is now the good guy or should I say gal. Patty gives a new dimension to her "Bad Seed" role - a real good actress - funny she never made it big time.Some good bloody scenes such as the ice skating rink. But my favorite being the electrocutionshower bit with chunks of hair going down the drain - nice touch! Some funny dialog - But i"m innocent. Yeah, so was OJ. Hey Max when's Mommy 3 coming out. Good DVD quality.

Mommy has done some pretty bad things and in this sequel to "Mommy" she is about to pay for her crimes. But wait, Mommy is not through yet; a woman like her cannot be disposed of so easily. After all, she only wants to clear her name and reunite with her precious daughter Jessica Anne. The media and those around her however are relentless in trying to get her to confess and discover the truth. In addition the famlies of her former victims would like nothing better then to see Mommy dead. Can she riase above it all, and still regain the love of the daughter she once nearly killed? If you have read "Moommy" then you have to read "Mommy's Day." It is just as suspenseful as the first book and the ending will positively shock you! Great book highly recommended. Hope Mr. Collins writes a third in the series.

I have to confess: I was thrilled beyond words when I heard Blue Underground was releasing this 1991 collaboration between two of my favorite horror masters, George Romero and Dario Argento. I bought the DVD sight-unseen, having only seen a few snippets of sequences from the second story in this two-movie collection, Argento's adaptation of Edgar Allen Poe's "The Black Cat".

I had seen those snippets as part of a larger Argento documentary called "Dario Argento: an Eye for Horror"---and they were ghoulish indeed! Harvey Keitel impaled on a stake? Mewling, hairless baby cats walled up with a gore-caked corpse, 'Cask of Amontillado' style? The gruesome final finishing touch---death by merciless, razor-sharp pendulum---that even Poe himself had shied away from?

I had to have it, just for the Argento work alone! As for the Romero adaptation of "The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar", well how could you lose, with the evil mastermind behind "Night of the Living Dead" helming up a short movie about a miser left in hypnosis after death?

Blue Underground has done an excellent job with their Limited Edition DVD: the DVDs themselves are nicely decorated with two of the more chilling sequences from the film, and the material on the bonus DVD (including---hey!---a tour of make-up guru Tom Savini's home!)is worth the price of admission alone. It's a handsome DVD, and a nice addition to any horror movie aficionado's collection.

As for the movies---well, they're not what I had expected, highly uneven, and not the best examples of either Argento or Romero's work. But they're enjoyable, gory, ghoulish fare, with Romero's piece more subtle and stylish and Argento's entry an over-the-top assault on the senses that pays tribute to some of the nastiest of Poe's nuggets, including "The Black Cat", "Lenore" (ah yes, her lovely 32 teeth! nice touch, Dario!), "The Pit and the Pendulum", "The Cask of Amontillado", "The Tell-Tale Heart", and even a glib nod to "The House of Usher".

Taken together, the two pieces that comprise "Two Evil Eyes" give the film a "Creepshow"-like feel, not surprising given that Romero helmed that movie. Romero's piece here has been unfairly savaged, and while it seems sedate in comparison to Argento's gory Italian Grand Opera, it's a stately, stylish little chiller. Adrienne Barbeau plays the crafty youngish wife of financier Valdemar (played to the hilt by Bingo O'Malley, who gave me the creeps!---he also shows up as Stevie King's dad in the Meteor episode of Creepshow), who plots with her hypnotist lover to get rid of the sick old man and abscond with a fortune.
Not surprisingly, things don't go as planned; look for an opening shot right out of "Night of the Living Dead" and a scene-chewing contest by movie veteran E.G. Marshall and Barbeau (who holds her own).

But it's really Argeno's sanguine little number you should check in for. Ostensibly an adaptation of "The Black Cat", it features Harvey Keitel as a demented crime photographer whose lifestyle and pre-occupations would make his "Bad Lieutenant" character cry for his mommy. It's not Dario at the height of his game, but it's wicked, depraved, gory stuff.

All told, these two shorts make a jolly, gory little evening of Poe-vian goodness. Break out a nice cask of Amontillado from your cellar (don't mind the knocking from the other side of the wall), open up a tin of caviar for your trusting black cat, put a blanket over your pet raven's cage, and enjoy two horror masters having some fun with their medium.

I bought this movie only because I am an Argento nut and wanted to have everything he has done. His segment is the only reason I gave this three stars; Romero's segment is a real let-down. I can't even believe it was made by the same guy who made Dawn of the Dead and Martin!

This movie is based on the writings of Poe. The first film is okay. It drags a little, but once things pick up it gets very interesting. The second film is probably the BEST horror short ever made. If you're a fan of episode horror films, (Creepshow, Trilogy Of Terror and the like), then this is a MUST HAVE DVD. The extras alone are worth the purchase. It's a limited edition, so make sure you snag it up before it's gone!

Joel West is a great looking and funny guy. Look for him in this movie and that's about it. The scene with him and the girl in the pool was the only thing that caught my interest. (You get to see his rear and his hot body.) Overall a boring un-original movie, if that's what you call it. For us guys the girl Joel scores with is pretty hot too.

I simply cannot believe that there are filmmakers who believe they are doing a service by creating these films. The not-so-special fx are barely above Sid & Marty Krofft's level, and it is insulting to the public to expect anyone to have any sort of affinity for this. Yet it appears to be quite the exploding genre, these low-budget digital sea monster movies.
I try to look at these films as if the only thing holding them back from being great is the budget, and try not to blame any particular crew member for the deficiencies. But would this film have been superb with Star Wars-quality fx? Unlikely, since, in this case, NOTHING could have saved a script like this. The infamous scene where their buddy rides the surfboard into the mouth of the croc--well, you don't actually "see" it happen--and all they can do is say "that must suck"....what writer was thinking that an actual person would react so callously to a friend's violent demise? And the "croc-teasing" line: someone thought he was being clever, but when the characters are supposed to be scared out of their wits they probably wouldn't be cracking jokes. So here I have no choice but to point the finger at the writer as the biggest criminal.
Low budget also means low-paid actors, which means inexperienced actors, which means we must try to be kind to them. They need to eat, too. Taryn Reif--apparently a regular on the soap "One Life to Live"--is, ultimately, the only reason I watch this. She is outrageously sexy IMHO, though I can understand she's not everyone's cup of tea. She bares herself way too briefly, but throughout she is very scantily clad and has a body that won't quit! I just can't figure what a soap starlet would be doing in a movie like this. It's a step backwards, one would think.
In the end, the high point of this film is the eye candy, and Taryn is my personal favorite, though the other girl, the one with the sex scene, is quite the looker as well.

This movie is not shakespear but it is alot of fun! Worth Renting. four stars.

I was at a local indie record store when I happened upon this DVD. I had heard that this video was "disturbing, violent" etc so I decided to give it a try. Once I got home my wife and I sat down to watch "Devils Experiment". Almost immediately I was sick to my stomach, not from the gore (or lackthereof), but from the fact that I had actually paid for this movie!!!!!!!!Devils Experiment is about as real looking as pro wrestling, which isn't saying much. Save your money folks, there is much better out there.

P.S. This review doesn't even begin to touch on Guinea Pigs 2nd feature "Android of Notre Dame". As soon as I saw the midget in the suit I turned it off.

I've not seen all of the Guinea Pig movies, but I have these 2. Both of them are ok, but nothing special.

Devil's Experiment - This one's only good if you want to see a fake snuff movie. It's got no plot or story, but it's not supposed to. It's just 3 Japanese dudes torturing a Japanese chick. The nail being pulled off was the only difficult part to watch. Kind of boring, but it was ok.

Android of Notre Dame - A tad better than Devil's Experiment, but only because it has a plot. This is also pretty boring. The gore is ok and it's also the only reason I bought the dvd in the first place. The story is ok, but just watch it for the gore. Easily squeemish beware. But, gorehounds probably won't find anything special. I didn't.

What I don't understand about these armchair film critics that are trying to rip this film apart is... WHat do they expect? A cool story line, character development and maybe some kung fu? No, no no! The GUinea Pig films have non of this. They are brutal to the extreme. Nasty, vile and borderline atrocities that are for the true gorehounds and something to add to the library of gore.

Want a story? Find Cannibal Holo or Nekromantic. Want gore comedy, get He Never Dies, BrainDead or Bad Taste. If you want to make your friends leave the house or freak em out then buy this. Want to support an indie company taking a chance on releasing these things, then buy this. You want [stuff] like Friday the 13th or Nightmare on Elm St. then wait until the sequel and leave. These films are for the gorehound who has seen everything and are looking for that revolting scene that makes you wonder? Why do you enjoy violence. Cause baby, these are violent to the extreme.