From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter (1999 Video) User Reviews (90)

Actually, I thought it was pretty cool

[Smells_Like_Cheese · 6/10 · 22 March 2008]

When I saw the first From Dusk Till Dawn film, I thought it was very cool and an awesome movie. Then I had the experience of the second From Dusk Till Dawn movie, and oh, wow, I don't even wanna talk about it, it wasn't horrible, but compared to the first From Dusk Till Dawn movie, it was pretty bad. But when I saw the sequel for rent From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter, my boyfriend had said the third one wasn't as bad, so I figured to give it a shot. Now despite some over the top cheesiness, it was a good time to watch. We sometimes need the gore, especially when it comes to vampires, I love the romantic vampire films, but sometimes you need the good scare and gore. From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter will not disappoint on that part and I think this was the better sequel.

Johnny is an outlaw/murderer who is about to be hanged, but is saved by an admirer, he saves the hangman's daughter, Esmerelda. Together they ride off, the admirer, a girl, Reece, who wants to learn his techniques, but she's stupid enough to go under his wing and pays for it. Another group, Ambrose, John, and Mary, are robbed and are left to the desert. But they all end up meeting in the same spot, at the bar where they are open from dusk until dawn with hungry vampires.

From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter is actually a very cool film. I was pretty impressed with how it was scary and gory, the story was decent enough. The only thing I thought was a little silly was when the vampire says to Mary "let's dance" or something like that, it was unbelievable a little out of character. But the last scene with the vampires was very cool and had some awesome deaths. But I won't give anything away. Just trust me, this is a good sequel.

6/10

Wants more than it delivers

[Freddy_Boy · 6/10 · 14 April 2007]

However, what it delivers isn't a little.

The prelude, if you will, actually lasts the majority of the movie. The horror doesn't start until very late. Until then it's a violent western tale to be told. And if there was time and money on this project I think it could have delivered a whole lot more.

Still doesn't measure up to the first movie, but was a whole lot better than the second one. Besides, Western/Vampire Horror Movie isn't something you see every day and it earns points just for that.

I definitely recommend this movie, it's not about to change your world, but it's different enough to be entertaining and imaginative enough to be interesting.

Why Ambrose Bierce?

[Gregorso · 5/10 · 17 July 2009]

What everyone seems to be missing is the significance of Ambrose Bierce. He's a real 19th century author, and the film takes it's title from one of his books. He's best known for the classic twist at the end of "Occurance at Owl Creek Bridge". (It was made into an episode of the original Twilight Zone.) This film hints a few times that a similar twist will take place... but it never does. Why is there no payoff after building up the Bierce character with so much historical detail? Anyway, the film is not bad, which is surprising, considering that they just rewrote the script from the first film into a Old Western setting.

Bierce's story "The Damned Thing" was produced as an episode of Showtime's "Masters of Horror."

if you HAVE to see these characters again, see this one

[captbruce · 13 November 2000]

I have a problem with the whole fact of Rodriguez and Tarantino doing a sequel, let alone sequels, of a highly original, totally off-the-wall movie like From Dusk Til Dawn. But where #2, "Texas Blood Money," was a waste of film, #3 "The Hangman's Daughter" is the ONLY one they should've attempted. It tells the story of Salma Hayek's character in the first one and actually has a plot, good acting, lasts just long enough and has enough content to be entertaining and not exhausting. I also want to add that Ara Celi is a GREAT substitution for Salma cause she is just as FINE! :)

The movie does suffer from some of the hokey tricks that plagued Texas Blood Money and is campy, but that's half the appeal of these types of movies. They're not Shakespeare, they're to entertain...and bringing back Michael Parks was a stroke of genius and if you want to see how diverse an actor he is, watch this movie and the first moments of the original where he's featured. If you're jonezing to revisit some old friends at the Titty Twister saloon, rent this one and TOTALLY AVOID the second sequel.

This is an amusing and disconcerting prequel with a lot of frantic action , chills , blood and gore .

[ma-cortes · 5/10 · 5 June 2020]

It begins with the getaway of Johnny Madrid (Marco Leonardi) , a nasty local bandit , from the gallows who then kidnaps his hangman's (Temuera Morrison) beautiful daughter , Esmeralda (Ara Celi) , with a little help from Reece, a female outlaw from the U.S. With the hangman and a local posse on their trail, Johnny meets with his gang who all rob a stagecoach which contains American author Ambrose Bierce (Michael Parks) along with newlywed couple John and Mary Newlie. As night falls, all parties coincidentally seek shelter in an isolated inn which is run by vampires led by the high priestess Quixtla (Sonia Braga) . However , the team unwittingly come into contact with the vampire denizens of the bizarre bar and soon join the ranks of the undead , taking place the usual carnage . Along the way a violent posse formed by the handman , deputies and underlings go after them . Esmeralda is revealed to be the half-human, half-vampire princess Santanico Pandemonium, whom the vampires want as their heir in which all the humans must join forces if they are to survive the night from the vicious blood-suckers.

Ridiculous , but entertaining horror/western , it results to an absurd prequel to ¨From dusk to Dawn¨ 1995 by Robert Rodriguez who here produces, in which a bunch of delinquents led by Marco Leonardi and other partners-in-crime decide to knock over a stagecoach and subsequently taking shelter at the weird brothel , then things go awry , while describing the tale of the birth of the vampire princess Santanico Pandemonium . Direct-to-video follow-up , it is a passable entry , quickly made , being set 100 years ago in Mexico , earlier the first film's massacre . This gory vampire movie contains thrills , chills , plot twists , brief doses of humor , gore and guts as well as go-for-broke action set pieces. The film is starred by Ambrose Bierce/Michael Parks , a notorious author who missed in Mexico , in fact the title of the film, "The Hangman's Daughter," is taken from the title of a short story titled : "The Monk and the Hangman's Daughter¨. As the protagonists suffering the bite put on them , except for Ambrose Bierce who manages to avoid momentarily the ordinary slaughter with lots of blood and gore . There are sympathetic and snappy dialogues but with no much sense and full of profanities and bad taste . This "Prequel" to the first From Dusk Till was professionally directed by directed by P.J. Pesce . Rating : 5.5/10 , this one is an acceptable film of the saga . Average . Only for ¨From dusk till dawn¨ saga followers and completists.

The saga is formed by the following ones : From Dusk to dawn 1995 by Robert Rodriguez with George Clooney , Quentin Tarantino , Harvey Keitel , Juliette Lewis , Fred Williamson , Salma Hayek . From dusk till dawn 2 : Texas Blood Money 1999 by Scott Spiegel with Tiffani Amber Thiessen , Bruce Campbell , Robert Patrick , Danny Trejo , Bruce Campbell , Muse Watson , Duane Whitaker who also wrote it , Raymond Cruz , James Parks . From dusk till dawn 3 : the handman's daughter 3 , 1999 , with Michael Parkas , Rebecca Gayheart , Sonia Braga , Marco Leonardi , Temuera Morrison , Ara Celi Danny Trejo . And TV series 2014-2016 created by Robert Rodriguez , Robert Kurtzman with DJ Cotrona , Eliza Gonzalez , Jesse Garcia , Jake Busey.

Wild, Wild Vampires?...

[paul_haakonsen · 5/10 · 29 December 2015]

This third installment to the "From Dusk to Dawn" movies is a prequel, as it takes place in the old West in American history. Initially one might think vampires and the wild West doesn't make for a good combination, but the movie was actually enjoyable. While better than part two, this movie still fell short of part one.

The story in "From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter" is essentially exactly the same as in the first two movies. A band of outlaws and holy men and up at a seemingly deserted tavern in a secluded location. As night falls, the patrons turn into blood-thirsty vampires.

The characters in the third movie were more detailed than those in part two, and as such you get more into the movie and a greater wholeness permeates the overall storyline.

As for the acting talents in the movie, then people were doing fair jobs with their given roles and characters. It is, as always, a treat to have Danny Trejo in a movie, alongside the other familiar faces in the movie.

While better than part two, this is not a movie that will make a lasting impression, nor is it a bright shiny moment in cinema history. "From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter" is exactly what you would expect from a movie of this type. It is enjoyable enough for what it turned out to be.

The first movie stands well on its own. The second movie is just a filler. And the third movie is essentially also just a filler, although it does show the origin of the seductive Santanico Pandemonium character from the first movie.

No entertainment value

[johnzappulla · 1/10 · 18 January 2015]

The only thing this shares with 1 & 2 is the same words in the title. Other than that this was a really poor excuse for a movie. The plot was completely incoherent, I think they lost the script somewhere 1/2 way through. There was nothing special in the special effects as most looked like they were done on a kids laptop. It was torture to watch and looked like a high school film project rather than a professional movie. Please do not waste your time or money on this loser of a film. Rated 10 on the disappointment scale. You will be scratching your head at the end wondering what exactly did you just watch and why did you waste 95 minutes waiting for it to get good. The best thing in the movie was the credits.

A 100 times better than the previous movie.

[CharltonBoy · 7/10 · 6 October 2002]

You know, this film aint too bad at all! this is an entertaining horror flick that returns to the quality of the first film and away from the pure drivel of the second movie. this is set in the past and we see the Vampire club as it was in the past. Like the first movie in this we see no monster action for the first half and pure blood sucking gore for the entire second half of the film. This not to say the first half is poor because it isn't. Again like the first movie the first half is different yet very watchable.

The acting is very good and the special affect are ok if not spectacular.The story is hardly ground breaking but at times this is very funny and in the moments when it was supposed to be, not like in the second movie when it was funny when they were trying to be serious! An above average horror that is hard not to like. 7 out of 10.

Not one vampire seen for one hour!

[atinder · 5/10 · 29 June 2012]

From Dusk till dawn 3.

First watch, i love the first movie, i did not like the sequel too much at all but this movie is a Little bit of a mix bag,

For the first hour of the movie, it felt like Western movie with no horror elements in the movie at all,

I found the those scenes very dull and boring. I was really bored with most of the this movie and i all most turn it off after 45mins of the movie but stuck with it

The movie did pick up in the last half hour of the movie.

That when it went all horror and action really starts and don't stop until end of the movie, there were some decent gory effect in this movie, which i really liked.

The make up effect were really good as well and made some of the vampires look scary and there were one or two funny moment in this movie that laugh at a little.

I going to give this movie 5 out of 10

"You're a monster!"

[lost-in-limbo · 6/10 · 14 August 2010]

Just like the previous sequel, the third entry of the "From Dusk till Dawn" franchise would be another quickly produced straight-to-video sequel that would be somewhat a prequel to the original film. While I didn't think the second entry was as bad that it's usually made out to be, however "Hangman's Daughter" is still a definite improvement over "Texas Blood Money". In a way it kind of plays out more similar to the original, only this time the carnage is set in the early 1900s (where the Old West was coming to an end) to be finally played out once again in the seamy Mexican tavern that harbours blood-gushing surprises for its guests. For most part this horror western comedy is very well executed, as it's brashly pieced with its admirably crafted make-up FX, slickly directed for its low-scale budget and colourfully acted. The sweeping camera has scope framing the moody, sunbaked landscapes and story dramatics with constant flair with that spaghetti western brutality shinning through. It wears its influences quite proudly too. The mellow story starts of episodic --- focusing on an Civil war hero looking to long for some cause while on the other side is an infamous outlaw with a hypnotic runaway beauty whose father (a hangman) follows their trail. But the two while crossing paths during stages, eventually come to be one when they encounter an orgy of alcohol, sexuality and blood at a desolate inn that just happens to be home for the blood-sucking kind. Strangely enough while nasty and kinetic, I thought it became tiring when the survivors of the feeding work together despite their differences and try to fend off the vampires, as I thought the initial build-up was interestingly offbeat with its dry humour and lasting bite despite the systematic staples. Michael Park's wry character Ambrose Bierce is a fascinating one, as he pretty much soaks it up with little effort in which doing so emits an ambiguously tainted air about him. Marco Leonardi is quite a live-wire as the outlaw Johnny Madrid and his combination with the lovely, if pouty Ara Celi comes off. Temuera Morrison provides aggression and then Lennie Loftin and Rebecca Gayheart give out that twitchy energy as a married religious couple. In support is modest turns by Sonia Braga (who looks great!), Jordana Spiro, Orlando Jones and an always worthwhile Danny Trejo.

From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Inevitable Prequel

[BA_Harrison · 5/10 · 27 June 2012]

The good news is that Scott Spiegel, who helmed the god-awful part 2, is no longer on directing duties, having been replaced by the far more capable P.J. Pesce; the bad news is that vampire fans might feel a tad cheated by this prequel, which takes a lot longer to get to the bloodsucking fun than either of its predecessors.

For the majority of its running time, The Hangman's Daughter plays out much like a traditional western, following the exploits of several characters whose paths become inextricably intertwined: Johnny Madrid (Marco Leonardi) is a Mexican bandit who narrowly escapes the hangman's noose thanks to the help of young wannabe outlaw Reece (Jordana Spiro); Esmerelda (Ara Celi) is the hangman's daughter, who flees with Johnny, her father (Temuera Morrison) and his men in hot pursuit; Ambrose Bierce (Michael Parks) is an author searching for Pancho Villa with the intention of becoming a revolutionary; John and Mary Newlie (Lennie Loftin and Rebecca Gayheart) are bible-bashers hoping to spread God's word to the Wild West.

After lots of fairly predictable western nonsense (shooting and spitting and cursing and drinking), spiced up with a little graphic gore (some splattery gun shots including a tasty hit to the head!), all of the characters converge on a remote desert inn where a gang of vampires prey on the clientèle. From here-on in, FDTD3 is a lot more fun, with plenty of welcome gore and gratuitous nudity (a forerunner of The Titty Twister, the inn is also a strip joint/knocking shop). The script leaves a few frustrating loose ends—most notably the significance of author Ambrose Bierce and his firing squad flashbacks—but when the vampire action kicks in, you probably won't care less. It's just a damn shame that they left it so late to get to the good stuff...

All in all, quite an impressive piece of work.

[cappados · 8/10 · 15 March 2007]

After seeing the PATHETIC From Dusk Til Dawn 2, wasn't expecting much , but I was pleasantly surprised. I won't spoil the movie for anyone but this story (which is actually the prequel to the excellent original From Dusk Til Dawn) is well written and well directed. Great production values, very interesting characters, decent plot, ASTONISHING action sequences.

And WHAT A CAST! Michael Parks is amazing as Ambrose Bierce, Temura Morrison is terrifying as the Hangman--and then you've got Marco Leonardi, Sonya Braga, Rebecca Gayheart, and Orlando Jones! All in all, quite an impressive piece of work.

Better sequel than deserves credit with

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 6/10 · 14 June 2014]

After getting pulled into a convoy along the Mexican Revolution, a group of travelers find their cantina hideout populated by vampires that are interested in one of the party's members, forcing them to fight back before they succumb to the creatures.

This didn't turn out to be nearly as much fun as it's predecessor, but it still has some great things going for it. Frankly, this is due mainly to the fact that this one has far too much time spent with it's Old-West rip-offs feeling like a Spaghetti Western imitation in the first half to the complete and total elimination of any horror elements. Even upon arriving at the cantina, which is just under an hour into the movie itself, it's still a bit before they reveal themselves as vampires despite us knowing something's going on. The film is a lot better when that happens due to a lot of wild action, tons of bloodletting and just a lot of fun, featuring some cool make-up effects that give off a great vibe about the situation and plenty of storyline motivation beyond just a never-ending stream of attacks. It manages to save the film somewhat, but it's still not enough to overcome the boredom in the beginning.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language and Nudity.

Pretty Pointless Sequel

[gavin6942 · 5/10 · 5 September 2012]

Set 100 years ago in Mexico, this horror/western is the story of the birth of the vampire princess Santanico Pandemonium.

Danny Trejo shows up as a bartender, and has far too small of a role here (and I like how they have the floor beyond the bar propped up to make him look taller).

Michael Parks, the greatest actor this film has to offer, appears as a fictionalized version of Ambrose Bierce (author "Devil's Dictionary"). Being Bierce, he of course gets the best lines. I found that to be the film's one redeeming quality.

Why Rodriguez and Tarantino produced this one is a mystery. Clearly, the point was to cash in on whatever value was left from the first two. But the story is not particularly interesting... there are a few nice effects (the bats in the stomach, for example) but overall this just makes me wish sequels were not so easy to get approved.

Part 3 attempts to combine the western and horror film genres.

[capkronos · 4/10 · 9 July 2003]

Jettisoning logic, coherence and a reasonable story structure for the basic cheap thrills (blood and boobs) has been the trademark of this increasingly banal series from the start, but this one has the conceit of throwing in the character of Ambrose Bierce, author of "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge," who also, in real-life, disappeared somewhere in Mexico never to be found again. Michael Parks does what he can with it, instilling the character's lines with fun tough-guy delivery, but, unfortunately, the script doesn't even attempt to develop the character and Parks is given little to do.

Like the first two FDTD films, this attempts to cover two different genres (this time it's western and horror). Various characters, including some sadistic Mexican outlaws, a hypocritical bible-beating couple, Bierce and the title character (who turns out to be half vampire herself) spend the first half of the movie involved in run-ins, shootings and other boring time-filler, before discovering a bar out in the middle of the desert...which, of course, ends up being filled with vampires. The "Hangman's Daughter" (who turns out to be the same character that Salma Hayek played in Part 1) is actually daughter of the large-breasted vampire queen (Sonia Braga and her mind-boggling cleavage).

In-your-face direction and gratuitous gore take the place of scares and suspense, but the plentiful FX (by KNB) make this OK time filler for the undemanding. Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino were the executive producers.

Why did I even bother?

[TheOtherFool · 4/10 · 25 April 2004]

I wasn't too impressed by the first two parts, but hell, once you've seen two you might as well make it three. Not that I would've missed anything if I skipped this one...

Movie starts out as a western, and this sure is the best part. Classy, stylish shots in the desert, and it even has something of a story. But once they come near to that famous bar, you know it's gonna be just like the first two movies...

Rebecca Gayheart is gorgeous and Michael Parks is great as writer Ambrose Bierce, but thats about it.

Only watch if you're a big fan of the series, 4/10.

back to the bar

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 22 October 2019]

Civil war hero Abrose Bierce disappears as he tries to join Pancho Villa's revolution. He boards a stagecoach with fellow passengers, John and Mary Newlie. Johnny Madrid escapes the hangman and takes along the hangman's daughter Esmeralda with the help of gunwoman Reece who really wants to learn from Madrid. The various groups gather at a mysterious bar run by Razor Charlie (Danny Trejo).

The franchise returns to the bar and that's a very good thing. This is a prequel and that's not unusual. The story is muddled due to all the various characters and the different groups. It does get better as the groups gather at the bar after half of the movie. There are some inferior monster makeup and questionable pre-2000 CGI but that stuff is alright. I still like the bar and the final reveal of the pyramid. I just need a character to hang my hat on. I also don't understand Abrose seeing his double. I don't understand his opening. There's a lot I don't understand about that character.

An interesting second sequel. I was impressed.

[Aphex97 · 7/10 · 14 April 2001]

After seeing the mediocre (at best) From Dusk Til Dawn 2, I was not expecting much from the 2nd sequel, but I was pleasantly surprised. I won't spoil the movie for anyone but this story (which is actually the prequel to the excellent original From Dusk Til Dawn) is well written and well directed. Good production values, very interesting and likeable characters, decent plot, nice action sequences, and a few good twists make this one a winner.

My rating: 7/10 - Good with few flaws.

Garbage, stinker one of the worst sequels "From Dusk Till Dawn" I have ever seen

[NightmareOnElmStreetFan · 1/10 · 12 August 2019]

I hate this movie, how is this god awful movie better than From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money but this movie get's better rating better praise. This is Old West movie and it takes an hour till we see a vampires at all. The film is so boring, slow paced that I bearly make it trough. I saw this movie as a teen and I never understood. This movie is garbage and even more worse than DTV sequel From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money. I will never watch this movie in my intier life again. I am a huge fan the First movie. The Original was a masterpiece but the sequel which revisits the first didn't have that potential of its predecessor; I am assuming it never happened.

This movie get's 10, 8, 7 from people on IMDb which I don't understand. It is one of the worst seqeuls/prequels ever. I hate this movie I don't like it. I love the first one to death, it is my absolutely favorite film of all time. This movie is boring as hell, peace a garbage. Johnny Madrid is one of the worst anti hereo I have ever seen. Marco Leonardi can not act, who wrote this garbage? Michael Parks is in this movie and the guy dosen't do trough whole movie nothing. Rebecca Gayheart I like the actress alot she was in Vanishing Son I and III, she was in Scream 2 she had a cameo scene. In this movie she is a virgin who turns in to a vampire and she is killed by her husaband with a machette? Serioulsy? You can't kill a vampire with a machette you have to stake them with a wood to the heart I have not seen that in this movie.

This movie is good awful, the effect and the monsters are laughable. Some of these people give it a 10/10 I'm like BRUH do people know how to rate/review movies those people who have it 10/10 the movie fails in various spots. This is the second time I saw Danny Trejo get killed. The finale is god awful. Johnny Madrid/Marco Leonardi is a peace garbage in this movie. He is not beliveble like were actors George Clooney and Robert Patrick. The finale when Johnny Madrid and this guy Michael Parks saves him self this Madrid says do you need company the scene that was stolen from the first movie. It copied the first movie and shows where Titty Twister stands just like in the first movie.

This is the most lame chapter of this trilogy, it has no sense, no ambitions, no morals, it happened only because it had to end. I do not want to see the 4 movie because it would be god awful like this garbage. One day I am going to re-visit the series. I love George Cloone and Quentin Tarantino to death. This movie has no likable actors.

I hate this movie, I hate the peoples who wrote it, I hate the actors who acted it, I hate the crew members who worked in it, I hate the studio which released it!!! I will never, ever revisit this god awful forgoten sequel ever again period.

You have no idea what you have unleashed.

[lastliberal · 7/10 · 15 July 2007]

This film starts off with action reminiscent of Sergio Leone's spaghetti westerns. It takes place 100 years before From Dusk to Dawn. The battle in the beginning is exciting, but the film soon bogs down to tedium until they arrive at their destination - a Catina similar to the first film, where they find our old pal Danny Trejo.

The bar scene is much better that DTD and the action gets hot and heavy as Esmeralda/Santanico Pandemonium (Ara Celi) comes home.

Michael Parks stars as Ambrose Bierce, who was a real writer who really joined Pancho Villa's army and disappeared in Mexico. Maybe he went back to the Catina and joined the vampires.

The film also stars Marco Leonardi and Rebecca Gayheart.

Lots of exciting makeup, special effects and gore at the end.

One star for Michael Parks ..... The rest is typical Tarantino trash.

[merklekranz · 1/10 · 12 April 2020]

Too awful to even be classified as a time waster, this misguided "dog and pony show" is Stupid with a capitol S. If your idea of entertainment is watching C.G.I. images of blood sucking freaks, then be my guest, and gorge yourself on on this abomination. Even the "spaghetti western" like beginning is nothing more than rehashed material from movies that are so far above this nonsense that it is an insult to them being mentioned in the same review. "The Good the Bad and the Ugly" along with "The Treasure of Sierra Madre" are plagiarized in such an obvious way, it is a testament to how unoriginal "From Dusk Till Dawn 3 The Hangman's Daughter" truly is. This is definitely one to be avoided . - MERK

Unexpectedly Good

[Terminator-2 · 9/10 · 9 June 2000]

I felt i had to write this comment so that those of you out there who, like me, watched Dusk Till Dawn 2 & were VERY disappointed, will give this one a go. It is very well made, has lots of lovely gore & girls and, unlike no.2, has a good script. Trust me, rent this one and you will enjoy yourself...

Nice chapter, a lot better than the second one!

[mario_c · 7/10 · 15 April 2008]

Not being as good as the original, this third chapter of From Dusk Till Dawn is a lot better than the second! Because of two main reasons: 1) It has a much better cinematography, as it's not a cheap B-series movie like the other one; 2) It follows an important premise of the original movie (which the second movie didn't do): a great part of the action is passed inside the vampires' bar. So, in spite of having the plot set on a different age (the XIX century) I think this film is a lot closer to the original than the second one. On the other hand it can be considered a prequel to the original film, especially to the bar and to SANTANICO PANDEMONIUM character.

I enjoyed the plot, the characters, the soundtrack (excellent and powerful sounds during the fighting scenes inside the bar!!) and the acting. Nice film!

A piece of trash

[The_Plague · 1/10 · 31 October 2002]

From Dusk Till Dawn 3 has a lame story about ridiculous-looking vampires trying to kill a bunch of people you don't care about. The whole thing is boring, predictable and not scary at all - the suspense and terror from the good vampire movies is instead replaced by gratuitous violence with no purpose at all. A common mistake, so, unless you're one of those who enjoys watching things like blood spilling everywhere and a person ripping off another one's testicles for two hours, you shouldn't bother watching this time waster.

Special effects are okay and acting is sleep-inducing. One good thing FDTD3 has is the photography, but it's not like this alone can save a movie from complete disgrace. I rate it 1.