Customer Reviews

From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(14)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

This one is simple. If you saw and liked the original "From Dusk Till Dawn" then you are going to like "From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter." Even better, if you did not like "From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money," you will find this one more to your taste . In fact, you can skip the first direct to video sequel in favor of this film and not miss a thing because this second sequel is actually a prequel. The bad news is that what makes this one succeed might spell the end of the series, because, after all, how many times can you draw water from the same well? Therefore, we may well be at the end of the Aztec/Mexican Vampire Bloodbath movies.

"From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter" is set during the Mexican Revolution, tied to that period of history by the presence of Ambrose Bierce (Parks), American newspaper columnist, satirist, essayist, short-story writer, and novelist, an enigmatic figure who disappeared south of the border and is presumed to have died during the siege of Ojinega in January 1914. Bierce is in Mexico to bring something of great value to Pancho Villa, but he is also ill and has something of a death wish.

At the other end of the spectrum is the outlaw Johnny Madrid (Marco Leonardi, "Like Water for Chocolate") who not only escapes from the hangman (Temuera Morrison, "Six Days, Seven Nights"), but the takes the hangman's sensuous daughter Esmeralda (Ara Celi) away with him. Madrid and Bierce first meet up when the outlaw's gang robs the stagecoach on which the writer is riding to join Villa (there is something to be said for having a blind man ride shotgun on a stage). But they meet again after the hold up when Bierce and a young newlywed missionary couple, Mary and John Newlie (Rebecca Gayheart and Lennie Loftin), end up that night seeking shelter at the combination bar and bordello that we recall from the first film (Danny Trejo is still behind the bar as Razor Charlie). Meanwhile, the hangman is still on the trail of his daughter. Eventually, wackiness ensues.

The film returns to the essence of the original, which finds a ground of humans forced by dire circumstances to band together against a horde of bloodsucking fiends. The first time around the scene was set in a Mexican biker bar. This time around it is essentially the wild, wild west, even if it is still early in the 20th century. The movie has a touch of class with Sonia Braga as Quixtla, the proprietress of the establishment, although the Bierce character also brings some dignity and ironic wit to the proceedings. Orlando Jones even plays it essentially straight in his role as an Andalusian brush peddler in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The script is by Álvaro Rodríguez, based on a story he co-wrote with original director Roberto Rodríguez. Director P.J. Pesce ("Body Waves") does not have the cinematic flair of Roberto Rodriguez, but then who does? The main thing is that he treats the first half of the film seriously as we deal with the possible romance between the outlaw and the hangman's daughter, the stagecoach robbery, and Bierce's deathwish. Then it becomes party time in the bar and all hell breaks loose. The special effects are over the top, but intentionally so; they are just part of the menu. The last half of the movie is simply a question of going along for the ride and waiting to see who makes it out of there alive.

Actually, I think "From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter" might be more enjoyable than the original. It is more of a classic horror film without the "Pulp Fiction" sensibilities that writer Quentin Tarantino brought to the table the first time around (with the exception of this film's "dance number"). As always when it comes to such films, whether we are talking Tarantino or vampires, it comes down to questions of taste. Either way, this film deserved better than the fate of being direct to video.

Virtually as soon as the film begins, so does the action. The movie starts with an outlaw who at the begining is about to be hanged by the "hangman", but the outlaw escapes with the hangmans daughter and throughout the movie the hangman pursues the outlaw. The main story however is the origin of Princess "Pandomonium"(salma hayek's part in "dusk till dawn") and where all the vampires came from. Overall an action packed vampire film with a great story line that clears a lot up that dusk till dawn 2 did not only being surpased by "dusk till dawn". The DVD has only a deleted scene, but the picture and dolby 5.1 sound is superb!

To truly appreciate this movie, you should first watch FDTD1, The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly and the Twilight Zone episode 'An Occurrence At Owl Creek Bridge'. Familiarizing yourself with Ambrose Bierce and the history of Mexico during the early 20th century couldn't hurt. FDTD3 is basically a spaghetti western meets vampire flick taking as its starting point the fact that Ambrose Bierce did disappear in Mexico in 1914. The movie isn't brilliant, the movie isn't as good as FDTD1, but it isn't awful like many of the reviewers make it out to be. FDTD3 is definitely one of those lazy weekend afternoon gratuitous sex and violence movies. [My wife says not to forget to mention the heavy lesbian overtones, but I know that cultured readers of reviews on this site probably aren't interested in lesbian overtones.] Always keep in mind that if you see a movie you don't like in the movie theater with a date at matinee prices, you'll be out at least 13 bucks with nothing to show for it. If you buy a DVD you don't like, you can always recoup some of your funds by selling it used. And if you like the movie on DVD, you get to watch it again and again. FDTD3 is not a classic, but well worth watching.

Third entry in "From Dusk Till Dawn" series is a prequel which has a violent outlaw escaping his execution at the hands of a ruthless hangman and taking off into the desert with his daughter. The two end up at the infamous bordello bar from the first "Dusk" film and it's vampire mayhem galore. This straight-to-video effort is actually very creative with both its direction and general story, not to mention some quality make-up effects from the KNB team. Featuring a strong cast for a video release which includes "Dusk Till Dawn" alumni Michael Parks and Danny Trejo, Rebecca Gayheart, Orlando Jones, and Temura Morrison, just to name a few, this sequel is actually far more solid than one might expect.

This film is a prequel,and it is really good it takes on more parts of the first film than its rather unpleasant sequel, and is thouroughly worth watching, lots of great effects including great bat animations and a rather unsettling knife experience... great & please if they have to make a fourth one please try to keep it like this rather than no 2...

After the disapointing 2nd Part, I was positively surprised by this one. Many things were copied from the 1st part, but this time it happened in the 19th Century, the gore is right, especially the "knife-scene", so if you liked the 1st Part, don't miss this one!

Despite my misgivings, I gave this movie a shot. After all, while it was unlikely to be as good as the first, there were bound to be at least some good special effects. I was right - there were. Actually, it probably showed a bit <b>too</b> much of the Bram Stoker's <i>Dracula</i>-like vampires. After awhile - upon scrutinization - you start to see the creases in the suits that the actors are wearing. It's hard to not see, to be honest, and can take away from the effect. That said, however, there was some pretty well-done CGI - mainly in the bat creatures as another reviewer pointed out.

The special effects were, unfortunately, the only redeeming factor. The acting was barely tolerable, and there were characters that made you question their purpose for existance. What's up with the wanna-be outlaw girl, for example? After nearly getting killed by one of the main characters, you would expect her to be out for <fontcolor=red>blood</fontcolor>, & have some sort of climatic vengence scene. Instead, you're left scratching your head.

All-in-all, don't bother with this movie unless you're up for a mindless slasher/horror film, filled with lots of blood and passable looking critters. A better bet along the same lines? Try "Demon Knight" from Tales From the Crypt.

Even though the names Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez, the pair behind the original film released in 1996 (Tarantino wrote the screenplay, while Rodriguez directed), are prominently displayed on the cover for the film From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter (2000), I didn't get a real sense the two had much to do with the actual film, other than taking executive producing credits. Rodriguez is listed as a co-writer, and I'd say a smidgen of his flair is present, but only enough to make me think he probably contributed a few ideas and eventually gave the finished script a once over. Directed by P.J. Pesce (Sniper 3), the film features Michael Parks (The Return of Josey Wales), Marco Leonardi (Once Upon a Time in Mexico), Temuera `Jango Fett' Morrison (Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones), and Ara Celi (Looking for Lola). Also appearing is Rebecca Gayheart (Urban Legend), Lennie Loftin (Daredevil), Sonia Braga (Moon Over Parador), Orlando Jones (Evolution), Danny Trejo (Con Air), the only performer to appear in all three From Dusk Till Dawn features.

Set around the time just after the American Civil War, the story begins by introducing us to a few gringos traveling down old Mexico way, including Ambrose Pierce (Parks), a writer who has come to throw in with Pancho Villa and his revolutionaries, along with John and Mary Newlie (Loftin and Gayheart), a pair of uptight, preachy newlyweds who intend of setting up a bible school for underprivileged children. While waiting for their stagecoach to leave, we see an outlaw character named Johnny Madrid (Leonardi) about to be hanged, along with the arrival of The Hangman (Morrison), with The Hangman's daughter Esmeralda (Celi), hiding among the onlookers. Madrid escapes with a little help, kidnaps Esmeralda, hooks up with his old gang, and sets out to rob the stagecoach carrying Pierce and the Newlies. By various twists of fate, all eventually end up at a sort of inn in the middle of the desert, and if you've seen the previous films, then you'll know this desert oasis is actually an evil place (the seedy bar featured in the first film), populated by no-goodnik vampire types who lure unsuspecting travelers with the intent on feeding on them. Things get a bit hairy once The Hangman, whose real name is Mauricio, makes the scene (he and his posse have been chasing after Madrid), and the vampires eventually reveal themselves. Turns out Mauricio and the head vampire (played by Sonia Braga) have some sort of history, one that involves Esmeralda, who is the key to some sort of ritual, so it is written, so it is told...after the initial bloody carnage following the revelation of the vampires, those who are left, including Pierce, Madrid, Mauricio, and a few others, band together in an uneasy alliance if only to survive, wandering the bowels of the inn/bar, in an effort to escape.

This film did seem to make an attempt to connect to the first film (the second film was really a sequel in name only), basically rehashing the plot in that of a group of unlikely misfits banding together for the sole purpose of surviving the vampire onslaught. The main problem is, when comparing the two films, none of the characters here had any real substantial essence. Five minutes after the movie is over, you'll begin to forget them. What you probably won't forget is the excessive amount of disgusting scenes, some involving the various vampires slurping blood off the floors in an exaggerated fashion. There's one particularly lovely sequence when Braga's character actually regurgitates blood from one of the victims for another vampire to taste. I generally don't mind the gory stuff, but this just seemed, pardon the pun, particularly tasteless and unnecessary. It was almost like the filmmakers knew they couldn't match various aspects from the first film (solid character development, interesting and viable storyline, etc.), so they decided to make their film memorable by grossing everyone out. As I said the story does somewhat resemble the first film, but what's really missing is any real interest in the characters only because we never really get to know any of them. There didn't really seem to be any true lead characters as the story often traded off focus from one to another. As far as this being a prequel, there wasn't much to that...I was hoping for a bit more background to the story, how the vampires came to be, and how they settled where they did, etc., but none of that is offered up. Santanico Pandemonium (played by Salma Hayek in the first movie) is brought up, but only in the sense of how she came to reside at the inn/bar, and not much else. As far as the acting goes, it was mainly so-so, but only because no one really had a chance to perform much given the script. The one character I didn't care at all was that played by Orlando Jones as a wayward brush salesman who later becomes a vampire, and an annoying one at that. One thing that always puzzled me with regards to the inn/bar...how does such an establishment continue to thrive given the fact those who run it are always eating its patrons? It would seem to me after awhile word would get out, and customer traffic would drop off...oh well. One thing I did learn from this film is that vampires whores in the period just after the American Civil War sported G-strings, an undergarment I would have attributed more to modern times. While there may not be much of an actual story here, director Pesce does keep things moving along, the wheels greased by copious amounts of blood. The special effects, particularly those involving the vampires, aren't up to par of the first film, but a good deal better than those featured in the second movie. All in all this wasn't a terrible film, but it could have been a lot better had they trimmed a number of characters and focused more tightly on those who remained (as it is there's about four different plot lines floating around, none of them ever really amounting to much). There is a decent amount of nekkidness in the film (none featuring the main actresses), along with a few really disgusting, often blood-soaked sequences (one involving the removal of a vampire's gonasticles, which wasn't so much bloody but fairly disgusting), so viewers with tender sensibilities should stay away.

The film, presented in widescreen (1.85:1) format, enhanced for 16X9 TVs, looks clean, and the Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround audio comes through well. The only extras included on the DVD are a deleted scene, along with recommendations for other Dimension DVD releases.

Cookieman108

If you're ever down old Mexico way and you stop off at a place called La Tetilla del Diablo, avoid leaving your horses with the grubby stable boy named Nano, as he seems to have a nasty habit of eating them.

Keep in mind this is a direct to video title and the third film in the Dusk Till Dawn trilogy. Now right off the bat that should tell you alot. Now with that said I have to put in a good word for the film because it is thorougly entertaining from beginning to end...A guilty pleasure to be sure. Do not be fooled. This is not high art and not even the best of either Rodriguez or Tarantino's work. But the film does stand on it's own as low budget entertainment ventures go and I highly recommend it. The second is just as good as well. Tons of action and gore. If you like this you should also seek out Legend of Phantom Rider a really oddity to be sure, but also quite surprising and entertaining.

This part 3 is very similar to part one. Bad guys who rob and kill innocent people get stranded into a vampire-infested bar. The female vampires are beautiful and there are a couple of scenes which contain nudity!

I had also seen part 2 and that was very bad. The story was boring and was nothing like the original FDTD.