Featured Audience Ratings

• Jeff "

  
  Every horror sequel tries to improve on the original somehow, they try to do something totally new and fresh, something that hasn't been done before. Well for the third entry, they definitely tried something different alright. But the question is do they pull it off? Nope they… More
  Every horror sequel tries to improve on the original somehow, they try to do something totally new and fresh, something that hasn't been done before. Well for the third entry, they definitely tried something different alright. But the question is do they pull it off? Nope they don't, this film is an insult to the first film in the trilogy, and took n interesting idea and twisted it into something totally bland with no soul, and this ends up being a terrible film with nothing new to offer despite its new take set in 1800's. The idea was good, but the direction was poorly executed and thus this film never really does anything gbreat, and ends up being a terrible mediocre third entry in a tired outr series. The original didn't need sequel, it was a better stand alone film on it's own.

• Dean M

  
  A prequel to Robert Rodriguez' great 1996's <i>From Dusk Till Dawn</i> is an entertaining, but pretty silly flick and nothing near the original, but a lot better than the earlier sequel <i>From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money</i>. This movie is… More
  A prequel to Robert Rodriguez' great 1996's <i>From Dusk Till Dawn</i> is an entertaining, but pretty silly flick and nothing near the original, but a lot better than the earlier sequel <i>From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money</i>. This movie is actually an acceptable prequel to the original. It is obvious that the whorehouse in the desert is the future 'Titty Twister', only almost a century earlier. Michael Parks plays the lead very good, Marco Leonardi and Tamuera Morrison are believable enough in their roles and Rebecca Gayheart and Ara Celi are eye candy. The cast furthermore contains Danny Trejo, who was in <i>From Dusk Till Dawn</i> sequels. The amount of violence and gore is once again pretty high, and keeps the viewer entertained.

• Derek D

  
  Vampires and Danny Trejo. No surprises here for this piece of shit. An embarrassment for Quentin and Rob, though they only produced it. But still...THEY WILL BURN IN HELL FOR EVEN GREEN-LIGHTING THIS TRASH!!!

• Anthony L

  
  Not as good as 1 & 2 but its still a lot of fun! Park's steals the show somewhat and Jones's brief part is also very entertaining.

• Luke B

  
  A nice spin for the third in the series. We go out west and it works a treat. Luckily a lot of the action takes us back to the Titty Twister but again it fails to explain the big temple thing the bar sits atop. Some fun and goofy moments, such as the vampire snake thingy and… More
  A nice spin for the third in the series. We go out west and it works a treat. Luckily a lot of the action takes us back to the Titty Twister but again it fails to explain the big temple thing the bar sits atop. Some fun and goofy moments, such as the vampire snake thingy and tentacles. It tries to play the vampire parts off as a twist, like the first film, but of course we all know where it is going and just wish it would hurry up. It's main crime is being to similar to the original. Luckily we have Michael Parks for some excellent acting chops.

• JY S

  
  The first was good. The second was better. This one was just plain mediocre.<p>The story isn't as good as the first, but it is better than the second and since this movie is a prequel to the first two it actually felt like a western for the first half before switching to… More
  The first was good. The second was better. This one was just plain mediocre.<p>The story isn't as good as the first, but it is better than the second and since this movie is a prequel to the first two it actually felt like a western for the first half before switching to vampire mode in the second. One thing about this film though was that it was really predictable. Most likely since I've seen the first two films a bunch of times. I also felt that there was just a bit too much characters that they tried to incorporate into this film. This is what made the first part of the movie slow and boring. They were trying to build up each of the characters, which is a good idea, but it just dragged a little too much.</p><p>The acting isn't too bad. I enjoyed Michael Parks' character and Ara Celi and Rebecca Gayheart are as beautiful as can be. Orlando Jones on the other hand really felt out of place in this film. It felt like they just threw him in for friends sake. In case you're wondering, Danny Trejo is in this film.</p><p>The action, like the first two, is held till the end and unlike the second, it goes back to a handful of people escaping from a horde of vampires. The action wasn't as good as the first two either. Most of the time it was just the characters fighting with each other. The gore on the other hand is on par with the first two. You have stabbings and feedings all over the second half of the film.</p><p>Overall, this wasn't as good as the first two and maybe this is a sign to leave the series as it is and not make anymore. If your in the mood for a vampire tale there are MANY other movies to quench you blood thirst.

• Dann M

  
  From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter attempts to return the series back to its roots. In this prequel, a group of outlaws and other wary travels take shelter at shady Mexican cantina that turns out to be a vampire lair. Unfortunately this installment makes all same… More
  From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter attempts to return the series back to its roots. In this prequel, a group of outlaws and other wary travels take shelter at shady Mexican cantina that turns out to be a vampire lair. Unfortunately this installment makes all same mistakes as the original, and then some. But, it doesn't have any strong acting talent or witty dialog to offset the weak material. So while From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter may deliver on the gore and the action, the inept story and bland performances bring it down.

• Kevin M

  
  Sadly, this one isn't a good kind of bad, but just flat-lines completely. There's only one scene in this pointless prequel that was good, and that was a scene that was so dumb it was funny. A woman gets turned into a vampire, and her voice becomes unnaturally deep. A man… More
  Sadly, this one isn't a good kind of bad, but just flat-lines completely. There's only one scene in this pointless prequel that was good, and that was a scene that was so dumb it was funny. A woman gets turned into a vampire, and her voice becomes unnaturally deep. A man puts a bible in her face and she throws up all over it and then calls the man a c*** sucker in her deep voice. Other than that, a complete was of time and money.

• Leo L

  
  Better than the second, simply because this movie is the tale of the rise of Santanico Pandemonium.

• Chad R

  
  Not even Rebecca Gayheart could help this shitpile

Read all 10 featured audience ratings