Featured Audience Ratings

• MisterYoda ?

  
  three stars

• Sophie B

  
  Yes, the acting was brilliant from Rooker and it was an involving story but it just seemed to drag and some of the performances were horrendous. There were many times when I just wanted to turn it off and at the end I felt like I had sort of wasted my time as there was no change from… More
  Yes, the acting was brilliant from Rooker and it was an involving story but it just seemed to drag and some of the performances were horrendous. There were many times when I just wanted to turn it off and at the end I felt like I had sort of wasted my time as there was no change from the start of the movie. More people were murdered and Henry just kept on doing what he did with no remorse. I'm not suggesting that Henry should have been caught or 'turned around', I just wanted more than to see him drive off with no consequences.

• Melvin W

  
  Henry: Guns are easy to get... I can make a phone call and get a gun. Anybody can get a gun, Otis.  "He's not Freddy. He's not Jason. He's real." Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is a dirty, raw and dark film. It isn't anything like the average… More
  Henry: Guns are easy to get... I can make a phone call and get a gun. Anybody can get a gun, Otis.  "He's not Freddy. He's not Jason. He's real." Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is a dirty, raw and dark film. It isn't anything like the average slasher. This wasn't made for fun and it isn't fun; it's disturbing. The film makes live an everyday life of a serial killer. The movie wasn't quite as graphic as I thought it would be, but it's still in your face. There are murders and rapes, disgusting moments and chilling moments. The movie reminds me of a more serious Man Bites Dog.  We are thrown into Henry's life. Henry has already been to jail; he killed his mother; with a knife, no with a baseball bat, or wait was it a gun. I don't know because Henry doesn't even know. That gives some pretty deep insight into the psyche of this man. He's an illiterate, who came from an abusive upbringing and he has mommy issues. He's the very description of a serial killer. He can't get close to anyone and he definitely can't love anyone.  The movie doesn't really have a plot. If I had to give it one though, I would say it's basically Henry killing and then also teaching his pal, Otis, to kill also. He also gets into a bit of a relationship with Otis' sister. That's about as deep as the movie goes plot wise, but it goes very deep into the psyche of a serial killer and puts some chilling ideas and images into the viewers mind. The last scene of this movie was one of the more chilling scenes I have seen; not because it shows us anything, but because it doesn't. It makes for a perfect ending.  Henry... isn't really a movie meant to be watched as pure entertainment or for fun. Nothing about it says, "Like me." But it is very good at what it's trying to do. In my eyes this is sort of an Anti-Slasher. All the other slashers do is have chase scenes followed by violent murders. Slashers are normally meant to not be taken seriously and try to be fun, just in a violent way. Henry... is the opposite. The point isn't to entertain and the violence isn't what it is trying to sell. It's powerful, scary stuff. People like this are roaming our streets. Real life is always scarier than a huge, supernatural, moron like Jason.

• Unknown H

  
  Now this is what low budget horror is all about people! A remorseless killer, plastic heads with corn syrup blood and senseless murder after senseless murder, with no retribution in sight! A truly amazing piece of cinema that has survived the test of time for one reason and one reason… More
  Now this is what low budget horror is all about people! A remorseless killer, plastic heads with corn syrup blood and senseless murder after senseless murder, with no retribution in sight! A truly amazing piece of cinema that has survived the test of time for one reason and one reason only - it is one of the best low budget horror movies ever made.

• Dan S

  
  An unflinching look at an emotionless serial killer, loosely based on a true story, in which director John McNaughton takes a look at a killer through detached lenses, and the result is something horrifying and truly haunting. Although it never reaches the heights of being a… More
  An unflinching look at an emotionless serial killer, loosely based on a true story, in which director John McNaughton takes a look at a killer through detached lenses, and the result is something horrifying and truly haunting. Although it never reaches the heights of being a "great" film (more dialogue and development of the relationship between Henry and Otto could have been added), this is a terrifying film experience, and it is all because of McNaughton's minimalist effort to his entire project, capitalized by a simple, scary turn from lead star Michael Rooker (his finest performance, without question). Sometimes I like movies to get inside the characters' heads and to give us more development in certain areas, and there are certain times when I felt 'Henry' needed more work. However, you have to give McNaughton credit for never overstepping his emotional bounds, and not drifting into a serial killer movie such as, say "Mr. Brooks", which goes too far into the psychological and "emotional high" element of the killing process - this one gets it just right, and it is fascinating as well as scarring.

• Michael G

  
  I haven't seen Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer in a while and maybe my priorities have shifted since the last time I've seen it, but this is a seriously skeevy movie. It also seems way more disturbing (the home invasion footage scene was particularly hard to shake) this… More
  I haven't seen Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer in a while and maybe my priorities have shifted since the last time I've seen it, but this is a seriously skeevy movie. It also seems way more disturbing (the home invasion footage scene was particularly hard to shake) this time around but despite the low budget Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is a very powerful and intensely gritty movie. A rough but very worthwhile watch.

• David L

  
  I watched this film again with a group of my friends who had never seen it Instead of the whooping, hollering and cheering that accompanied most of the other movies we watched together, Henry was met with a deathly silence. Its gritty and gripping tale was so different, so fresh, and… More
  I watched this film again with a group of my friends who had never seen it Instead of the whooping, hollering and cheering that accompanied most of the other movies we watched together, Henry was met with a deathly silence. Its gritty and gripping tale was so different, so fresh, and just so plain nasty, that my friends were lost for words. Even today, Henry still has the power to render the viewer speechless, such is the brilliance of the direction and performances in this powerful and shocking movie. Recently released from prison, murderer Henry (Michael Rooker) is earning a meagre living as a bug exterminator; in his spare time, however, he prefers to seek out bigger prey, committing a series of indiscriminate murders in a variety of grisly ways. On a night out with ex-prison-mate, and now flat-mate, Otis (Tom Towles), Henry slips into full-on murder mode, doing away with a couple of hookers, and ends up recruiting his impressionable friend as a willing accomplice to his extra-curricular activities. Between spraying roaches and teaching Otis the secrets to being a successful serial killer, Henry also forms an unlikely relationship with Otis' sister, Becky (who is staying with her brother, after leaving her violent husband). But when sexual deviant Otis takes the idea of brotherly love a little too far, Henry steps in with devastating consequences for all. Director John McNaughton shows that he means business from the very start by opening his film on a slow reveal of a naked female corpse, which has been dumped unceremoniously in some shallow water. Several gruesome bodies later (including one of a woman with a broken bottle jammed in her face) and the audience know that they're in for a rough ride. This film doesn't intend to make murder glamorous; it means to show the ugly side of killing in every nauseating detail. The result is a truly haunting experience that will stay with the viewer long after the film has finished. As the film progresses, the levels of violence escalate, and the unflinchingly graphic manner in which the depravity is captured make this one of the most harrowing studies of psychotic behaviour ever filmed. McNaughton's sparing use of his unsettling score, coupled with some particularly stylish and clever storytelling techniques (most noticeably, the ferocious 'house invasion' scene, which I believe to be a big influence the effectively sickening August Underground pseudo-snuff movies) make this a chilling character study that pulls no punches: nihilistic and disturbingly graphic, the film presents violent death without the glossy veneer that would be present in a Hollywood production.Highly Recommended

• Stella D

  
  another film i've been somewhat leery of watching given it's reputation and it is fairly disturbing. the lead actor is very good and the home invasion scene kinda made my skin crawl. well done on a very low budget. i would like to mention that this is about as… More
  another film i've been somewhat leery of watching given it's reputation and it is fairly disturbing. the lead actor is very good and the home invasion scene kinda made my skin crawl. well done on a very low budget. i would like to mention that this is about as 'true' as the blair witch project and what's even more disturbing than this film is the way law enforcement officers used henry lee to close over 600 cold cases, where evidence is now so muddled they may never be properly solved. henry lee lucas' death sentence was commuted by none other than george w. bush when it was proven he wasn't even in the same state as the woman for whose murder he was sentenced to die

• Aaron N

  
  Otis: I'd like to kill somebody. Henry: Say that again. Otis: I'd like to kill somebody. Henry: Let's me and you go for a ride, Otis Partially based on a true story, this film is an intense character study about a man, seemingly normal, who commits acts of… More
  Otis: I'd like to kill somebody. Henry: Say that again. Otis: I'd like to kill somebody. Henry: Let's me and you go for a ride, Otis Partially based on a true story, this film is an intense character study about a man, seemingly normal, who commits acts of murder on almost a weekly basis. Low budget, but finely acted by the two main leads, its creepy and effective to an extent. Michael Rooker stars as Henry, an ex-con living an average life during the day. He seems non-threatening, if a bit distant, but that only masks his true nature, a vicious serial killer. Henry shares an apartment with Otis, another ex-con, whom he was friends with in prison. Otis is basically a red neck, but seems to be living a honest life after prison. At the start, we know that Otis' sister Becky has arrived, living with the boys until she gets a new start on life, after leaving her abusive ex-husband. Upon meeting and getting to know Henry, Becky is curious and smitten with him. She wants to know more, and only believes him to be a little private, but nothing threatening. While Becky and Henry become more acquainted, Otis seems frustrated by not being able to act on any urge he may have towards his sister (did I mention the red neck thing?). One night out, the boys pick up a couple of women, but during some dirty deeds, Henry kills one of them. Otis, initially put off, soon relishes the idea of murder and begins to join in on Henry's night time activities. Made in 1986, but not released until 1989, the film sparked controversy among the ratings boards due to its brutal subject matter. Watching the film now, its not particularly brutal (even for its time) but I can understand the objection. The portrayals of murder in this film are very matter of fact. Henry does not have a showy personality. He is not funny, ironic, or a cool anti-hero. Henry's actions are simply put on screen. Many of the murders are shown after the fact, but the few that we do see are just presented straight-forward and it is cold and chilling. Rooker is very good in this role. The film, as a whole, is not great. It is low budget and the cast is made up of non-actors, which shows. The film is short, but its not made in a snappy-paced sort of way. Its certainly not the kind of movie I want to watch again. Its brutal and unapologetic, but its fueled by a strong lead performance. Henry: If you shoot someone in the head with a .45 every time you kill somebody, it becomes like your fingerprint, see? But if you strangle one, stab another, and one you cut up, and one you don't, then the police don't know what to do. They think you're four different people. What they really want, what makes their job so much easier, is pattern. What they call a modus operandi. That's Latin. Bet you didn't know any Latin, did you kid? Otis: Big fucking deal. Henry: What? Otis: Nothing. Henry: It's like a trail of shit, Otis. It's like the blood droppings from a deer you shot, and all they've got to do is follow those droppings, and pretty soon, they're going to find their deer. Otis: Why don't you use a gun? Henry: You can use a gun. I'm not saying you can't use a gun. Just don't use the same gun twice.

• Anthony L

  
  A very chilling and quite disturbing, albeit, inaccurate portrait of Henry Lee Lucas. I have to admit, it?s not as good as I'd been lead to believe but I did enjoy it, it?s very well directed and the music is ace! I just didn't like as much as, say, Maniac! Interesting but… More
  A very chilling and quite disturbing, albeit, inaccurate portrait of Henry Lee Lucas. I have to admit, it?s not as good as I'd been lead to believe but I did enjoy it, it?s very well directed and the music is ace! I just didn't like as much as, say, Maniac! Interesting but uncomfortable viewing.

• Robert C

  
  All things considered, a decent film.

• Tim S

  
  Call it a slasher film, call it a character study film or call it a horror film, because no matter what you call it, you can't deny that Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer is one of the most shocking and disturbing movies to ever be committed to celluloid. Michael Rooker gives… More
  Call it a slasher film, call it a character study film or call it a horror film, because no matter what you call it, you can't deny that Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer is one of the most shocking and disturbing movies to ever be committed to celluloid. Michael Rooker gives an astonishing and startlingly real performance as the enigmatic Henry, a serial killer who is relentless and terrifying. He's somehow relatable yet a complete maniac that it haunts you to know him so personally. The film was shot on 16mm and looks gritty and downbeat, giving the movie a really real feeling that only plays into it's own hyper-reality. It's dark and dirty most of the time and doesn't spend time trying look good, which gives it the edge it needs. The score is dated by the cheesy 80's synthesizer, but it still gives the character his dark and disturbing theme, which only enhances his character. The gore level of this movie is not quite what you'd expect. There are some truly grisly and gory shots in the film, but overall, not enough to garner the attention it received at the time. My only complaint about the film would be it's length during certain scenes, which feel tiresome and long. A long slow build-up to each following scene in some cases feels burdensome, particularly the scene where Otis and Henry watch the tape of the family massacre. I don't think cuts should have been made because of the disturbing images, but they should have been made to pick up the pace a bit. In this film, we don't see a lot of what Henry does. In his most grisly acts, we are only shown the aftermath of what Henry does to his victims, with the sounds of their final moments. I found this infinitely MORE successful than actually showing what he does, so the tape of the family being murdered just seemed out of place to me when most of the time we don't see him doing these terrible things. So some trims here and there could have helped that sense of mystery, rather than show it. Be forewarned though, this WILL startle you and probably haunt you for a while after you see it. It certainly did in my case. It's absolutely honest and unapolegetic approach is maniacal and unflinching, never stopping for a moment to self-analyze what it is, only show it. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth...and I like that.

• Cassandra M

  
  For these type of serial killer movies you never need a budget worth millions of dollars to let it work out. Often a shoe-string budget work out the best for this type its movies, because it contributes to the movie its unpleasant atmosphere. You can say that in these type of movies… More
  For these type of serial killer movies you never need a budget worth millions of dollars to let it work out. Often a shoe-string budget work out the best for this type its movies, because it contributes to the movie its unpleasant atmosphere. You can say that in these type of movies the amateurism and simplicity all adds to the creativity and overall effectiveness of the movie. The best known example of this is the original first "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre", from 1978. This movie is far less known and also isn't blessed with such a great title. The title of this movie somewhat sounds something like a based on true-events TV movie, without any graphic images. But don't be fooled, for "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" is filled with graphic violence and other disturbing moments. The movie feels and breaths an '70's atmosphere. Also the overall style of the movie is very '70's like, in a gritty, dark and very straightforward type of way. It also of course helps that the movie at times uses 'home-video' movie, in which we get to see the killings/rapes from the perpetrators perspective alone. It isn't a movie that has a true beginning or ending, in terms of having a conclusion that puts an end to things. It has instead now got one of the best possible endings thinkable, that is shocking, unexpected and satisfying even though it doesn't put a definitive end to things. The real story of Henry Lee Lucas is even more shocking and disturbing but also a lot longer and more complicated of course. It's far too much to put in a movie and then prevent it from getting ever overlong or starts repeating itself and remain original. This movie obviously had to make some choices and even decided to not only exclude a lot but also to change and add certain elements, which all strengthens the story in this case. The story might seem very simple at first sight now but is's perhaps the very same simplicity that makes the movie so great- and let things work out in it so effectively. It makes some great choices with its story and build up, that seem simple but are all thought out and constructed cleverly. The movie features the then still unknown Michael Rooker in one of his earliest roles. None of the actors are that impressive within this movie, which gives Michael Rooker all the more room to shine in his role. He plays a great two faced character, that can be both kind and sort of shy as well as ruthless. He does this very convincingly within the movie. But it are the graphic killings within the movie that makes this a really watchable one. It doesn't show all the killings how they happened but only just a few, which makes the impact of them work out all the more and adds to the reason why this movie is regarded by many as one of the most shocking one's. A great and effectively shocking movie within its genre.

• Randy T

  
  Hard core. This film takes you into Henry's world in a way you won't soon forget. Dark and disturbing.

• _kelly .

  
  Frightening for its realism, tight characterization, solid dialogue, and shocking shots, this is a superior examination of serial murders, and not a genre film, but a legitimate drama with psychotic twists.<br/><br/>"So Fucked Up" highlight:<br/>the… More
  Frightening for its realism, tight characterization, solid dialogue, and shocking shots, this is a superior examination of serial murders, and not a genre film, but a legitimate drama with psychotic twists.<br/><br/>"So Fucked Up" highlight:<br/>the conclusion

• Lady D

  
  Quite a gruesome and disturbing film in it's day, possibly a film that's a little more acceptable in today's standards.

• Emily A

  
  I don't know about this one. The violence and coldness that you're privy to as an audience gets a little awkward after a while and I found myself wondering if there was anything more to this movie. Turns out there isn't. This kind of got gratuitous without ever making a… More
  I don't know about this one. The violence and coldness that you're privy to as an audience gets a little awkward after a while and I found myself wondering if there was anything more to this movie. Turns out there isn't. This kind of got gratuitous without ever making a point. Disappointing.

• A.D. V

  
  Too disturbing to rate but since I have to...

• Cindy I

  
  A day in the life of a serial killer. Disturbing because it was so matter-of-fact. No hockey masks or chain saws or deformed features. Just a guy who killed people. Based of the life of Henry Lee Lucas, who claimed to have killed hundreds, then recanted. A very well-done film.

• xGary X

  
  A seedy and disturbing film that does exactly what is says on the tin. Nowhere near as sensationalist as you might expect, Rooker's character is a study of a man with no moral concept of what he does because of his total inability to deal with intimacy and the emotions it… More
  A seedy and disturbing film that does exactly what is says on the tin. Nowhere near as sensationalist as you might expect, Rooker's character is a study of a man with no moral concept of what he does because of his total inability to deal with intimacy and the emotions it provokes. Never has a simple shot of something so innocent looking as a suitcase seemed so loaded and downright frightening.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings