CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Paul Magne Haakonsen 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.

siderite If the first film was original, well acted and fun, the second was just fun, the third is none of the above. Set in the Wild West in the times of Pancho Villa, it does only one thing right: it prepares the mythos that will be used in the series, not that they knew there was going to be a series back then.It does a better job of getting elements from the original film: the unlikely band of misfits that get caught in the vampire bar, more violence and many character side stories that can keep the viewer watching. Alas, all the characters in the film are unlikable and rather badly scripted. The acting was not stellar, either, but I can't call it bad.Bottom line: a watered down version of the wonderful From Dusk Till Dawn, but without any fun in it. Taken itself way to seriously and I can only call it a boring failure.

GL84 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.

mario_c 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!