Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

MusicChat It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.

Cujo108 Notorious cult item that has to do with a Manson-like cult leader and his bevy of lovely women who do his bidding. They kill a bunch of people before finally targeting a pregnant actress and her rich boyfriend.Aside from that main storyline, there's also a tacked on ending that was falsely advertised to have been real snuff footage. The gore doesn't even look realistic though, especially the snipping off of a finger. No question about it, this is a bad movie. It's also pretty aimless, and there's a ridiculously overlong parade scene that made me want to hit the fast-forward, though I resisted. There is admittedly some fun to be had, as much of the film is really cheesy with some elements that you can't help but laugh at, not the least of which is the dubbing. Other than the cheese, the only other thing I liked about this movie was the presence of cult actress/director Roberta Findlay as one of the cult followers. I've always had the hots for her, so seeing her here or in any other film is always a pleasure.My praise for "Snuff" stops there, however. Most will flat-out hate it, and frankly, I can't blame them.

happyendingrocks Any glutton who loves awful movies has sat through dozens of inherently unwatchable films in the hopes of finding the rare beast that is both completely un-viewable and completely awesome at the same time. While Snuff leans more ardently toward the former, the current DVD presentation of this film helps this deservedly obscure classic drift a bit toward the latter.Let's clarify that this film wasn't intended to be passed off as an actual "snuff" film. If such a genre truly existed, which we won't debate here since we're clearly talking about a film that is NOT a "snuff" movie, chances are it would look a bit more like the footage hinted at in Mute Witness or 8mm than a carefully edited multi-camera affair with dubbed audio and generous arrays of stock Carnavale footage. If anyone ever truly believed that filmmakers murdered someone on camera and surrounded that footage with a pseudo-story about biker chicks who kill random people in surprisingly un-bloody ways, somehow found a way to bypass all of those dicey regulations concerning murder and its illegalites, and found a distributor to get a theatrical release for said footage... Seriously, no one did. I promise you.Yes, this movie is tedious, far too long, and so ineptly made that I can not find a single reason to recommend it. To normal people, that is. However, if you actually know what this film is, and still have any interest in seeing it, then you kind of need to, because it is as wretched an example of film-making as you could ever hope to encounter. Scene after scene, it is a shining an example of crappy C-grade schlock. But, you know, some of us really love crappy C-grade schlock.We don't want good dubbing, quality special effects, or actors who had heard of the phenomenon of "acting" before the cameras were turned on them. We aren't concerned with continuity, character development, or coherent story structure. We simply want to spend 80 minutes of our life watching something that vaguely resembles a film, yet ends up being an hour and twenty minute exercise in incredulity that forces us to question what's wrong with us for enjoying something that is clearly so un-enjoyable.This film is a joke. And one would suspect that the film-makers knew this. Now, the reason that Snuff is awesome is that not only did a piece of unwatchable trash like this gain some level of infamy, but 30 years later, there is a reasonably intelligent person sitting at their computer typing this missive at 3:33 in the morning, and another one reading said missive because they have yet to view this film.Ignore what you've heard about the grand guignol finale of this film, because it truly is a disturbing bit of nastiness. The fact that it follows such a laughably bad precursor is probably the point of this entire affair. And kudos to Blue Underground for presenting this film as they did, in a package without cover art, synopsis, or special features, which, contrary to the numerous criticisms of this I've read, captures this film perfectly. If you would really want a Criterion Collection pressing of Snuff, then you are clearly missing the point.Fans of terrible movies won't find one much more primitive than this (although I'd also tip my hat to The Last Slumber Party). If that sounds appealing to you, then you will thoroughly enjoy Snuff. If not, I really have to question what you thought you were in store for when you popped in a non-existent-budget South American film from the '70s called "Snuff".Do I recommend this? No, absolutely not. But do I own it and love the fact I own it? I kind of have to...

homecoming8 Naturally, with a title like this is certainly will attract people who love movies like "Saw" and 'Hostel" who have never seen it, even if this movie is more than 30 years old. Not only did it not stand the test of time, it is godawfull to begin with. The story centers around some kind of Charles Manson cult, who kill people. It even has a charismatic leader, or at least that is what we are supposed to believe. The actor in question is pretty bad, but that goes for the entire cast. This movie is really cheap and amateuristic on every level. The so-called effects are cheap with blood that looks more orange than red. It really is hard to watch this 'movie' till the end but you have to in order to find out why it is called 'snuff': in the last 5 minutes you're supposed to think that the crew of the movie really kills a girl and cuts her open. Supposed to, because even Stevie Wonder can see that it is fake and badly done. That last segment has nothing to do with the other 60 minutes. And that is the only positive thing, the running time is short. Maybe it was shocking to some (a couple of) people in it's time, but please, do not bother. You have been warned...

klaatu2 I do not want to repeat former comments about the low quality of this film but as a fan of Joe Bob Briggs I do give it one breast for 2-3 gratuitous topless scenes and 1 lacy pantie scene. Perhaps it should have been subtitled Snuff w/ a little naughty stuff. It is a good 100 min of escape and enjoyment if you accept that most films are made on a shoestring and this one did not disappoint on a dollar for dollar basis. Think Waterworld and Heaven's Gate. Movies should be seen as entertainment kind of like jokes or short stories. There are classic jokes (The Aristocrats) and classic short stories (Gift of the Magi), but bad jokes and bad short stories don't mean the genre is bad. Roll with campy humor/horror. It is one of the last vestiges of the vaudeville concepts of over the top presentations