Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

searchingforthemuses If you are interested in Stone's cinematic evolution or you like to spend time watching horror movies, this one is watchable. Using a part of body as an horror object might be an original idea at that time. Yet, I don't recommend the movie to those who prefer more realistic psychological thrillers because the script becomes more and more supernatural while watching the film and psychological explanations for actions of the hand and its owner are rather weak. I think the final 10 or 15 minutes of the film surprised many watchers at that time, but for today's horror movie admirers, it can be dull. The dialogs between Jonathan Lansdale and Bruce McGill are worth listening. I like Stone's camera angles serving to show the scene to us from the point of view of the hand, especially the one from within the grass. In addition, two women characters of the film, Stella Roche and Anne Lansdale, are powerful, independent, beautiful and interesting. I appreciate it.

peterroeder34 I just saw this on my phone and I wanted to comment on the aspect of psyche vs reality. It is really futile to discuss if the hand is "real" because it is not possible obviously for a severed hand to act like that. Having understood that one should think of the psychological aspects of the movie. I think this is a great horror movie but the description of paranoia and delusions is quite weak since we never really get a feeling that Lansdale is suffering very much whereas such mental stated would be extremely unpleasant and not funny. The plot is also extremely predictable whereas an ec horror or twilight zone would have a good twist this movie is really too long and predictable.

jayraskin We really have to hand it to Oliver Stone. As far as Killer Hands goes, nobody touches this one. We have to give it a thumbs up, even if some haters of the genre give it the middle finger. This may be a hand-me-down story, but Stone handles it with verve and a handsome style. At the risk of being the sound of one hand clapping, I have say to say that Stone doesn't pull any punches and comes up with a gripping story.Seriously, this is about as good as an above average Stephen King movie. It has an interesting central characters and a nice supporting cast. The direction and action is fine.Note, ten year old Kara Hobel played in "Mommy Dearest" the same year she played in this movie. She was a hell of a brave kid to take on two such scary roles.I would compare this film with Brian DePalma's "Dressed to Kill" which also starred Caine and came out nine months earlier. Both are competent low budget horror films that delivers the chills, but sound ridiculous and dumb when you try to describe the plot afterward.You wouldn't hand out any academy awards for this, but anybody who likes good, solid thrillers shouldn't keep their hands off.

disdressed12 this movie kinda reminded me of the classic short story The Monkey's Paw,only it isn't as good.it's too long for one thing,and too slow.the concept is interesting,but to me the execution of it goes wrong somewhere.i did find it interesting that Oliver Stone wrote the screenplay and directed the movie.there is nothing political about the movie.this doesn't mean the movie is good of course,but it is an interesting aside,nonetheless.Michael Caine is the lead,and and does an OK job,but the material is not really compelling or even mildly interesting.i watched it for awhile and got bored,so i started talking on the phone with a friend while i continued watching halfheartedly.having said all that,i don't think it is an awful movie,it's just not very interesting.by the way,this movie is part of the Twisted terror Collection,and is also contained in the box set(along with five other titles)of the same name.anyway,my vote for the hand is a 4/10