Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

ChanBot i must have seen a different film!!

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

Leofwine_draca About the only thing this Joe D'Amato-directed sleaze fest has going for it is an authentic Caribbean setting, given that it was filmed in the Dominican Republic. Otherwise it's a film entirely devoid of merit, a grubby work of pornography masquerading as a sex/horror film. The story is about a group of characters who arrive on a desert island and discover that a radioactive mutant with a penchant for raping women to death is on the prowl.Admittedly the premise sounds, well, controversial, and this could have been another ANTHROPOPHAGUS THE BEAST had the emphasis been on the horror. But it isn't. The horror elements of the film are almost entirely non-existent and only turn up in the last half an hour, although there are a few P.O.V. heavy breathing scenes in the first hour as an unseen presence watches the proceedings.Instead this is all about the sex, and D'Amato stages possibly some of the most repellent sex scenes ever. The actors and actresses are all sweaty and dirty-looking and the porno moments are about as boring as you could imagine. PORNO HOLOCAUST is the kind of film that would put people off sex, not arouse them in any way. The cast members include the hard-working Mark Shannon and big George Eastman, who also wrote what little plot and dialogue there is. D'Amato seems to be preoccupied with other stuff while directing this, leaving it a plodding and gruelling watch due to its sheer ineptitude.

gavin6942 A group of scientists head off to a tropical island to study the effects of atomic testing years earlier. The island isn't entirely deserted however -- a large solitary creature, mutated by the radiation, is waiting for them.That plot does not really explain this film. All I can say is that this film is nothing more than poor attempts at porn, with a bit of plot thrown in. You can watch the clock and literally not go more than five minutes between sex scenes. Which is great if you want to see sex scenes, but awful if you actually care about the story. It's not much of one, and in some people's opinion, not much of a porn either (though I wasn't really going to worry about that).Italian horror critic Jim Harper says director Joe D'Amato "screws it up pretty badly... the film is a mess." He sees it as a mix that destroys both elements at the same time: "This is unlikely to please fans of either horror or hardcore." Another noted horror critic, Jay Slater, agrees and does not mince words with this one, which he calls "a dismal failure". The "movie is a failure because it alienated both audiences" of sex and gore. The film "is so incompetently directed, scripted and acted that the finished movie borders on tedium and unintentional hysteria." It "is devoid of a lively plot, delirious set-pieces or funky sex." If this isn't bad enough, "the cast are uniformly sexually unattractive." What good can be said of this one? I think the film has a certain unintended humor, simply because it is unique. There have been newer attempts at horror porn, such as Doug Sakmann's "Re-Penetrator" and "XXXorcist", but those set out to be somewhat funny, whereas D'Amato actually thought he was being serious. Does the humor make it worth owning? Probably not. But you'd sure get a lot of interested people when they scour your shelf and see this one.

lazarillo This is exactly what I'd expect from trying to cross a hardcore sex movie and a horror film--a crappy horror film but a better-than-average sex flick. The plot, as it were, is heavily borrowed from D'Amato's own notorious cannibal film "Anthrophagus". A group of idiotic European tourists land on an idyllic island and are stalked a shambling monster. But D'Amato breaks up the tedium here with a lot of hardcore sex scenes. And when THAT gets tedious (which it quickly does) the monster shows up and kills off most of the cast. But, of course, a D'Amato film simply CANNOT be tedium-free so he makes the whole thing a frickin' ridiculous 110 minutes long! Some people objected to the fact that the ridiculously well-endowed "monster" is dark-skinned, but then so is half the cast. Others were offended that the giant monster dispatches most of the women with his, uh, giant monster, but frankly these scenes are pretty hard to take seriously and I doubt the biggest perverts in the world will be turned on by them. The female cast is only marginally more attractive than the monster, but I found it interesting that the prettiest girl (relatively speaking) didn't participate in any of the hardcore scenes but was willing to do the most controversial scene where she is choked to death during fellatio by the monster's obviously fake appendage (Laura Gemser did a similar thing in the companion piece to this "Erotic Nights of the Living Dead" although she was the aggressor there ). This raises the interesting question of what is more "degrading"--dark but obviously simulated fantasies like this or the exploitation of real-life private sex acts? Well, you can't stop men (or women) from fantasizing whether you ban movies or not, and fantasies, however warped, don't give real-life people real-life AIDS.I also liked that this movie was shot on film on and on island location, which regardless of its incompetence, makes it preferable to today's hardcore "product" shot on video in some producer's condo in the Valley. And as homely as some of the cast are, there's not a silicone breast in sight. In short, this movie is no more offensive, and slightly less boring, than any hardcore porno movie.

ericdetrick2002 Wow. I felt like I needed to shower off after watching this one, but maybe there were other reasons that I will leave to your imagination. I felt used and abused after wacking, I mean watching this film. Hairy chests, thick mustaches, and well, hairy everything describes this porn/horror movie, but hey, it was 1981, you can't call it "porn" in the 70s and 80s without the hair.As a horror flick, this bites. But as a piece of exploitation/porn from Italy's rich cinematic history- it definitely has a place in my library. The copy I have is in Italian with English subtitles. I wish it had the really poorly dubbed English, I think it would have added to the sleaziness factor that already existed. The only white guy who gets laid in the movie is "Mark Shannon"- he is the moustache wearing, hairy chested piece of machismo who really does try and give a performance every time he "steps up to bat". This was at the end of an era where porn producers were actually trying to make something artistic. Nothing like panning the camera from a tropical backdrop to a hairy man having "doggie-style" sex with a woman. I can't help but laugh.This is one of those movies that I pray my future wife and kids never find.