Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

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

margielove I have found this film to be a true 'cult' movie, and have been bemused by the number of reviewers who have said that the chemistry between Stoler and Fernandez was 'not explained'. It is a no-brainer that the chemistry between any 2 people is unique to them - and other people are not a privy to that chemistry. Yes Stoler is overweight and sullen and Fernandez is thuggish - but I can see how he would be attractive to some women. The direction is superb - with a feeling of claustrophobia emanating from the constant presence of Stoler's large body in the frame- and the black and white photography gives a 'noirish' presence. And if not in the frame she is always around - scheming. I had to disagree with 1 reviewer who criticised Stoler's acting as having only 2 expressions - I found her acting incredible - in particular watch her near the end when she is about to report Fernandez to the police.I also felt that some reviewers found the conning of the women inexplicable - they need to watch 'A Current affair' or its overseas equivalent- to observe how many people are conned when there is a whiff of romance in the air. I was shocked at Stoler's comment about how 'Hitler was right about you people' when as a nurse she is fired by a foreign-sounding doctor. How did THAT one get past the censors? Maybe the reason why Pauline Kael hated the film and Kastle never directed again?Trivia: When they were in Sing Sing Martha offered to donate her body to science in order to save Ray - an offer which was declined. Margaret Reines

Mr_Ectoplasma "The Honeymoon Killers" is one of those films that you want to shut off because it's so damned tenebrous, but at the same time you don't really want to look away. The thin plot follows an overweight, depressed nurse who meets her prince charming after her mother places an ad in the lonely hearts section of the local newspaper. The problem? Her smooth-talking Latin boyfriend wants to take her along for the ride on a killing spree of innocent women. Among all of the drive-in grindhouse fare to come from the late 1960s-early 1970s, "The Honeymoon Killers" may be the cream of the crop; it's not sleazy enough to be shelved among its counterparts, but it's also not sophisticated enough by most standards to be thought of as anything else. It's a remarkably ugly film in just about every sense of the word— its characters are vile, its story is downright macabre, and it has one of the most downtrodden but effective endings of any of its peers of the time period. Shirley Stoler and Tony Lo Bianco turn in ingenious performances here and have a surprising chemistry with one another. Also featured is a young Doris Roberts (beloved mother on television's "Seinfeld") as Stoler's friend. Directed by Leonard Kastle (and his only feature film), it is well-shot and takes advantage of its stark black-and-white photography to create effective mood and make even daylight scenes potential threats. Other horror films of the era that feature similar use of photography (Herk Harvey's "Carnival of Souls" comes to mind) may have done so more effectively, but what the photography really bolsters in this film are its bleak depictions of violence. The murder scenes in the film are tonally flat, and that may be why they are so shocking. There is no dramatic cue music, no thunderstorms outside, no killer with a knife— just silence, screaming, and the thwack of a hammer against the skull. Released in the wake of Charles Manson, it's not surprising that "The Honeymoon Killers" was relegated to the drive-in circuit, and in some regard it deserved to be there; at the same time, it had the chops to be playing at art house theaters as well. Its straight-talking documentary style strips the film of any and all potential variation in tone, but its flatness is part of what makes it so appalling and so realistic. It's gritty and expressionless, but still masterfully done and fraught with emotion. It's a remarkably well-made film, but it's so direct that it at times feels dangerous to watch; the fact that it's based on an actual killing spree only amplifies the sentiment. 9/10.

dougdoepke Chubby ex-nurse Martha Beck over-eats and gets confused as she and gigolo boyfriend Ray Fernandez murder their way across the Northeast.No doubt about it, the movie's a sleezeball masterpiece. There's maybe one likable character in the whole hundred-minutes-- a prison guard, of all people, and she has maybe all of five lines. The rest are either slimy (Ray), monstrous (Martha) or pathetic (the victims). Only an indie production would dare combine such ugly photography with such a succession of dismal characters. But, for a real shudder, imagine how a Hollywood studio would have prettified the same movie.Nonetheless, the sleeze has genuine style behind it, along with two tacky Oscars for the leads. As Ray, Lo Bianco exudes more oily charm than a BP platform, while a stretched-out Martha (Stoler) resembles nothing less than a beached whale. Just the thought of the two of them clinching is enough to sound an environmental alarm. And the fact that the kinkiest things turn them on makes the picture even worse and not even their "mad love" helps.I don't know how many movie details are based on fact, but two of the murder scenes are genuinely ugly. And the fact that it's nurse Martha, not the squeamish Ray, who handles the messes says a lot about gender equality. Most chilling to me, is the fact that these two psychos merrily bludgeon, shoot, and poison their way from one place to the next with nary a police siren in sight. It's almost like they're planning a vacation itinerary from one murder site to the next. In fact, it's a betrayed Martha who finally puts a stop to things. Anyhow, no movie I know makes crime and murder any more sordid than this one. And in my little book, that's a genuine achievement. Plus, I think the movie changed my mind about the merits of capital punishment.

PaulyC This film, originally titled "Dear Martha" suffers a little for its low budget but ends up being a decent movie. The bad sound which at times makes it difficult to understand the dialog might turn you off at first but if you stick with it, it stops being so distracting. What I liked about the film is that the movie stuck a lot to actual facts of the true story. It is heavily rumored that this couple the story is based on killed a lot more then two people but the film doesn't speculate anything and only shows the two confirmed killings. This is the story of Martha Beck, a lonely, moody nurse, who joins a "lonely hearts club" where lonely people write to each other. Well, soon she receives letters from Ray Fernandez, a charming con- man. They meet, she falls in love with him, and he robs her and leaves. She tracks him down and is so lonely, she convinces him she will help con people as long as they marry one day. They eventually become a team where she pretends to be his sister while he cons money out of lonely women. Martin Scorsese was hired to direct but was replaced after he was taking way too long with each shot and the director feared they would go over budget. That budget was $150,000 which even in 1969 was not a lot to make a movie. Shirley Stoler and Tony Lobianco as the twisted couple are very well cast as well as a small role by a young Doris Roberts who would later play the mom in "Everybody loves Raymond". Good Stuff!