Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

estebansito Man oh man, some of these reviewers are toxic. Instead of giving a review of the movie, some decided to stick their head up their butt and let their pseudo-political bull crap, and communist psycho-babble bias, to explain this movie. I don't care if YOU THINK this some parable to show the "the evil of capitalism." What a joke; you people make me sick! Typical projection of your nasty beliefs to explain everything. Now on the movie.... I really liked this one; it was fun, gory, entertaining, and I was captivated by the way Ted Levine talks; it can be funny at times. Ted did good as the lone, frustrated cop trying to save the day. Robert Englund sure did a good job as the villain too, really creepy the way he looked. The story was entertaining because it takes an unexpected turn at the supernatural. I'd recommended this to Stephen kings fans or horror fans.

LeonLouisRicci Director Tobe Hooper rode the Cross-Over success of the Drive-In/Grind-House release of "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" (1974) into a Cult Awareness that eventually went Mainstream and managed to Mangle a Career Opportunity with a Descent into Oblivion, Ridicule, and just plain Bad Movie Making.He rode that Beaten Dead Horse for over Two Decades until it was Obvious the Man was a "One Trick Pony". He then Faded to Black as "The End" was Inevitable.This Movie is Not a Pretty Sight. Everything is Ugly, Extremely Ugly, it seems to be Ugly for No other Reason then to be Ugly. The Clueless Notion that because it's a Gore-Fest it has to Look Ugly, Sweaty, and Unattractive with all aspects being Unappealing.The Characters (starring Robert Englund and Ted Levine) the Sets, the God-Awful Acting, the Costumes are all Unappealing. Therefore when the Money Shots (the horrific gore and slaughter) are On Screen, there is No Contrast. Nothing to Differentiate from the Proceedings. It's just more Ugliness among the Ugliness.Adapted from a Stephen King Short Story, the Movie Fails the Paranormal, Demon Possession, Occult Angle and is Muddled and Misses the Main Message( soul-less capitalism and industrial evil) by a Mile.The Budget makes it all Appear Slick and Professional, but the End Result is a Mess of Ugliness that Appears Slick and Professional. One More Mangled Movie made on the Long and Winding Downward Spiral of Tobe Hooper. What a Waste.

Max Kämmerer How do you make a horror movie about an industrial laundry machine? Well, they kinda did it alright. Now this movie is not a masterpiece by any means, but it's watchable, even entertaining. The effects are good, except maybe the CGI for the Mangler at the end. The acting is solid at times, but admittedly sub-par at others. I enjoyed the surreal ending with the Mangler (but not the one were it's revealed what happens after the horror in the town stops).The worst part of the movie is Hunton's friend the occultist, especially when he keeps talking about "virgin's blood". Robert Englund is also not appealing as Gartley, aka pirate Mr Burns, but that's mostly because the character he has to work with is ludicrous. I also had a hard time keeping Sherry and Sue apart with their curly hair. The machine itself, the Mangler, is pretty horrifying looking with all its gears and steam. The exorcism at the end is weird - them hysterically throwing sacred objects and Bible verses at the machine. And one last thing: are the police in this movie wearing old Nazi uniforms?

Jonny_Numb A 3.0? Really? Have horror fans suddenly come down with a case of collective amnesia in the facts in the case of Tobe Hooper? The same director whose signature traits include a smattering of extreme gore garnished with dark humor? The man who made one of the most influential, landmark films of the 1970s ("The Texas Chainsaw Massacre")? I mean, granted, Hooper's career has been frustratingly inconsistent overall, but "The Mangler"--easily one of his most maligned works--is an unsung gem that suggests his tongue was planted firmly in cheek, but nobody really noticed. While the concept alone has "disaster" written all over it (a feature-film rendering of a Stephen King short story), what Hooper does with (and to) "The Mangler" is, really, what should have been done with "Graveyard Shift": he tears into the story with the veracity of a mental patient chewing the head off a rag-doll, elevating the absurdist elements to their breaking point, filling the film with (un)intentional humor to counteract the bloodletting, and fleshing out the characters and concept into a satisfying marriage of B-movie bliss. The plot? It's all about an anachronistic laundry facility where an ugly beast of a steam press starts folding the employees into bloody pulp; a pill-popping, chain-smoking local cop (Ted Levine) and his wiccan brother-in-law (Daniel Matmor) suspect foul play on the part of the disabled owner (Robert Englund, once again under a heavy latex mask), but the real reason is much more sinister (Hooper does succeed in making a compelling argument for the ridiculous explanation). While I haven't read King's short story, I will say that the script (by Hooper, Stephen Brooks, and Peter Welbeck) efficiently captures the quirky, small-town mannerisms of his characters, juxtaposed against evil spawned out of the banal territory of Everyday Life. While Hooper is unable to sustain the tricky balance between terror and dark humor that has made "Texas Chainsaw" so endearing, he ultimately transforms "The Mangler" into a sturdy, clean-burning B movie, buoyed by fantastic performances by Englund and especially Levine (who seems to be operating under the influence of a perpetual hangover).