El Chupacabra

Boyle Heights, Los Angeles: legendary South American goat-sucking vampire, El Chupacabra, is on the loose, feeding on anyone unlucky enough to cross its path. Animal control officer Navarro (Eric Alegria) and Chupacabra expert/author Starlina Divide (Elina Madison) attempt to track down the creature, but find their progress hampered by a pair of dumb cops, money hungry locals keen to capture the beast for a fat reward, and a couple of nefarious scientists who want the monster for their experiments.

Stinking higher than a two-week-old taco, El Chupacabra is an incredibly bad horror movie that even fans of incredibly bad horror movies might struggle to sit through. With its dreadful script, awful direction (by not one, but two talentless hacks—Brennon Jones and Paul Wynne), laughable dialogue, and some of the worst acting this side of a porn flick, I recommend this film about as much as I do drinking the tap water in Mexico.

As Navarro and Starlina proceed with their investigations, viewers are treated to some incredibly weak gore, the worst designed book jacket in history, the most unconvincing dead person I've seen since the blinking corpse in Dr. Butcher MD, and a high-tech computerised security system consisting of a keyboard nailed to a post.

To be fair, for a guy in a rubber suit, the monster itself is fairly creepy (hairy, with big claws, and a face like a particularly ugly bat), but its appearances are few and far between, with more screen time spent on the tedious trials and tribulations of whiney Officer Navarro than on the killer antics of the titular creature (just how many times is it necessary to see Navarro handing in paperwork to his bitchy boss?).

If, like me, you make the mistake of wasting your hard-earned cash on this dreadful latino bilge (in my case, it was a whole 50p), consider using the disc as a coaster for your tequila rather than actually watching it.

I rented this movie in hope of an at least semi interesting creature feature. What it turned out to be was a badly done joke. This movie really stank, the acting was terrible with the main actor putting obvious breaks in between all his lines because he obviously can't remember his lines. The lighting and film making

are horrible and above all the script is possibly the worst one I have ever heard. The monster though scary looking were hardly worth the watching. There were

a lot of things that could have been built on but never were. Over all this is a major zero movie and not even worth the time I spent watching it. Thankfully I didn't pay to see it!

This movie is a complete and utter waste of time, one of the worst films I've ever seen. And coming from me, that is definitely saying something. In fact, I wish I could have given it negative stars instead of just rating it as a pathetic one-star awful.

When I rented this movie, I had an open mind. I find the legend of the chupacabra interesting and I have a fondness for cheesy horror flicks. But I draw the line at this one.

The acting sucked. The lead male gives one of the worst performances ever, looking and sounding unnatural as he delivers his poorly written lines. The lead female gives a slightly more palatable performance, but that really doesn't take much.

The chupacabra... well, considering how low budget this movie must have been, the creature was tolerable. It does, however, look exactly like someone in a mask and body suit. The mask is fairly detailed and might look cool in person, but not so on screen.

Speaking of on screen, you'd think they could have at least used a better camera. It looks like it was shot with a camcorder for crying out loud. Not a very good one, either.

I don't know what whoever wrote this abomination was thinking. The dialog sucks and just... I can't describe what I feel about it. At least not without getting in trouble with the site.

My advice? Avoid this at all costs. It's just not worth it. If it comes on TV and you have nothing else to do or watch, then *find* something else to do or watch. Read a book, listen to music, *anything.* Just don't subject yourself to this. If you do, you cannot say you weren't warned. And for Lord and Lady's sake, don't rent this sucker. It is not worth it, even if you get the chance to rent it for fifty cents. Trust me, I know.

My God, is this movie bad! When will the super-talented folks at York Entertainment realize that sooner or later viewers will get wise to their product and not be fooled by their better than average DVD box covers? Sure the "film" was shot in 35mm but the cinematography is average at best and the "acting" -- well, it's another non-Screen Actors Guild horrorama in the casting department. Too many of these ultra-low budget horror films are made today with non-SAG actors because the cheapo production companies don't want to pay actor residuals and the result is 70 minutes of unwatchable filler.

The screenplay seems to have been written by blind-folded, trained chimps and the resulting pages put together at random. On the only plus side, the "Chupacabra" monster suit is decent and I'm sure the makeup effects guy did the best he could do with the tiny budget he probably had. I dare you to watch this (or ANY of York's recent releases) without fast- forwarding through it.

Humans are terrorized and mutilated by the title creature. Said prey consist of, among others, an animal control officer, an author, two idiot cops, three harmless gang members, a mad scientist and his henchman, as well as a homeless person.

The monster itself is obviously a guy hopping around in a monkey-man suit. At least there are no visible zippers.

EL CHUPACABRA contains plenty of blood, intestines, and other carnage. However, it lacks thrills, suspense, or an engaging story. Much can be forgiven due to the low-low budget. In spite of this, it does tend to drag on, and could cause the viewer to check the clock to see if it has stopped...