User reviews

One of Wes Craven's best, "Serpent and the Rainbow" is as much a psychological thriller as a horror movie. Some horror fans may find it too slow (it takes its sweet time to come to a climax) but it's worth it... the journey is entertaining and interesting. This is a polished, professionally filmed movie with higher production values than the average for its genre.

I've never seen a film before that went quite so in-depth into the subject of voodoo. Filmed on location in Haiti, this movie goes into a lot of detail about various voodoo practices and introduces the voodoo versions of the good and evil magician, the houngon and the bocor. If you have any interest at all in this subject matter (or the supernatural in general), I recommend the movie on that basis alone.

Acting is uniformly solid throughout, if nothing really outstanding. We do not come to care very deeply about these characters, so their trials, tribulations and deaths do not bother us much... but Craven's attention to detail really shows, and there isn't a moment of this movie that lacks entertainment value. 7/10.

The best thing about "The Serpent and the Rainbow" is probably the topic it covers: Not known to the general public (including me, until I watched the film and researched the subject a little more afterwards), the so-called zombies, which legend has it that they are people who were condemned by sorcerers to become living deads, are in fact nothing more than the victims of a special powder thrown to them, whose active ingredient is a substance which is now well-known by scientists worldwide. This substance has the effect of rendering the person in a dead-like state (no ostensible breathing, moving, etc.), while his brain is still lively (which means that the horrified person is even able to understand what surrounds him, without being able to do anything about it); in such cases, an inexperienced doctor claims the person deceased, and he is then put into a grave. When the effect of this substance starts to diminish after 12-24 hours, the sorcerer is usually there to undig the completely shocked and shattered person, convincing him that he is now his zombie-slave.

The movie is based on a true story by a scientist (Pullman) who went to Haiti, a country were such practices were rife, in order to get his hands on this substance and provide it to his employer, a pharmaceutical company, in order to analyze it and use it as an anaesthetic. In his quest he was assisted by a female local psychiatrist (Tyson), who treated several "zombified" people. However, he soon realized that things were much more complicated than that, as the police chief (Mokae), who used this zombie-trick as one of his suppression tools, was quite unhappy with this intrusion.

Although based on a very interesting story, the movie goes a bit far and becomes a typical horror film, full of black magic, terrifying visions, etc. In my opinion, it would be much better if the plot sticked to the basics, as from some point onwards everything (and especially the ending) becomes too unconvincing.

The cast does a fair job, despite the fact that it includes actors not widely known. The make-up and scenery produce and impressive atmosphere, traveling the viewer to the mystifying secrets of Haiti.

Grade: 7/10.

A researcher (Bill Pullman) goes to Haiti in order to find a "zombie drug" that can give someone the appearance of death, when in actuality their body is at its lowest functioning. They may not breathe, or bleed, but they are not truly dead. The researcher and the company he works for hope to use it as an anesthetic.

The film started as a book of the same name by anthropologist Wade Davis, who is probably the world's authority on voodoo and zombies. Discussions were made to have Peter Weir direct and/or Mel Gibson star, but obviously this never happened. The script found its way to Wes Craven, and Bill Pullman (at that point a young rising star) was given the lead.

Author Wade Davis was on set from the very beginning and wanted to make the best film he could regardless of who the director would be. He notoriously did not like the way it went, and Bill Pullman says that both he (Pullman) and Wes Craven were disappointed, too, because they wanted a more serious angle and the studio (Universal) was pushing for a horror story. In retrospect, Davis seems to have become more accepting of the film and does not hold it against Craven. In fact, he praises many of the scenes for their authenticity, especially in comparison to other attempts at making voodoo films.

The filming took place throughout 1987, and the political tensions were getting nasty in Haiti. Dictator Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier becomes part of the plot, which makes this not just an anthropological horror film, but a political one, too. If people are able to look past the horror aspects, there is actually an important cultural document here.

While the film is quite interesting for a variety of reasons, it starts off slow, and does not really pick up until the second half. Bill Pullman's character is the only one you are going to get to know from this film, and the only character who gets a lot of development. The natives seem very flat, and most just come across as wanting to kill Pullman. In a way, this makes sense, because this story is essentially told from his point of view.

Bill Pullman reflected years later, "I don't think any other movie I've done is as adventurous as this one." He did most of his own stunts, met with real voodoo priests and took part in a variety of activities that may not be your typical Hollywood situation. One scene was filmed in an actual Dominican grave. He confirms that writer Richard Maxwell had to be admitted to an asylum after consulting with a voodoo priest.

Fans of Craven ought to check this one out. It does not have the in-your-face slasher horror of Craven's "Nightmare on Elm Street", "Scream" or "Last House on the Left". But it is not intended to be. This is a film built on atmosphere, and in many ways a horror more realistic than any he had ever done before.

As always, the must-have version was released by the fine folks at Scream Factory. Those interested in the movie will have to watch the 25-minute "making of", which has interviews with cinematographer John Lindley, the father-son special effects team of Lance and Dave Anderson, Wade Davis, and some re-used audio from Pullman.

The audio commentary is disappointing. On the one hand, it is the first time the film has had a commentary track, so credit must be given to Scream Factory for giving the disc the attention that past companies (specifically Image and Universal) failed to do. But the commentary with Bill Pullman only goes halfway through the film, with no one left to take his place. The real tragedy is in the passing of Wes Craven (the disc is dedicated to him), who could have offered more insight.

There will undoubtedly never be a better release of this essential Wes Craven film... unless someone manages to convince Bill Pullman to hand over all the vacation footage he shot with his wife on set!

Wes Craven's "The Serpent and the Rainbow" is one of the more original and ambitious horror movies to come out of the '80s. Not only does it seek to reconnect cinematic zombies with their voodoo roots, ala classics like "White Zombie", but it also uses the creation of zombies as a political allegory. The film is set in Haiti during the last days of the dictatorship of "Baby Doc" Duvalier.

Based - very loosely one surmises - on a true story, the plot follows Dr. Dennis Alan (Bill Pullman) as he investigates a powder that is said to turn people into zombies. He is aided in his quest by Dr. Marielle Duchamp (Cathy Tyson), who he quickly falls for, and Louie Mozart (Brent Jennings) an expert in voodoo. Dargent Peytraud (the chilling Zakes Mokae) is the snarling villain of the piece, a man with sinister powers both government-sanctioned and supernatural.

The film abounds with creatively gruesome imagery - a man is buried alive, screaming, in a coffin as it fills with blood, a fiendish hand reaches out from a bowl of soup - this is one of those rare films that genuinely makes your skin crawl. Horror fans should not miss it. It's a shame that the film runs just a little longer than it should and becomes disappointingly routine in its final moments.

There is a sense that this movie was aiming a bit higher than it ending up reaching. I can't quite hold that against it.

In 1985, after a successful research in Amazonas, Dr. Dennis Alan (Bill Pullman) from Harvard is invited by the president of a Boston pharmaceutics industry, Andrew Cassedy (Paul Guilfoyle), to travel to Haiti to investigate the case of a man named Christophe (Conrad Roberts) that died in 1978 and has apparently returned to life. Andrew wants samples of the voodoo drug that was used in Christophe to be tested with the intention of producing a powerful anesthetic. Dr. Alan travels to meet Dr. Marielle Duchamp (Cathy Tyson) that is treating Christophe and arrives in Haiti in a period of revolution. Soon Alan is threatened by the chief of the feared Tonton Macuse Dargent Peytraud (Zakes Mokae), who is a torturer and powerful witch. Alan learns that death is not the end in the beginning of his journey to hell.

"The Serpent and the Rainbow" is one of the creepiest and most originals zombie movie ever produced. Directed by Wes Craven, the story uses the background of political environment of Haiti and entwines horror and politics. Bill Pullman has good performance and Cathy "Mona Lisa" Tyson completes the romantic pair of the story. But Zakes Mokae "steals" the movie with a scary performance in the role of the wicked Peytraud. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "A Maldição dos Mortos-Vivos" ("The Curse of the Living Dead")

At times genuinely frightening thriller, full of hallucinatory andimaginative visuals, strongly supported by good performances, a fine sense of place and an original, intriguing, thought-provoking script. It suffers only from a rather weak - and protracted - finale. (**1/2)

I found it entertaining and different from the casual horror films out there.The acting isn't the best, but the characters are interesting and I liked the cast. The plot is decent,, it felt worth it. Worth a check out.

The story of a chemist who is investigating a rumoured drug that brings people back from the dead. This is a great movie which keeps you in suspense right through. Not a horror movie but more of a suspense type movie that enters the world of black magic and voodoo. Very underrated movie and well worth watching, great plot and the story works.

Bill Pullman is an anthropologist who on a previous visit to Haiti experienced the power of black voodoo,filling his mind with evil dreams and eventuating in the murder of his pilot. His Jaguar spirit leads him to safety. Upon returning to America he is asked by a drug company to return to Haiti and investigate the process of "Zombification" as proof of a man being brought back from the dead has been discovered and the Americans of course would love to know how it is done.

In Haiti Dr Allen meets a beautiful female psychiatrist and together they become embroiled in a world of good vs evil voodoo style in search of this miracle which is in the form of a powder.

However, their is evil at work in the form of a very nasty voodoo witchdoctor, who unfortunately also happens to be Chief of Police in the very much oppressed Haiti.

This was a great film. I only just purchased and watched it for the first time on DVD for $6.95 AU, at that price I wasn't expecting much - Reviews I have read regarding this film dubbed it dissapointing, but I found it to be highly entertaining.

The film is eerie, the acting is excellent. I have found in most reviews that people have complained that the film is far-fetched and doesn't make sense. Well, in my opinion - that is the nature of voodoo -it is un-explainable and to a skeptical mind is silly, but there have been many accounts in real life of voodoo magic and it's power and this film was based on some such accounts.

The film starts of a little slow and can be described as a bit messy. However, as the plot unfolds, not only are we watching an eerie film about the supernatural, we are also watching an action packed political thriller. This is a very unusual film. There is just enough blood and gore to entertain the slasher fans, but not too much discourage the general film appreciating public.

As opposed to common belief, I found the story-line of this film to be tight, different and utterly engaging.

Nice trip to Voodoo wonderland: Wes Craven did a good job with The Serpent and the Rainbow, capturing the exotic magic and world of Haiti. Production, acting, story solid, with that special exotic extra flavor. The only thing I gotta complain, I would have spiced up the level of horror a tiny bit. Well, sometimes we can't have everything, sadly, I should add ;)

In 1988's "The Serpent and the Rainbow" Bill Pullman plays an anthropologist who goes to Haiti to investigate a rumored drug that can make people seem dead, but they're really not. In other words, the plot addresses the reality behind the zombie myth. The story's supposedly based (loosely) on factual material contained in Wade Davis' book.

Davis reportedly wanted noted director Peter Weir to direct the film, but he got stuck with horror maestro Wes Craven. Wes is great for cartoony horror flicks, like "A Nightmare on Elm Street" and the "Scream" series, but he was apparently out of his league here. I hate giving bad reviews to movies because I realize no one intends to make a bad film. Making decent movies is expensive and takes a lot of work by scores of talented people. "The Serpent and the Rainbow" had the funds, talent, locations and music to make a quality film, but it horribly fails.

Over the years it's taken me four attempts just to get past the 20-40 minute mark. I finally forced myself to watch the entire film last night and it was a chore. It starts out intriguing, but immediately fails to engross. The story's fine, but the way it's told is bad, which includes the puzzling editing. It's incoherent and you soon find yourself bored watching interesting images and cool percussion-oriented music, but characters and a tale you don't care about, mainly because you were never allowed to comprehend it.

There's a shallow love story with the requisite beautiful native (Cathy Tyson) and the second act gets a little better with Brent Jennings as Mozart, but the third act spirals into to ultra-horror cheese. Some scenes are so ridiculously bad they're laugh-out-loud funny. For instance, a classy white woman suddenly jumps on the dinner table radically attacking the anthropologist; a torture-chair moves across the room by itself on a couple occasions; someone's head falls off; a scorpion walks out of someone's mouth; something alien and diabolic comes out of someone else's mouth (or head); etc. On top of this, there are so many dream/hallucination sequences that they become tedious. These scenes were obviously included to up the ante with horror props and – hopefully – jolt the audience, but they utterly fail because, after a while, you suspect that what's going on isn't really happening and it's hard to be scared by illusions. Most of the time, they just make you laugh, like the (supposedly) creepy hand coming out of the soup (rolling my eyes). Don't get me wrong, scenes like these CAN work in horror films, but they have to be done right and in the right context, which isn't the case here, unfortunately.

The only reason I'm not giving it an "F" is because of the positives noted above.

The film runs 98 minutes and was shot in Haiti, the Dominican Republic and Boston.

GRADE: D

First I have to mention that while the book (The Serpent and the Rainbow by Wade Davis) is infinitely better and deeper than the movie that shares its name, comparing the two is unfair. The audience is informed that the movie was "inspired" by the content of the book, for whatever interpretation you give inspired. What makes the book more interesting, aside from it being a true documentary, is how it balances light and shadow in much the way the Vodoun religion balances both. This film may leave you thinking that Haiti is a horrible place filled with monsters and boogeymen, and I don't think that's a fair estimation.

The film confuses many things and ideas which I feel should have been explained. Not everyone is an ethnoreligionist, after all. Totems, houngans, hounfours, mambos, bokors, le Bon Dieu, and the Amazon shaman are just mentioned in passing as if this is everyday vocabulary to the audience. The character of Marielle is presented as a dedicant of the goddess (loa) Erzulie. Well, this is a nice touch, but what of Damballah and his consort Aida-Wedo--the original serpent and the rainbow? And what about the man dressed as a skeleton in an obvious tribute to Baron Samedi--yet the Baron is never mentioned. What really made me chuckle is how Alan's totem saves the end, a totem we had only seen in glimpses without the concept of a power animal ever being explained.

Through in the confusion of the collapse of the Duvalier government and we have the perfect recipe for movie mayhem. Oh, come on...you just knew the overthrow of Duvalier had to work itself in here somewhere, right? We must have the obligatory "I am an American citizen--you cannot touch me" scene when dealing with the so-called Third World.

Bill Pullman was entirely wrong as the protagonist. I just found it unbelievable that this man could find his way out of a Happy Meal box let alone 200 miles of Amazon rainforest. He is abrasive and unpolite, two things which are professional suicide for anybody dealing in international cultures. All right, one can allow for a certain degree of cynicism on his part, but I find it difficult to believe that a man of his caliber and academic background would be fool enough to shoot his mouth off as he does.

Watch this film with an acrostic eye. It isn't a bad film, in spite of the faults I personally found with it. Just watch it cautiously. If it whets your interest, definitely go check out the Davis book.

Anthropologist Dennis Alan (Bill Pullman) embarks on a journey to Haiti in search of a drug said to be the cause of zombification. Thrown into a world of superstition and surreal bedlam, the good doctor digs deep to find answers.

Loosely based on a true story, this tale of rising corpses and scientific endeavour takes us on a genuinely creepy ride. Bill Pullman does a great job of leading the film and brings a noteworthy authenticity to his character. It's also worth mentioning that Zakes Mokae's performance as the villainous Dargent Peytraud is quite chilling.

Since as early as I can remember, Zombie films have always fascinated me. A good zombie flick should be able to make you question it. Where would you hide? How would you kill them? And could you survive? Wes Craven did well to stay away from walking dead clichés and ask the mother of all questions – Is it real and how far would you go to find out?

Direction: 8/10 (Wes Craven keeps you interested with relative ease, thanks to the story) Cinematography: 7/10 (John Lindley's choices were simple, but effective. Editing: 9/10 (Academy Award winner Glenn Farr keeps us on our toes) Acting: 7/10 (Bill Pullman and Zakes Mokae do a great job in their parts) Dialogue: 7/10 (The screenplay was well drawn out, for the most part) Sound: 6/10 (Works well enough to please the audience) Effects: 10/10 (Some genuinely creepy looking corpses will keep you watching) Art Direction: 7/10 (One of David Brisbin's more memorable achievements) Costumes: 8/10 (Peter Mitchell's vision suits the film and the actors) Music and/or Score: 6/10 (Brad Fiedel provides enough to satisfy)

Total Score: 75/100

On release it was competing with The Blob, Child's Play and Critters 2. Wes would have known what the industry was looking for but stuck with it. Not his best work but Horror/Thriller fans will like it for what it accomplishes.

Set in 1985, Anthropologist Dr. Dennis Alan (Bill Pullman) is hired by American pharmaceutical company Biocorp to research voodoo "Zombification" in Haiti following reports of a man, Christophe Durand (Conrad Roberts) who'd been previously declared dead in 1978 having been confirmed to be alive. Upon arrival in Haiti he comes into contact with colleague Dr. Marielle Duchamp who helps him vavigate the Haitian voodoo underworld and the political strife afflicted the country with Captain Dargent Peytraud (Zakes Mokae) of the paramilitary Tonton Macoute who controls the revolutionary elements with fear. As Dennis traverse the voodoo underworld in search of the zombie powder, he finds himself tormented by terrifying visions and Peytraud's merciless tactics.

The Serpent and the Rainbow is a loose adaptation of the 1985 allegedly non-fiction book by Wade Davis of the same name that detailed the author's experiences with Zombification tracing te story of Clairvius Nacisse who was allegedly poisoned, buried alive, and revived with an herbal brew that resulted in what was called a Zombie. The book has been criticized by many in the scientific community for scientific inaccuracy and some scientists have found little to no tetrodotoxin in the samples provided by Davis' research. The book being what it is, the movie goes (even more) fictionalized with elements such as Christophe Durand standing in for Clairvius Narcisse, but the movie goes more for a mixture of horror and weird detective as director Wes Craven and writer Richard Maxwell dive into the more exploitative elements of the culture but with some genuine interest in the culture that sidesteps the exotic and forbidding nature usually present in such takes. Despite the film's troubled production an only modest performance upon initial release, The Serpent and the Rainbow does have enough to draw you in even if it does get sillier the longer it goes on.

What makes the movie work as well as it does is Bill Pullman as Dr. Dennis Alan. Giving both a solid performance as well as narration delivered with conviction, Pullman does a solid job of pulling us into this world of Voodoo and political strife as the movie functions as something of a detective story with Pullman using analysis, cunning, and even guile to get the answers he searches for. Wes Craven does a solid job of making Haiti a character in itself with us getting to see the bustling culture as well as the mixture of Catholicism and Voodoo that is adopted by the Haitian citizens, and while I can't vouch for the accuracy of its portrayal it's still a very fascinating look at this culture and society. Where people will probably split on the movie is in the later half where the movie does pretty definitively state whether or not voodoo is real and this is where we get the reliance of special effects that does make it hard to ignore connections to previous Craven projects down to the fact who becomes our primary antagonist reaches into peoples' dreams. This is where the split with this movie will occur as those who were engaged by the surprisingly analytical nature of the first half may feel short shifted by the effects heavy second half, while horror fans may find themselves slightly restless during the opening stretch before the movie is really allowed to cut loose. The movie was supposedly massively recut following a less than successful test screening with Universal fronting an additional $5 million for re-editing and a new ending and you can see this in certain respects down to the fact Peytraud feels pretty forced as an antagonist despite the movie's attempts to justify his presence here.

The Serpent and the Rainbow isn't fully successful as a horror film as it never really reconciles the analytical first half and special effects heavy second half as smoothly as it wants, but Bill Pullman's lead performance and solid direction by Craven utilizing the atmosphere of Haiti to good effect does lead to some engaging parts of the film both in terms of themes and identity. The movie does ask a lot of its audience in terms of buying the directions it takes and audiences will be pretty split on its decision to go further and further over the top, but there is just enough here to warrant a viewing from genre enthusiasts.

I remember watching "The Serpent and the Rainbow" in a cinema when it opened 12 years ago, and although it did not strike me as a masterpiece, I never forgot it. I had always had a memory of it as a good horror film, but tonight I saw it again on television and I was impressed about how good it is. One may associate Wes Craven with "Scream" or "A Nightmare on Elm Street", but this one is certainly one of his best films. I still see it as an adventure film with horror elements, but this time I found it full of style -a touch of documentary approach, clever use of colorful locations, good handling of massive scenes with many unprofessional extras, attractive ethnic art direction, a bit of grand guignol in some performances (mainly Zakes Mokae), humor and a sensitive and sympathetic approach to a different culture. Many times one sees American films dealing with others' cultural aspects -such as political affairs and religion-, without any respect or concern. It is true that "The Serpent and the Rainbow" is not a serious drama about people's revolt, or a tract on synchretic religions (such as Cuban santería, Haitian voodoo or Brazilian candomblé), but both aspects are not just décors, but elements well integrated to the story in its own terms -that is, in a low budget feature, whose main objective is to entertain and scare the audience. The so-called "South" is such an exotic locale for most First World filmgoers, that cultural "details" often pass unnoticed, because these persons seem to be too obsessed with their own "cinematic hedonism". Craven knows it, and that is why he makes foreign tourists applaud when they have seen a real possession, thinking it is just part of Paul Winfield's show. One of the reasons that this film is good is the script. Someone mentions in another comment how cleverly it introduces more than one level in a single scene: for example, when Dennis and Marielle are looking for Christophe in a cemetery, they not only meet grave robbers for scaring effect, but they also discuss about the possibility that Marielle is using Dennis to obtain funds for her hospital, and the scene fulfills its expectation: they find Christophe, who tells them about the mysterious 'powder'. What turns off some viewers -and myself, in a way- is the cinematic forms that take all the things dealing with energy and human capacity for evil. They are sometimes too gross, others just plain funny or ridiculous; but this is a Craven film, and they did not detract me from the main objective I mentioned earlier. Besides, there are other things I enjoyed watching the film again. First, to see once again the Bill Pullman whom I used to enjoy so much (remember the dumb blond in "Ruthless People"?) when he was beautiful and had not turned into the dull American president of "Independence Day." I also recognized elements I've witnessed. A lot of the things that you see and hear in this film are not just fiction (after all it is based on a "true" story): they are all part of many Caribbean cultures -from the sensuality of the islanders, to the rite in the river, or the powder itself. And believe me: the powders work! Not only for making zombies, but also for many other things. Don't ask me how, I do not know how they do it, but I have seen them work (in Cuba -no joke intended)! So beware.

Great movie, why ? because in some horror scenes you really afraid. You can feel what is the claustrophobia, and you can learn what happens after you die from this movie. Also there are lots of voodoo stuff.

Film is like a horror adventure game. Also nightmare and dream scenes are very good. This movie is like a surrealistic drawing. Torture, magic, horror : are all in this movie. Acting is also very well, I liked mostly the Titian zombies. Bill Pullman also do his job very well. I really liked this movie. I cannot take my eyes over it at horror scenes. Dialogs for the movie are written with intelligence.

Finally the story of the movie isn't just a fiction. It contains realistic things.

Bill Pullman is good in this sort of horror movie and it has its interesting moments as Pullman's character tries to track down the various mysterious presented to him. However, other than the dream sequences that are mostly confined to the beginnings of the movie this movie does not offer up that many scares. Well, it does feature a rather good buried alive scenario, but after that the movie's conclusion is rather weak and almost out of place. I did not care for the whole getting your soul back plot point. Still, it is interesting enough to watch once and only once on my part. However, the dream sequences were the best part for me, to many other scenes simply made this movie seem to drag and become overlong. You will get to see a voodoo movie and sort of zombies, but not the type you will find in a George Romero undead flick and you will see a rather dumb lion scene near the end so I say give it a look it may be a movie more in the lines of what you like than I like.

When seeing a Wes Craven film, you can never really be sure of what to expect. You might be in for a great ride, if you're watching the likes of The Last House of the Left or The Hills Have Eyes, but then again you may be in for a big disappointment; as in the case of The People Under the Stairs and the absolutely awful Scream sequels. The man's filmography is a mixed bag, and this film; The Serpent and the Rainbow, despite having an awesome title and good subject material (zombies, voodoo, being buried alive), still ranks as a disappointment. That's not to say that the film is bad, however - not by a long shot. It's just disappointing considering how good it could have been. Some of the Edgar Allen Poe adoptions from the sixties, among other horror films, have shown what an interesting topic being buried alive - a fate far worse than death - can be; but this film seems content to just coast along without ever really delving into it's subject. There's lots of interesting sequences and imagery in the movie, but none of it is done with conviction, which means that the movie is good enough while viewing; but it doesn't leave you with anything when it's over.

Bill Pullman has a persona that lends itself well to the horror genre and on the whole, it's a shame that the majority of the work he's done in said genre isn't really up to much. He does do well here, though, but it's a shame his material isn't better. Cathy Tyson, who impressed everyone but me in Neil Jordan's Mona Lisa, appears alongside Pullman and doesn't do badly; but I think her filmography aptly sums up her acting talent on the whole. Wes Craven's directing isn't bad, but it never really impresses and since he didn't write the script either, it's safe to say that any of the success of this film doesn't really have much to do with him. The jungle setting is nice, and makes for a nice change as there aren't too many horror films set there; and the film also impresses in the special effects side, as although the movie doesn't go over the top with great effects, the ones it does have are put to good use and it helps to create and intriguing and foreboding atmosphere. On the whole, this isn't fundamental horror viewing, but if you're into horror films and get a chance to see this - it's worth watching.