From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter

What everyone seems to be missing is the significance of Ambrose Bierce. He's a real 19th century author, and the film takes it's title from one of his books. He's best known for the classic twist at the end of "Occurance at Owl Creek Bridge". (It was made into an episode of the original Twilight Zone.) This film hints a few times that a similar twist will take place... but it never does. Why is there no payoff after building up the Bierce character with so much historical detail? Anyway, the film is not bad, which is surprising, considering that they just rewrote the script from the first film into a Old Western setting.

Bierce's story "The Damned Thing" was produced as an episode of Showtime's "Masters of Horror."

However, what it delivers isn't a little.

The prelude, if you will, actually lasts the majority of the movie. The horror doesn't start until very late. Until then it's a violent western tale to be told. And if there was time and money on this project I think it could have delivered a whole lot more.

Still doesn't measure up to the first movie, but was a whole lot better than the second one. Besides, Western/Vampire Horror Movie isn't something you see every day and it earns points just for that.

I definitely recommend this movie, it's not about to change your world, but it's different enough to be entertaining and imaginative enough to be interesting.

After Watching From Dusk Till Dawn, i fell in love with the movie. I couldn't wait till the sequels came out! I didn't even mind the fact that they where being released to video, because the first one was so great, they couldnt possibly screw up! That was until i saw From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money. There where only a few entertaining parts in that film, and when i saw a few...i truley mean it! I thought they wouldnt even release the third installment after how horrible the second one was. But luckily they did! Hangmans Daughter is a far superior film compared to the Texas Blood Money. Sure this film does not surpass its original, but i will amdit for a sequel it is a good film. The cinematography is amazing, and the characters are well acted. I think the story is very entertaining, and explains things about the first film, which i thought was interesting! Its just the way this film shot, that makes it diffrent from the first and especially the second! And definatly as one person stated Rodriquze really did have his hands on this film! Some of the style does remind you of his earlier work!

All in all, a good film, that doesn't surpass the first...but as a film on its own its a good film, with style! Rent it if you have some spare time! But just make sure you like From Dusk Till Dawn, or you might not enjoy this film as much!

This third installment to the "From Dusk to Dawn" movies is a prequel, as it takes place in the old West in American history. Initially one might think vampires and the wild West doesn't make for a good combination, but the movie was actually enjoyable. While better than part two, this movie still fell short of part one.

The story in "From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter" is essentially exactly the same as in the first two movies. A band of outlaws and holy men and up at a seemingly deserted tavern in a secluded location. As night falls, the patrons turn into blood-thirsty vampires.

The characters in the third movie were more detailed than those in part two, and as such you get more into the movie and a greater wholeness permeates the overall storyline.

As for the acting talents in the movie, then people were doing fair jobs with their given roles and characters. It is, as always, a treat to have Danny Trejo in a movie, alongside the other familiar faces in the movie.

While better than part two, this is not a movie that will make a lasting impression, nor is it a bright shiny moment in cinema history. "From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter" is exactly what you would expect from a movie of this type. It is enjoyable enough for what it turned out to be.

The first movie stands well on its own. The second movie is just a filler. And the third movie is essentially also just a filler, although it does show the origin of the seductive Santanico Pandemonium character from the first movie.

I have a problem with the whole fact of Rodriguez and Tarantino doing a sequel, let alone sequels, of a highly original, totally off-the-wall movie like From Dusk Til Dawn. But where #2, "Texas Blood Money," was a waste of film, #3 "The Hangman's Daughter" is the ONLY one they should've attempted. It tells the story of Salma Hayek's character in the first one and actually has a plot, good acting, lasts just long enough and has enough content to be entertaining and not exhausting. I also want to add that Ara Celi is a GREAT substitution for Salma cause she is just as FINE! :)

The movie does suffer from some of the hokey tricks that plagued Texas Blood Money and is campy, but that's half the appeal of these types of movies. They're not Shakespeare, they're to entertain...and bringing back Michael Parks was a stroke of genius and if you want to see how diverse an actor he is, watch this movie and the first moments of the original where he's featured. If you're jonezing to revisit some old friends at the Titty Twister saloon, rent this one and TOTALLY AVOID the second sequel.