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."

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.

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!

Just like the previous sequel, the third entry of the "From Dusk till Dawn" franchise would be another quickly produced straight-to-video sequel that would be somewhat a prequel to the original film. While I didn't think the second entry was as bad that it's usually made out to be, however "Hangman's Daughter" is still a definite improvement over "Texas Blood Money". In a way it kind of plays out more similar to the original, only this time the carnage is set in the early 1900s (where the Old West was coming to an end) to be finally played out once again in the seamy Mexican tavern that harbours blood-gushing surprises for its guests. For most part this horror western comedy is very well executed, as it's brashly pieced with its admirably crafted make-up FX, slickly directed for its low-scale budget and colourfully acted. The sweeping camera has scope framing the moody, sunbaked landscapes and story dramatics with constant flair with that spaghetti western brutality shinning through. It wears its influences quite proudly too. The mellow story starts of episodic --- focusing on an Civil war hero looking to long for some cause while on the other side is an infamous outlaw with a hypnotic runaway beauty whose father (a hangman) follows their trail. But the two while crossing paths during stages, eventually come to be one when they encounter an orgy of alcohol, sexuality and blood at a desolate inn that just happens to be home for the blood-sucking kind. Strangely enough while nasty and kinetic, I thought it became tiring when the survivors of the feeding work together despite their differences and try to fend off the vampires, as I thought the initial build-up was interestingly offbeat with its dry humour and lasting bite despite the systematic staples. Michael Park's wry character Ambrose Bierce is a fascinating one, as he pretty much soaks it up with little effort in which doing so emits an ambiguously tainted air about him. Marco Leonardi is quite a live-wire as the outlaw Johnny Madrid and his combination with the lovely, if pouty Ara Celi comes off. Temuera Morrison provides aggression and then Lennie Loftin and Rebecca Gayheart give out that twitchy energy as a married religious couple. In support is modest turns by Sonia Braga (who looks great!), Jordana Spiro, Orlando Jones and an always worthwhile Danny Trejo.