So much average

Best movie of this year hands down!

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

It's difficult to describe in words how much crap this movie is. Nor is it a horror or a thriller, humor nowhere to be found, lousy actors, even worse directing... pure action and extremely bad one. I can not believe that Rodriguez and Tarantino approved this, let alone signed... but they did.

This is a great horror film. It this better then the original From dusk till dawn. It is a prequel. It has a great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. 4 is underrating it. I give it 9 out 10. This a very scary movie. All the From dusk till dawn movie are are must. See this movie. It is one of the best horror movie of all time. This is scarier then The silence of lambs ever could be. This movie will scarier you. It not easy to be scarier then the original From dusk till dawn. But this film was successful in being scarier then the original From dusk till dawn. This is not a 4. Take my word for it. See this awesome movie.

This was suppose to be a sequel to "From dusk till dawn". First of all, let me make one thing clear - the story of the film had absolutely nothing to do with the original FDTD, with possible exception of the presence of Danny Trejo (who, as far as I recall, doesn't have a name in either of the films other than in the role list, and therefor could have been a whole different character), and a bar called "Titty twister" (which doesn't even look like the original Titty Twister, and hence it might as well have been another bar).The story has nothing to do with the original (it doesn't continue where the first one ends, for example), non of the original cast (except from Danny Trejo) appears. In Sweden, it was promoted as a direct sequel: according to the back of the DVD cover, they ended up at Titty Twister to wait for the Gecko Brothers (who doesn't even appear). It is not nearly as well made as the first one. The "special effects" are crappy, the cinematography has little to no resemblance to the first one. The lines are suppose to be cool, probably trying to aim for something like the language in the first movie (that really were cheeky as hell). If you want to watch a sequel to "From dusk till dawn", skip this and jump to the third one at once. "Hangmans daughter" brings back at least some of the original feeling (playing with western movies the same way as the first one played with action/crime movies, for example).If you however choose to watch this, please do not watch this as a sequel to "From dusk till dawn", but more of it's own movie. That was the only way I actually managed to endure through the entire film, by thinking of it as a totally different film.

First movie was great and I loved it and this sequel is not connected to last movie, one of the vamps return to this movie, well for part of the movie as goes missing for rest of the movie. This movies does take a while to get started as there have a lot of filler scenes ,with some vamps scenes.The first few scenes with vampires look descent with make up effect as the movie goes on the vampires look less scary When the movie started get a little less boring, they make movie look messy, it just felt like the movie was all over the place and i did not were to go with and then gave up with rushed last 10 mins.The effect in this movie was not were near as good as the first, some were little descent but most of it was really bad,The acting was decent in the movie.Worth watching a least once 4 out of 10