Opiniones de usuarios

The second part of the blood trilogy that began with Blood Feast.

This one is considerably more professional than the first. But it still as its short comings. Acting is variable. And the plot is weak and does not make a lot of sense. The gore scenes (which is probably the reason why you are watching) are great. And even quite brutal, although the film is too camp to take too seriously. The music is also great and very fitting.

It does suffer from two annoying things however. The annoying little boy for one. But I do think they knew how annoying he was, because at the end even the villagers don't want him back. The other thing is how long the film takes to end. Its got more endings than Spielberg film.

Still its pretty good and worth it if you like gore films...

Writer/director/cinematographer Hershell Gordon Lewis is considered by bad movie fans to be one of the few "autors" in film history to have equaled or at least come close to equaling the abysmal work of Ed Wood, Jr.. While it's debatable which was worse or if another small-time film maker (such as Ray Dennis Steckler or Al Adamson) was the worst, no one in the know would argue that Lewis was a brilliant film maker! However, even the most inept can occasionally get lucky and TWO THOUSAND MANIACS is Lewis' moment in the sun. Unlike previous films such as BLOOD FEAST (which were all amazingly bad), there was enough good about TWO THOUSAND MANIACS that I actually recommend you watch it--particularly because it proves substantial budgets or consistently good acting aren't necessary to make a decent film!

The film begins with two very stereotypical hillbilly idiots tricking two cars full of Yankees off the highway and into their town. There the locals declare that these outsiders are their guests of honor for a centennial celebration and they are convinced to stay. Now the audience knows this is a very bad idea, but the six folks don't yet suspect that these hicks mean to do them great bodily harm. Of course, that might also be because they didn't see the folks running around town with nooses in preparation for their arrival! One by one the Yanks are brutally killed and the ways they did it were pretty clever and the gore was amazingly realistic for 1964. It's amazing to think that with a budget of $46.28 that they were able to achieve these effects, as the blood actually looked like blood and the killing was quite shocking for the mid-1960s.

Two of the six are reasonably bright and guess what is in store, so the last part of the film consists of showing their efforts to leave this deathtrap. Oddly, despite the budget, the acting of these two was pretty good (particularly William Kerwin) and the last 15 minutes of the film turned out to be by far the best. There were several wonderful twists and turns that showed Lewis could actually write a clever script and despite the stupid hillbilly acting earlier in the film, the film was surprisingly good. I won't ruin it, but it sure was nice to see that things only improved as the film progressed. Plus, every time I thought that the movie SHOULD have ended sooner, the additional portions kept building on an excellent "Twilight Zone" style script.

By the way, the film offended many when it debuted--though it also became a cult favorite. The gore and offensive portrayal of Southerners as crazy morons must have made many at the drive-ins have heart attacks! I sure wish I could have been there to see it!

"Two Thousand Maniacs" is a wonderful Brigadoon-esque film about two groups of Yankees who become guests of honors for the southern town of Pleasant Valley's centennial. What these "guests" don't realize, though, is that they are going to be murdered in bizarre (and I mean, BIZARRE) fashions because of a war lost by the south 100 years ago.

The festivities include a woman being dismembered and barbecued, a man being quartered with four horses, and the infamous "barrel roll" sequence where a man is pushed down a hill in a barrel that has nails driven into its sides.

The movie altogether has a wacky, feel-good charm (despite its gruesome nature) that keeps you smiling, and you'll surely be singing its theme song after the movie's over! I sure as hell was.

Decided to watch this film, but I really was not very sure if I was going to enjoy this flick with unknown actors, but as I started to view this film I became very interested. A young couple gets themselves involved with a town where strange things start to happen to people. The town's folks remember the Civil War days when their town was destroyed by the Yankee's up North and it seems this town celebrates this event by having Yankee guests participate in some games of chance for both men and women. These games of chance will greatly surprise you and you just will not believe just what is going on until it actually happens. There is one scene when a man gets into a barrel and rolls down a hill which becomes very tragic. This is a rather short film, but great to view on Halloween night, or anytime you find it showing on TCM. Enjoy.

Two carloads of travellers are diverted to the quirky town of Pleasant Valley where they become guests of honour at the centennial Civil War celebrations. But these are far from ordinary commemorations, and as the title suggests, the town's population aren't fond of Yankees as their sinister brand of southern hospitality is gradually revealed.

Early hicksploitation horror no doubt inspired 'The Cars that Ate Paris' and does a good job at depicting the isolation and increasing discomfort experienced by the reluctant guests as they begin to suspect something more unsavoury than bootleg might be brewing.

Notwithstanding the outrageous plot, there's one or two moments of genuine terror, and despite being occasionally absurd HGL's sadistic shocker has a bigger budget than his previous attempts and shows more technical polish (save for some looping issues and stilted dialogue delivery) as a result potentially making it more accessible.

Coherent, imaginative, chilling and ultimately worthy of celebrated cult status.

that is a line I heard in a song. I have heard of HG Lewis, but finally got around to seeing one of his movies Let me tell you, this movie is wayyy before my time, so many people of this generation may not appreciate this movie. I for one thought it was awesome.

It is about a town that appears every 100 years. This town, Pleasant valley, was wiped out by Yankees during the civil war. So when this town reappears, their goal is to find Yankees to invite to their town so they can have their revenge with them.

They manage to get 6 tourists passing by to enter their town, by putting up detours. They tell the tourists that the town is celebrating its centennial, and they must be guests of honor. the tourists have no idea what is going on, but they are provided with free accommodations such as hotels, and food, that they stay. They enjoy a nice barbecue. After the first night though, a few of the tourists go missing, and others start questioning where they are and what this celebration is actually really about. The townspeople jerk them around with answers like "they are on a walk", "the celebration is a surprise" One of the tourists discovers the awful truth, that they are there to be killed, and him and a woman try to escape. The other 4 are not so lucky, and they are all killed in creative ways. The townspeople make a game out of it, and tell the tourists (one by one, they separate them for different games), that they can play. But then they just use them for their amusement in a game of killing.

This movie was made in 1965. HG Lewis is often referred to as the Godfather of Gore. This film did indeed have blood and gore, and I imagine it was a lot for 1965.

I am a big fan of horror in the 80s , but have been watching older ones as of recently. The 70's decade offers a lot of great ones also, and now I can add one to the 1960s list of great horror.

I have heard of other HG Lewis films, i think Blood Feast being the most notorious. I held off on buying his Blood Trilogy set, because i wanted to see if I liked his style first, and I thoroughly enjoyed 2000 Maniacs, so I am definitely getting the set now.

After his successful début, Blood Feast (1963), which introduced cinema audiences to splatter horror, Herschell Gordon Lewis made his redneck horror movie, Two Thousand Manics!. Just a few years later, horror movies set in America's Deep South were all the rage, and are still a popular location for some gruesome slicing and dicing (Tucker and Dale Vs. Evil (2010) made fun of the racial stereotyping), so perhaps we have this film to thank for the likes of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) and Deliverance (1972). And Lewis goes all out, with Dixie flags aplenty and thick-accented inbred simpletons in dungarees, in what is a noticeable improvement on his ropey début.

Celebrating their centennial, the town of Pleasant Valley welcome six Yankee visitors who unwittingly drive into their celebrations. The town's mayor, Buckman (Jeffrey Allen - who went on to star in a few of Lewis's films), promises them some of that famous Southern hospitality, but with his two retarded henchman, plans to butcher them all to gain vengeance for a massacre committed a hundred years previously in the midst of the American Civil War. Terry Adams (Connie Mason), who has picked up hitch-hiker Tom (William Kerwin) on his way to a 'teacher's conference', notice their fellow Yankees disappearing under strange circumstances and attempt to flee the increasingly bizarre town.

Everything about this film looks more professional than Blood Feast, with a more patient approach taken with the moments of gore, and less atrocious editing and camera-work. Don't get me wrong though, the Lewis tropes are there - mannequin limbs, dodgy sound editing, paint-red gore, but it just seems that little bit better. It's still a dreadful film, with Feast's block-headed cheeseball William Kerwin - who actually had a pretty successful acting career - returning for more ham-fisted dialogue delivery, and elongated moments of tedium, but it's still quite fun. The gore is certainly better handled, with everything from dismemberment-by- horse and being pushed down a hill in a barrel full of nails being use to satisfy the blood lust. Which makes it all the more strange that Lewis seemed to retreat back into complete ineptitude after this, with his next film, Color Me Blood Red (1965) being the worst of his 'Blood Trilogy', and the long line of nudie cuties and Z-grade horror films that followed. Still, it's a must-see for horror fans.

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

Director and writer, Herschell Gordon Lewis, has mentioned this film as his favorite and you can see why. It is by far the best acted of all his movies and undoubtedly the one with the most production value. Six Yankees are lured into a small Southern town for a Centennial celebration where the townsfolk proceed to kill them one by one as revenge for the town's destruction during the Civil War. The death scenes include a man being pulled apart by four horses and a sexy blonde having her arm chopped off and then barbecued. The effect of the arm being hacked off is a bit weak but the other killings look much better. There's even a bit of suspense as one of the few remaining Yankees plans his escape with the help of a good Samaritan played by Connie Mason. The cast is good with the exception of one or two of the smaller roles. The biggest stand out is Jeffrey Allen as the Mayor with a very colorful performance. A fun watch for people who like their bloodshed with an actual story behind it. Good Stuff!

This was a frustrating, hilarious and an inventive watch. The audio was horrific, the camera work shoddy and the edits were hilarious in their ineptitude. The kills and the story were inventive and worth the watch if you can get past the horrendous dialogue (everyone is a walking, talking exposition machine). I recommend this if you are a purveyor of absolute schlock and in need of a good laugh. I had originally marked this as 3/10 but theres a certain quicksand scene that made me guffaw to the point of having tears in my eyes, so i had to mark it up!

Well that was an awful experience.

I only watched this movie because I'd seen "2001 Maniacs" starring Robert Englund. I didn't know it had a predecessor. Now having seen the original I wish that I'd never known about it.

This movie wasn't bad because of the confederate flag waving Southern hillbillies. It was bad because the soundtrack was unbearable, the acting was atrocious, the editing was sloppy, and the script was pathetic. The concept of the movie did have something to it: the idea that a southern town celebrates the centennial of the end of the Civil War. A war which the town of Pleasant Valley was trampled by. So the production team had something to work with, they just didn't do much with it. Clearly, budget was a mitigating factor but it wasn't the only thing handicapping this movie.

'Two Thousand Maniacs!' may not get name-dropped as much as the infamous 'Blood Feast', but it is arguably the better and more entertaining movie, and quite possibly Herschell Gordon Lewis' best effort. HGL's budget seems to be a tad bigger this time around, though the acting is just as poor. In fact the two leads (Thomas Wood and Connie Mason) are both from 'Blood Feast', so that explains a lot. The plot in this one concerns a small town in the South that is celebrating its centenary by luring unsuspecting "yankees", and basically torturing them to death. HGL doesn't spare us the gore, but the murders are done with such good humour that the movie ends up with an odd feel somewhere between 'The Beverly Hillbillies' and 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre'. This is a very silly movie obviously, but also very entertaining fun for those with a strong sense of the absurd.

This is it, gang. Herschell Gordon Lewis's greatest accomplishment (so far). After the massive success of a little gore-soaked experiment called Blood Feast, H. G. Lewis and Dave Friedman decided to make a new gore-epic, with some real money, and maybe even some ideas for a decent storyline, this time. A real gore epic. They originally wanted to call this movie Ten Thousand Maniacs, but with a cast of no more than 40 or 50, that would just be insulting the viewers intelligence. And so, Two Thousand Maniacs was born. This time around, the name of the game is Civil War vengeance, cleverly disguised as Southern hospitality.

Unsuspecting yankees, just passing through "the South", get tricked into stopping by the little town of Pleasant Valley (what state was that, again?). So, now, 2,000... or, let's just say a whole bunch of eager hicks have surrounded the yankee's cars, making it crystal clear that this week, and this week only, their purpose in life is to shower these people with Southern hospitality... or at least a whole bunch of food and alcohol, and Betsy, if she's around. Why all the fuss over a bunch of lost yankees? Well, hell, son, it's the Centennial!!

That's right, it's been 100 years since The Civil War ended, and it's high time we all put our differences aside, and make peace with our brothers and sisters from the north, and let some of them in on our shin-dig... Yeah!! That's what we'll tell 'em. They'll sure 'nough never expect to be mutilated in extremely painful, yet, kinda creative, and often humorous ways. We got all sorts of ideas. Such as...

"The four horses"

"The barrel roll"

"Ol' teeterin' rock"

"The axe throwin' contest" (if there's time)

We got us some good un's. Dogged if we don't!!!

And what about that other little sub-plot that never got explored? You know, when everybody was cheering over that guy being dead, and then Rufus busts out with "You know what happens to anybody that backs out. Let's hear us some music". What was that all about?

One of the first, if not the first ever feel-good B-Horror cult classic in American history. Definitely the first one to offer gruesome killings that offer gore, so, of course you gotta take it seriously as a Horror movie, but surprisingly, the cheesy humor, questionable acting, often-ridiculous dialog, and all-around ineptness doesn't over-shadow the Horror element at all, not at all... alright, maybe a little, but I love this movie, and I passionately recommend it to anyone who will listen. Two Thousand Maniacs is by far the best piece of B-cinema you're gonna find out of the 60's. I won't lie to ya, there ain't as much gore as there was in Blood Feast, but we're talking about a much, much more fulfilling experience. Guaranteed to keep your attention, and to put you in a good mood. The highlight, for me (besides the barrel roll), is good ol' Jeffery Allen, the guy that plays Mayor Buckman. That big, loud, entertaining hick makes the movie all the more likable. Obviously, Herschell didn't really put a huge amount of thought into this one, then again, maybe he did. I mean, compared to some other Lewis fiasco's I've come across, over the years. For a real wake-up call, as to the difference between a regular B-movie, and an unwatchable B-movie, check out another one of Herschell's flicks, How To Make A Doll, but you gotta go through Dr. Gore to get to it, so, good luck with that. For anyone who might find Two Thousand Maniacs as awesome as I do, I would recommend ignoring the fact that a remake of this movie exists. Seeking out Moonshine Mountain would be in your best interests. That is, unless you require gore. In that case, can't help ya, because Two Thousand Maniacs is truly one of a kind. 10/10

The second of Herschal Gordon Lewis' "blood trilogy", this one was filmed in the town of St. Cloud, Florida that was later razed to make way for Disneyworld.

Local rednecks are looking to avenge the massacre local townsfolk during the Civil War by luring yankee tourists to their town 100 years later and murdering them. Three couples are lured there by some false detour signs and most of them meet nefarious ends.

The first gore scene has a woman getting axed on a table (with a large confederate flag hanging overhead) by some of the rednecks after getting her thumb cut off. Not bad. Part of her remains are later roasted over an open fires as the local townsfolk are sitting around singing campfire songs. Hilarious. At the same campfire, her drunken boyfriend has his limbs tied up to four horses and is pulled apart, limb by limb. You don't really get to see it, though. Only his leg (with meat hanging off the end) being dragged away by a horse. The bloody torso isn't shown.

The next couple meets as gruesome end as the first one. The woman is lured to a platform beneath a large boulder, then she is tied down kicking and screaming (she doesn't look like she's really resisting) and is crushed by the boulder when a lever releases it. Just like in a carnival show. Her husband is dragged up a hill and stuck in a yellow barrel that has nails nailed inside of it, and is rolled downhill inside the barrel. He's looks like a real mess by the time he reaches the bottom. Not bad.

Of course the third couple (Connie Mason and Bill Kerwin from BLOOD FEAST) catch on real fast and make their escape out of town in their red 1964 Mercury convertible with a truckload of rednecks not far behind. As they make it to the main road, they leave the rednecks behind and make their way to nearest town where the local sheriff there doesn't believe them. As they sit in the car and reflect on what's happened, they almost don't believe it themselves.

My second favorite after BLOOD FEAST, this too uses a beautifully remastered print taken from the original negative. The Something Weird DVD also has additional unused footage which doesn't add anything to the film but is interesting to look at, anyway. In the secondary audio commentary that's included as an extra, Lewis says he had triple the budget to use due the success of BLOOD FEAST and they made almost as much money back on this one as they did on the earlier film.

Excellent camp film that must have terrified audiences the first time they saw it. Check it out!

7 out of 10

Except for the obvious and quite funny similarities to Deliverance (which was something like 20+ years later) this movie is awful. I saw it at a second run cinema with my friend and we were both pretty shocked at how stupid it was. Oh well it seemed like a good movie by the marquee whatever!!

Yee Ha 2,000 maniacs is probably the most palatable of H.G. Lewis' films. It's not as icky as say the Gore Gore Girls, the acting is much better than Blood Feast, and the story moves along much more rapidly than A Taste of Blood. This little gem from the sixties, loosely based on Brigadoon, and filmed in St. Cloud Florida, is a fine example of Guerilla low budget film making at its finest. Some have complained its a little mean spirited, but I don't think the film takes its self seriously enough to truly come across that way. Apparently a remake was put out this year, which would definitely be interesting to see. This movie will change the way you think about dunking booths at the fair. Yee Ha

Six northerners (a young woman, a school teacher and two married couples) are detoured into the small southern town of Pleasant Valley, population 2000. The date is April 1965, the centennial of the American Civil War's conclusion and a violent incident in the town's past. What do these "maniacs" have planned for their celebration?

Sadly, I saw the remake of "2000 Maniacs" (appropriately called "2001 Maniacs") before I saw the original, so I cannot avoid comparing the two in my mind. The old film has a classic non-Hollywood feel the newer one lacks, the newer film adds lots more sex and a fair amount of gore (and a racial aspect). Both are flawed films, not completely selling what I think they were capable of. While the newer film makes the character of Harper Alexander too hackneyed, the old film has two other characters that seem just too backwoods.

Both feature the "yankee cat" scene and the draw-and-quartering. The old one, surprisingly, features far fewer deaths -- which happens to be one of its weak points. The film is slow to build up, provides a few great kills, and is then too long in slowing down. Herschell Gordon Lewis can be credited for one thing, though -- he was quite capable of inventing new and terrifying ways to kill on film. Barrel roll, anyone?

Another reviewer praised this film as far exceeding "Blood Feast". He is wrong. The direction might be better, and it is certainly true that the returning actors (William Kerwin and Connie Mason) have greatly improved their acting skills. Especially Mason. But sometimes cheese wins, and this is one of those cases. If "Maniacs" was trying to be a real film, it failed. It seemed like they tried hard but did not achieve what was possible. "Blood Feast", on the other hand, comes off as being less serious and as long as the audience understands this it is more enjoyable. I will freely admit I love bad movies, but I can appreciate good ones, too, and "Maniacs" did not meet my standards.

Lewis fans will want to see this, because it is one of his classics. Again, not on the level of "Blood Feast", "The Wizard of Gore" or "Gore Gore Girls", so see those first. But if there was ever a film that deserved a decent remake, it was "2000 Maniacs". Unfortunately, it did not get one (see separate review for more on this). So we are left to try and enjoy the original. I did.

As of September 2011, you can have this film in your collection on Blu-Ray, thanks to Image Entertainment. Besides the new technology, there are commentaries from Lewis and producer David Friedman, as well as plenty of special goodies. I would strongly urge anyone to pick it up.

Six Yankee travellers are tricked by a fake road diversion and find themselves as "guests" in the small Southern town of Pleasant Valley just in time for its centennial celebrations. What they don't realise is that they are on the menu! Director Herschell Gordon Lewis was known as the Godfather of Gore and he stated that this is his favourite movie (personally I prefer his Blood Feast). His films are most definitely an acquired taste, bad acting and very cheap looking gore effects being staple elements. To its credit Maniacs does have an interesting plot that incorporates a supernatural theme, the acting may be wooden but former Playboy Playmate Connie Mason looks ravishing. The gory deaths are elaborate, the one in which a guy is rolled down a hill in a barrel that is full of nails is probably the best known however I really liked the one involving horses, "You're gonna ride four horses and they all gonna be going in four different directions" a hick tells the unfortunate victim to be. In Britain the old VHS was heavily cut but seen uncut now the gore is so fake looking that it's more amusing than shocking. The low budget is very obvious and the town's population of 2000 looks more like 100 tops, however it is well shot and good use is made of its Florida filming location. If I'm honest this is a pretty bad movie and the poor acting does get tiresome at times, a shorter running time may have been an improvement, however as an early gore/drive-in/exploitation flick then it is essential viewing for fans of Grindhouse.

Essential group viewing, "2,000 Maniacs" demands audience participation in the form of MST3K-style ridicule. Poorly recorded sound, bad acting, excessive (yet obviously fake) gore, and a lot of padding. The soundtrack, however, deserves special mention--the twisted "Hee Haw" banjos and attention-deficit organ really frost the cake of this unabashed cheese-fest. Probably intolerable and boring when viewed solo, "2,000 Maniacs" can be fun when watched with a group of like-minded individuals in the right mood.

5/10

I saw this movie while in the Army. It was part of a blood triple header at a drive-in while stationed in Virginia. Blood Feast, 2000 Maniacs and another movie I forgot the name were on the bill. I can still remember the ways the characters were killed and all the themes from a State Fair that were used. But my favorite was when they cut the girls thumb off and then they fixed it by chopping her arm off. Then later that night by the campfire while they cooked the arm. They sang "I'm rolling my sweet baby's arm." How can you not like this movie it is almost like a must before seeing Kill Bill part 2. Just my opinion.

Here at IMDb, there appears to be an interesting difference between the "splatter" film cult and those who admit they watch pornography. Since the 'splatter' film is really a kind of sadistic/violence pornography, I went, on a hunch, after reading through reviews of this film, to the reviews for a known cult porno, "Deep Throat." I thought I would find the same sort of remarks (with obvious necessary variation), but was surprised to discover that those who praise "Deep Throat" seem determined to discuss the merits of its story, an issue that doesn't concern most who praise "2,000 Maniacs." What is both interesting and upsetting about many of the positive reviews of this film is that the writers admit that what brings them to it are what, they also admit, are the "perverse" or "sick" elements - they want to see the mutilation, the blood, the pain of the victim, this gives them enjoyment.

This was the first of only about a half-dozen films I've walked out of my entire life. I left after the first major episode of sadism, where a hick thug laughingly cuts off the thumb of a girl with whom he's on a picnic, for no discernible reason whatsoever except that he finds it amusing. It was clear that the audience was not invited to identify with the victim who was merely an object of use for the thug. And I have no idea, to this day, why anyone would identify with the thug. Nor do I understand the only other psychological explanation for watching this scene without any identification at all, that is, as a clinical observation of how good or how poor the special effects are.

I like action films, so I recognize the cathartic, even therapeutic, use of violence in cinema. But just cutting off a woman's thumb just for the enjoyment of her pain, or to see how much it might bleed, is beyond any reasonable understanding.

This film remains a strong argument for suppression of sado-porn, or at least burying it under an "X" or NC-17 rating. It is confusing why Woo's "The Killer" was originally given an "X" - yet I was able to walk in to see this Lewis film, at the time of a brief re-release, when it was obvious I was only 14. It has left an indelibly bad impression on me all these years, and I will always damn the name of Hershel Gordon Lewis for it. Some have tried to defend this film as "so bad it's funny," but sado-porn is just cruel and can never be funny. My psychic pain is not a subject for your profit or enjoyment.

It never fails to amaze me what some people have filmed as entertainment. This film, for example, tells the story of a town that magically reappears 100 years after being destroyed by Union soldiers to wreak its vengeance on Yankee tourists. Herschell Gordon Lewis uses his same lack of directorial style, bad actors, and hideous dialogue to incorporate into this cheesy, sleazy, yet highly enjoyable gore film, his second in his gore trilogy. The Southern characterizations alone are so stereotyped and, if I were a Southerner, so offensive that they make the viewer wince more than the bright red that dapples the screen over the various killings such as a woman being made into a barbecue, a man being nailed as a barrel rolls down a hill, another man is quartered, and finally a woman is squashed by a gigantic boulder. The southern "maniacs" have missing teeth, no idea of standard English, always wear overalls and red scarfs about their necks, and lastly have no humanity at all in them....nor does the Yankee cast as not one of them can act either. This film, with its major problems not withstanding, is entertaining solely for its shock element of yesteryear which is now its comedy factor of today. One last note, some people consider this Lewis's masterpiece, but it is decidedly a notch below Blood Feast.....both of which are a notch below most Ed Wood films.