The Mangler Reborn

First Mangler movie is not all bad, typical b horror flick nothing special but not that bad. Second movie was bad but one could tolerate it cause you kind of know what to espect from this sort of films. The Mangler Reborn makes no sense, the plot is rubbish and reminds me of a cheap Saw ripoff. Horror films are scary and suppose to be this one is not the least bit scary in anyway, there are few gruesome scenes that are more of bad taste than anything else. I get the feeling that the whole crew of this movie just went through the motions of making it and put minimum effort into it, there is truly nothing good about this film at all. Evil Dead,Bad Taste and the likes of them are great films that i really enjoy, made with a small budget but Sam Raimi and Peter Jackson made them with there heart and soul. Stay clear of this movie and i have learn my lesson and will stay clear if they make another one.

The bloodthirsty laundry machine is purchased at auction by repairman Hadley,who quickly becomes possessed and kills his wife.Some time later,Hadley is now abducting young women for the Mangler to kill.One such victim is Jaime,who is taken back to Hadley's house,where the Mangler devours its victims.But while Hadley was away father and son thieves Rick played by Reggie Bannister of "Phantasm" fame and Mike are doing some breaking and entering and it just so happens that their latest target is Hadley's horror house."The Mangler Reborn" is pretty bad.The gore doesn't come until the last 20 minutes,the action moves at the snail's pace and the acting is stiff.Still the third act of "The Mangler Reborn" offers plenty of blood and gore and is worth waiting for.5 out of 10.

Repairman Hadley (Weston Blakesley) buys an old laundry machine at an auction, and restores it to working condition, unaware of the demonic force that lurks within. The machine possesses the man, and drives him to kill so that it can feed on blood and guts. Meanwhile, house-breaker Rick (Reggie Bannister) and his son Mike (Scott Speiser) make the mistake of choosing Hadley's home for their next robbery...

Some might say that The Mangler Reborn should have been terminated before it reached full term. Some might say it should never have been conceived in the first place. But while it's true that the film looks and sounds terrible, having been shot on digital video on a very tight budget, I actually think it's not all bad. The plot is sufficiently twisted, allowing for some fairly suspenseful moments and a few scenes of graphic violence (although the use of a rubber mallet and not a lump hammer detracts a bit from the nastiness), both Aimee Brooks and Juliana Dever (as victims of the killer) are easy on the eye, the claustrophobic house setting works well, and the downbeat ending makes for a nice change. Plus, it's always good to see Phantasm's Reggie Bannister, but I wish someone would tell him that the bald head and ponytail is not a good look.

Sure, The Mangler Reborn isn't as effective as the original film (which starred Robert Englund, was directed by Tobe Hooper, and based on a story by Stephen King - and even with that talent involved, it wasn't that great), but it's still better than the current IMDb rating of 3.1 would have us believe.

4.5/10, generously rounded up to 5 for IMDb.

Third entry in the Mangler series, the original being based on a Stephen King story. A middle-aged man becomes obsessed with the mangling machine, and has to kidnap young women and feed them to it. Most of the running time takes place in the guy's house, this does stifle it somewhat. There is enough gore to keep gorehounds happy, we get a gratuitous female shower scene early on (no doubt intended to stimulate interest), plus a few moments of (unintentional?) humour ("in this world there's only room for one asshole!"). Horror fans may recognise Reggie Bannister from the classic Phantasm, but sadly some of the acting is pretty wooden. Straight to video that serves as an adequate time filler if you are seeking a simple gory, horror flick. But it is nothing more than that.

Even though all or almost all the action takes place inside one admittedly large detached house, this had the makings of an excellent horror film. Unfortunately, it falls far short.

From the title, this is an obvious sequel, albeit a belated one, it would lose nothing if there were some sort of tenuous explanation. Instead, all we see is the bad guy hardly uttering a word and walking around almost in a trance. There is a lot of blood and a lot of pain, but hardly anything else. Terribly disappointing.

The original film is based on a 1972 short story by Stephen King, a novelist who has a well-deserved reputation for horror. Alas, not every horror classic translates from the written word to celloloid, or whatever films are made of in the cyber-age.