El Chupacabra (Video 2003) Poster

(2003 Video)

User Reviews

Review this title
24 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Cheap, cheap, cheap
ejn197211 March 2004
Every so often, a movie comes along. This is one of them.

Really, what can you say about bargain-basement junk like this? El Chupacabra (or simply "Chupacabra" - the movie box, trailer, and movie itself can't seem to decide which title to use) is a really good example of what happens when you give some guys a camera and $20 and tell them to make a movie by the end of the week. It's full of no-name, no-talent people, plus a guest-villain appearance by some guy from Naughty by Nature (personally, I'd stick to music, because his acting isn't good). The whole thing has an amateurish feel. The "star" has trouble remembering his lines, let alone delivering them with any kind of feeling. Monster attacks are confused, filmed in extreme close-up and rapid cuts that defy any sense of what is happening - and, flagrantly flaunting convention, the monster is about twice as slow and three times as awkward when it attacks from a point-of-view shot. The dialog ranges from clunky to laughable, and can be unintentionally hilarious in places (in this respect, it rivals the great works of Ed Wood, Jr. and Coleman Francis).

Some time was put into the monster design, though it doesn't match the description given by the film's "expert," and it looks as if it may have been an off-the-shelf Halloween costume that the prop guys modified. Even assuming it was entirely original, it's less inspired than adequate, and given the astonishingly low quality of the rest of the film and props, it's likely that most people will be underwhelmed.

I've no doubt that El Chupacabra will make money. But it's only because they only need to sell about 5 copies to cover their costs. Even for a low-budget direct-to-video flick, this one is bare-bones. And in movies, as in just about everything else, you tend to get what you pay for. A few hundred dollars and a script rewrite (or, for that matter, an actual script) would have done wonders. It still would have sucked, but only as much as all the other low-budget direct-to-video flicks suck. As it is, it's in a class by itself.

Hail to the chupacabra, baby.
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Potentially the greatest, worst movie ever!!!
alexbnieto4 December 2008
What can I say about this movie that hasn't already been said. If you like soft core porn, then this movie is for you. If you like Horror, then this movie is for you. If you like comedy, then this movie is definitely for you! Let's just start out by saying that this is the best, worst B movie I have ever seen. Sometimes I laughed, sometimes I cried, but all throughout there was always Chups there to comfort me. The plot goes from bad to dreadful in a matter of micro seconds. That's the beauty of this movie.

Pros: How can you say no to the main character who is referred to by only one name? Navarro! He could problematically be Brazilian. Who knows. Also, Navarro is a great character and has the acting prowess of Lou Ferrigno or Mel Gibson in Thunderdome. He is a great cop dammit! Not a dog catcher! Cons: There aren't any cons in this great piece of American movie art! Overall, this movie contains cheers, jeers and a little bit of tears. Highly recommended for B movie fanatics. Pick this gem of a movie up at your local Wal-Mart or Penny Saver Online.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Oh man! What was I thinking when I watched this pile of crap (and how much did I drink)?!
seanwilson23 July 2004
Well, what can I say besides "utter s**t." This is, literally, a pain-inducing movie!! How ANYONE can stand to sit through this tragically long (by being more than five seconds long) trainwreck of plot-holes, confusing characters-that-come-out-of-nowhere-and-are-NEVER-explained, to the ass-tastic camera work is well beyond me!

Goddamn, I hate this movie! My friend and I rented it because we wanted to rent a cheesy horror movie to watch late at night and be slightly scared (but most likely just end up making fun of it, via MST3K)*. Guess which one ended up happening! That's right- the latter of the two (good job! You get a gold star!). But we really didn't need to make fun of El Chupacabra because it is SO freaking horrible, that we ended up laughing simply from watching the movie (and believe me, we did NOT laugh at the so-called "humorous" moments in the movie). We laughed at how appallingly sad and deplorable El Chupacabra is.

Well, if you want to torture someone, tie them up to a chair and force them to watch the movie that cockroaches, lice and diseases avoid - El Chupacabra.

*If this sounds familiar, it's probably because you've (unfortunately) read my review of Alien 51. Sadly, both movies were made by the same two "directors" (that's right, TWO DIRECTORS! I guess they had to get two dumbasses to come up with enough bull***t to fill El Chupacabra and Alien 51).And please avoid both movies at ALL COSTS!!!!
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
El Cheapocrapfest
BA_Harrison25 January 2009
Boyle Heights, Los Angeles: legendary South American goat-sucking vampire, El Chupacabra, is on the loose, feeding on anyone unlucky enough to cross its path. Animal control officer Navarro (Eric Alegria) and Chupacabra expert/author Starlina Divide (Elina Madison) attempt to track down the creature, but find their progress hampered by a pair of dumb cops, money hungry locals keen to capture the beast for a fat reward, and a couple of nefarious scientists who want the monster for their experiments.

Stinking higher than a two-week-old taco, El Chupacabra is an incredibly bad horror movie that even fans of incredibly bad horror movies might struggle to sit through. With its dreadful script, awful direction (by not one, but two talentless hacks—Brennon Jones and Paul Wynne), laughable dialogue, and some of the worst acting this side of a porn flick, I recommend this film about as much as I do drinking the tap water in Mexico.

As Navarro and Starlina proceed with their investigations, viewers are treated to some incredibly weak gore, the worst designed book jacket in history, the most unconvincing dead person I've seen since the blinking corpse in Dr. Butcher MD, and a high-tech computerised security system consisting of a keyboard nailed to a post.

To be fair, for a guy in a rubber suit, the monster itself is fairly creepy (hairy, with big claws, and a face like a particularly ugly bat), but its appearances are few and far between, with more screen time spent on the tedious trials and tribulations of whiney Officer Navarro than on the killer antics of the titular creature (just how many times is it necessary to see Navarro handing in paperwork to his bitchy boss?).

If, like me, you make the mistake of wasting your hard-earned cash on this dreadful latino bilge (in my case, it was a whole 50p), consider using the disc as a coaster for your tequila rather than actually watching it.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Lame script + Horrible acting + Bad creature effects = El Chupacabra
Hypnotica9 January 2005
This movie is a complete and utter waste of time, one of the worst films I've ever seen. And coming from me, that is definitely saying something. In fact, I wish I could have given it negative stars instead of just rating it as a pathetic one-star awful.

When I rented this movie, I had an open mind. I find the legend of the chupacabra interesting and I have a fondness for cheesy horror flicks. But I draw the line at this one.

The acting sucked. The lead male gives one of the worst performances ever, looking and sounding unnatural as he delivers his poorly written lines. The lead female gives a slightly more palatable performance, but that really doesn't take much.

The chupacabra... well, considering how low budget this movie must have been, the creature was tolerable. It does, however, look exactly like someone in a mask and body suit. The mask is fairly detailed and might look cool in person, but not so on screen.

Speaking of on screen, you'd think they could have at least used a better camera. It looks like it was shot with a camcorder for crying out loud. Not a very good one, either.

I don't know what whoever wrote this abomination was thinking. The dialog sucks and just... I can't describe what I feel about it. At least not without getting in trouble with the site.

My advice? Avoid this at all costs. It's just not worth it. If it comes on TV and you have nothing else to do or watch, then *find* something else to do or watch. Read a book, listen to music, *anything.* Just don't subject yourself to this. If you do, you cannot say you weren't warned. And for Lord and Lady's sake, don't rent this sucker. It is not worth it, even if you get the chance to rent it for fifty cents. Trust me, I know.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not So Legendary Anymore
jamhorner12 January 2008
This is a great example of what could have been a great film and a great idea but turned out to be really bad in the process. I was mainly tempted to get this because of the DVD cover, stupid me, but I did anyway and I was blown away, in a bad sense. This movie is essentially about El Chupacabra wreaking havoc around Los Angeles and it's up to a local animal cop and a writer to save the day, before two corrupt cops and two evil scientists bring them down. The main reason why I did not enjoy this film was because of big continuity errors that were hard to not notice. Along with some bad acting, okay lighting and nothing scary, this movie did not hit me as much as is it probably should have. However, compared to other Chupacabra movies, this one certainly tops the charts, just barely.

First off, the continuity in this movie is way off and I mean off the shoulders and into the ditch. There were so many points were the characters said or did something and then in the next shot, they aren't doing it or the change never occurred. Case in point: the main character has a gun, the Chupacabra attacks, he whips out a flair from nowhere and distracts and the gun in missing. The girl runs while he defends here with the mystery flair and she had no gun, then the main character is running with the girl and has the gun. Where did the flair come from and what happened to the gun. The time of day gets screwed up. One minute it is sun set and you can still see the sun and then the next minute it looks like midnight. There were some plot holes as in, why was the Chupacabra there, what were the scientists doing, what happened to this guy and why did he shoot the animal and it still lived? These things bugged the heck out of me and none of the questions were answered.

Next on the list is the acting. Boy was it wooden and bad. The main character Navarro, played by Eric Algeria, seems a bit too calm at points and too dedicated to finding out what killed a few dogs and when a tragedy hits, his emotion was just not there. Elina Madison, who played Starlina, did a fairly poor job. She was the author of a bestselling book about the Chupacabra and she just didn't seem into her role or her performance. Her acting was kind of laughable and a poor. Even for an author she knows too much about that thing, and knows how to disable a high security defense system in a hidden laboratory. Tony Criss was okay, but he seemed a bit to calm for some of the stuff that was going on. The movie reminds me of a bad reenactment to murder for some crime solving show, where the actors and actresses aren't really that committed to their work.

I rarely don't get this anal when it comes to lighting or editing, but for this movie, I could not help but be harsh on the lighting. It took me out of the movie a number of times because the lighting was so poorly directed. There were times when they were trying to be creative by adding color filters to the scene to make it more "comic bookish," but it backfired. The worse part is at night when it is pith black outside, but the scene is so oversaturated with light, it seems like its day. They keep switching from high intensity light to soft light for random scenes, and the lights seem so bright that the actors were squinting. It shouldn't be that bright that there are dark shadows at night. During the sunset when the lighting was perfect, that's the only time when the light was good, other than that it was terrible.

There were not scares in this film. There was only one time where I did jump but other than that, it wasn't scary. There were points were it probably could have been scary but it was so damn light out, you could see the Chupacabra approach the man, but if it was dark, it would have been better. Even the creature design for the Chupacabra was poor, it looked good but it was a short man or kid in a jump suit. They didn't hide his face; they showed him with no sense of mystery or any enigmatic appearance. There was a fair amount of gore, but it seemed unreal. This movie just wasn't scary, that's all.

Overall, they did Americanize a great South American legend into a blood-thirsty human eater, which the Chupacabra isn't. In fact, it was scared of people and it only killed goats, sheep, dogs and deer because it was said that it hated the smell of humans. But, then were would the story be? I did not enjoy this film for any reason, but I will give them credit for trying to make a good film with good intentions. I would not recommend this film to any horror fan, but if you like indie or B-movies, you should check this out. Also, if you are easily tempted by cult-classics, you'd enjoy this film. I didn't, I won't see it again, but in some deep sedated way, I enjoy these kinds of movie just to see what the other side of Hollywood is making.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
In your face, Darwin!
Coventry11 October 2007
According to this masterpiece of film-making's script (pun intended), Charles Darwin was full of nonsense when he presented his evolution theory, because he made absolutely no mention of any alien intervention. For you see, aliens sent Chupacabras to the earth and they form the missing link in the evolution theory. However, the rest of the film clearly seems to emphasize that Chupacabras are a typically Puerto Rican phenomenon, so I don't really know where that fits in. Are they saying all Puerto Ricans are aliens? Whatever, it's all pretty irrelevant anyway. The only thing you need to memorize is that "El Chupacabre" is an utterly cheap and imbecilic amateur B-movie, lacking tension, character development and any form of style. Several duos of people are chasing this goat-munching monster (remotely resembling the midget version of the Pumpkinhead demon) through the streets and ghettos of an ugly city. We have an untalented dogcatcher and a nagging female novelist, a pair of obnoxious cops and the supposedly evil scientist with his dim-witted accomplice. Since they all are extremely incompetent in what they do, the monster can carelessly carry on devouring all the Latino immigrants of the neighborhood. The monster itself looks okay and the make-up effects on his victims' leftovers are acceptably gross and bloody. The acting performances are irredeemably awful and headache inducing. Particularly Eric Alegria is pitiable in his first and only lead role as the overly ambitious employee of Animal Control. Yes, it's an incredibly stupid film, but surely you have struggled yourself through worse and less amusing low-budget garbage.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
It was so bad that it was good!
iceman-9839810 September 2018
Low budget, pretty sure at one point the Chup was made from a cardboard cutout, I absolutely love cheesy horror films!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The goatsucker is loose and this time it wants human blood.
moviegirl666200010 November 2003
Behind the dreadful acting of our main characters, there is a quirky, funny, and suspenseful story. It's too bad that York won't fork over some more money because there was a lot of potential there. The cops are great, the monster looks cool and I was always into seeing what would happen next. The cinematography kind of seemed a bit off but I guess that's what happens when you hire people at sweatshop rates. Compared to the large stack of low budget dribble on the shelves these days, El Chupacabra stands out. Maybe next time the guys that made this one will have a better monster to work with since the Chupacabra is probably the dumbest and least believable conspiracy theory out there. The writer had to give it all sorts of other powers to make up for the fact that killing goats just isn't that entertaining. If you're into low budget horror, this is a film you have to watch.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
the Chupacabra arrives and destroys
dechols6610 September 2003
This film rocks! Great special effects, has a cool look and the writing makes the whole thing move fast. Treach from Naughty by Nature is in it and does a great job playing the evil Dr. Goodspeed.

I've seen most of the York low budget horror flicks and this is by far the best, way better than scarecrow, which was a joke. I can't wait for the sequel. I have a feeling that the guys who wrote and directed this are definitely around to stay and kick our butts with more hardcore horror that is both innovative and original. Monster movies are back!
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
midget monster horror ...
alistairc_20009 October 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This is another movie from Hardgore. As a label they are very hit and miss and this is one of their miss titles. If the script had been sharper this could have been a classic monster slasher cross over movie but all they could do was follow a clichéd plot full of holes. The Characters The young guy who wants to be a cop like his dad, but is a dog catcher. The expert who no one believes, she is an expert in the same terms that Von Daniken was. The hard bitten cop who is a bit corrupt and his dopey partner. Lastly the dodgy scientists who are going to create some super breed of monster. All the characters are clichéd and just what you would expect in an also ran movie. The Plot. A mad scientist wants a Chupa for some unknown reason but it escapes and starts killing dogs in L.A. In pops the dog catcher, he is down on his luck but he knows if he finds the killer of these pooches he might be a contender. Then people start dying, the hard bitten cop tells the dog catcher to leave it to the professionals. The mad scientists cover up the evidence and the expert teams up with the dog catcher to get the bad guys. This is limp stuff. The gore. Understated is all I can say. The creatures themselves are great and are the saving grace of the movie. Summation. This is a tired excuse for a horror movie which could have been so much more. I never know why script writers do not try to make there movies more original or put in some sort of conspiracy theory. This is not worth more that £2.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Slightly amusing piece of utter trash.
HumanoidOfFlesh21 February 2007
The back of my DVD describes the plot of "El Chucabra":after his capture in the wilderness,the legendary bloodthirsty creature Chupacabra escapes into the city creating mayhem and panic.As they pursue the deadly beast,an animal control officer and scientist Dr Starlina Davide realize that a vigilante with his own suspicious plan is also tracking the elusive killer for a mysterious research facility run by the diabolical Dr Goodspeed.This putrid horror flick is somewhat amusing,if you watch it under the influence of alcohol.The script is completely silly,the acting is wooden beyond belief and the direction is amateurish.Two rubber Chupacabra suits are easily the best thing about this movie.3 out of 10 and that's being extremely kind.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Yes, its as bad as you think
Horrorible_Horror_Films28 September 2006
You want the worst horror movie of the 21st century? El Chupacabra is it. "Manos:The Hands of Fate" is THE worst movie of all time, but El Chupacabra certainly is the worst movie of this century. It also has to have the distinction of having the absolute worst leading actor ever. Eric Alegria, the actor in the lead role, has never done another film other than El Chupacabra, gee - I wonder why.

Apparently the monster is attacking people, but everyone that is attacked moves really slowly and is really stupid. And, there are no cops at all in this town just two idiot detectives - Hello! Cops show up on the scene of homicides first, then the detectives come! And, apparently the monster only attacks in one person's backyard, and some deserted area by the docks. Or...thats the only places the filmmakers could get access to film.

This 'film' is the reason why IMDb must allow us to give negative stars. This easily deserves -10 stars, or at least 0. They should allow a 0 rating.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
El Landfill
Dr. Gore27 September 2003
Warning: Spoilers

I have a prediction. A bold prediction. Someday, there will be a good Chupacabra movie. A monster legend of this magnitude deserves an exciting cinematic tribute. Well, at least a competent one. "El Chupacabra" is not that film.

So the Chupacabra attacks people and the world's most excitable dogcatcher decides to do something about it. There are some other characters that appear for no good reason. The movie concludes at the standard B-movie lab. All of the characters somehow end up there and mercifully end the movie.

This movie is painful. It will cause you physical pain. My stomach was turning over while watching this. Every single aspect of this movie is rotten. I cannot find one positive thing to say about it. Let me think...nope. Not a thing.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Almost unwatchable
HareTrinity15 September 2011
It's slow with a terrible script and plot. The fun gore effects do little to save this film from itself.

I even enjoyed Kaw and various other bad creature features but I do not recommend this bad film as a bad film!

I feel most sorry for the actors of the 2 agents. They tried to do something with the script they were given, adding in a few specks of comedy to this bland and ridiculous story. Sadly, the script sells them out towards the end; they weren't WRITTEN as comic relief.

Really, really, poor...

If you have nothing else on hand to watch you'd be better off writing your own and acting it out with paper finger puppets or stationary.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
what a let down!
iknowcraig29 April 2006
OK, so i have recently been collecting a lot of vipco and hardgore titles on DVD and i have to say that this one is one of the most disappointing ones. A more recent film compared to other titles in the Hardgore catalogue this was a straight to DVD release. i've always been interested in the myth of el chokeberry ever since i saw a documentary on it as a teenager. however this film is a terrible let down shot on tacky dv the storyline and acting are terrible, it took me three goes to watch this film all the way through. While cheap 80's and 90's horror films are good because of their cheap budgets and comedy this film is not.

check out some other titles in the hardgore series first, boneyard for example is older but much much better.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
skinbonez5 July 2005
God what a great flick. This movie had such great acting and suspense. 4 Stars and it makes movies like the exorcist,the ring, and child's play look like Saturday Morning Cartoons. God what a movie!! I was shaking and I almost cried. I had nightmares for months and to this day they still occur. I mean those little creatures mad me scared to walk outside at night. I even thought I saw one of those things in real life. For people who want to be scared, rent or buy this movie. It was such a joy. How can a movie like this not be in the theaters, is beyond me while I see movies with an all star cast like Sin City and War of the Worlds getting more respect then an amazing flick like this. The story line was amazing and nearly breath taking. Pure genius acting by Eric Algeria who makes Denzel Washington look like a school boy. Oh and I cant enough about the directors Paul Wynne and Brennon Jones who just blew with creative techniques like these. The soundtrack was just fantastically unbelievable. God I wish they had a soundtrack to this movie. I give this flick 2 thumbs up.A must see thriller!!!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I've seen better middle-school projects!
pizzaranman22 April 2005
One of the latest (disaster) movies from York Entertainment, "El Chupacabra" excels in making its viewer want to die after having wasted two hours watching it. This movie appears to have been filmed with a spare camcorder normally used for birthday parties. The only reason I could tell that it wasn't was because of certain scenes where the cameraman's shadow is in the frame.

Just about every aspect of cinema is plagued by this movie, and I'm sure that it has set the film industry back another ten years. The actors are borderline retarded, often pausing while they wait for the off-screen cue-card to change. The actor that plays Navarro not only slurs and skips word in his dialogue, but stumbles through the swiss-cheese plot line with a squinting and confounded look on his face. Other actors break the forth wall and overall show the acting skill of a twelve-year old kid doing a science project in his backyard.

My friends and I purposefully search out the worst possible movies, and this one gave us more than we bargained for. The humorous parts are unfunny and the rest is riddled with horrible clichés and plot holes. As one friend so humbly put it, this movie is the aborted fetus of the industry. I would highly suggest this film for people like me that purposely search for these movies, but for all others, beware!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Elswet16 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Where do I start? The box should have been enough to keep me away from this attempt, but I'd been taught early on not to judge a book (or movie) by its cover, so I ignored the disgusting graphic quality of the box and rented it anyway. But common sense should tell you that if they can't do a single still image properly, then how dismal will the moving ones be, later? Yeah. They were pretty awful.

The actors in this flick appeared totally unaware they were being filmed, as just any expression seemed to do fine, regardless of the situation the characters were in or what they were reacting to.

However, a good story can offset the downfalls of low budget productions. Good dialog can carry a poorly-funded attempt at times. Unfortunately, this was not one of those times, as the story was as weak and nonexistent as the other required elements of good cinema.

There simply aren't words for how bad this was.

Perhaps you can get the idea from my rating of -2.3/10 from...

the Fiend :.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Are you kidding???
Phaith15 October 2004
I rented this movie in hope of an at least semi interesting creature feature. What it turned out to be was a badly done joke. This movie really stank, the acting was terrible with the main actor putting obvious breaks in between all his lines because he obviously can't remember his lines. The lighting and film making

are horrible and above all the script is possibly the worst one I have ever heard. The monster though scary looking were hardly worth the watching. There were

a lot of things that could have been built on but never were. Over all this is a major zero movie and not even worth the time I spent watching it. Thankfully I didn't pay to see it!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
yeah, this is pretty weak. Mild spoilers below.
willywants13 July 2004
Warning: Spoilers
A Dogcatcher is hunting a Chupacabra, a small reptilian,ape-like creature, after the mysterious death of several animals and people. Little does he know a private investor is also searching for the mysterious creature and will stop at nothing to capture the creature. Okay, I guess it isn't fair to blame the producers of the film, I guess it's the low-budget that really kills the film. At times it looks like it was filmed with a camcorder (Not one of those high-tech handheld deals, one of those gigantic 80's sony things), the immensly poor performances (Isn't it funny how the actors can "keep they're cool" while being attacked by the monsters?)and the horrible writing (Prehaps the writers thought they would be able to insure Marketability in the US be loading the dialogue with profanity?). But the special effects were better than I thought they would be. The creatures look like small monkey-like creatures with reptilian claws and hop around alot like Kangaroos. There was also an adequate amount of gore, lots of slashings and throat cuts. I guess this film could have been worse--considering this film was designed to be no more than a money-grabbing entry in the direct-to-video market, There are much more pretentious films out there......any ways, I give it 3/10.

About the DVD: The picture is generally O.K. though it can be heavy on grain at times in darker scenes and is often very soft. The audio has no surround sound effects but generally is audible (The opening sequence notwithstanding) and free of distortion. For extras we get a brief 10-minute production featurette,in which the actors talk about how fun the film was to work on, how some of the F/X were accomplished, some on-location footage and crew interviews. It's a pretty interesting featurette that's more enjoyable than the movie itself. We also get a theatrical trailer for the film. The menus are non-animated. my rating for the DVD: 6/10.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Interesting lighting makes this movie very memorable.
MrRyan21 February 2004
Warning: Spoilers

This movie was rented as a joke, and what a joke it was. The film is based on a dog catcher who is looking for El Chupacabra. The dog catchers outfit is so ridiculous. It looks like he sewed the patch on his hat and for some reason he shows of his "muscles" by rolling up his sleeves. Throughout the movie, mostly at night, you can see how bad the lighting was. They are in a car which is brightly lit and they are driving in pitch black. Often you can see the camera man's shadow on the ground. The costumes are terrible, the lighting is terrible, and the acting is terrible. This is a good movie for a laugh...maybe.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
This movie sucks so good.
JohnnySodoff31 October 2003
I rented El Chupacabra over the weekend with one of my friends thinking it would probably suck because it was a straight to video horror movie but i rented it anyways cuz the chupacabra is one of my favorite pieces of mexican folklore (and i don't think a movie about lachusa would be very exciting). First off, this movie featured TREACH from friggin' NAUGHTY BY NATURE. What the hell is that all about? The movie had the worst acting i've ever seen and all they're little "facts" about the chupacabra were screwed up. Mostly everything that happened, happened for no apparent reason and, oh yeah, it sucked.


This movie's EXTREME suckiness is actually what makes this movie pretty entertaining. I rented Run Ronnie Run (the mr. show movie). That was friggin' hilarious. But el chupacabra made me laugh quite a bit more. What i'm saying is if you like to watch really cheesy horror movies with your friends (which i do)and make fun of them and laugh about it, then this movie is for you and is awesome. If you like to watch horror movies and get scared s***less or see something at least sensible then you will hate this movie and pray for the death of yourself and your family if you see this piece of crap. I LOVE HOW MUCH THIS MOVIE SUCKS.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Crap, crap and more crap
broad-216 October 2003
My God, is this movie bad! When will the super-talented folks at York Entertainment realize that sooner or later viewers will get wise to their product and not be fooled by their better than average DVD box covers? Sure the "film" was shot in 35mm but the cinematography is average at best and the "acting" -- well, it's another non-Screen Actors Guild horrorama in the casting department. Too many of these ultra-low budget horror films are made today with non-SAG actors because the cheapo production companies don't want to pay actor residuals and the result is 70 minutes of unwatchable filler.

The screenplay seems to have been written by blind-folded, trained chimps and the resulting pages put together at random. On the only plus side, the "Chupacabra" monster suit is decent and I'm sure the makeup effects guy did the best he could do with the tiny budget he probably had. I dare you to watch this (or ANY of York's recent releases) without fast- forwarding through it.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed