Two Thousand Maniacs!

It could have been a story from The Twilight Zone. A small Southern town comes alive each hundred years to get even for the Civil War. Unfortunately, the subtext for "Two Thousand Maniacs" is in-your-face hateful. Back in 1964 the premise probably was considered amusing. Now, however, it seems dated and is in very poor taste. There's a lot of sneering joviality in this film. The stupid, bloodthirsty townsfolk are bullies who get a lot of enjoyment out of inflicting pain. There are no heroes here, only villains. And the script plotting is weak. Just when you think the movie is ending, it's not. It revs back up with a slight "twist" and keeps going. This happens several times. Aside from a substandard theme and plot, the film's direction is poor. Among the worst scenes are those wherein cast extras stand around in the background watching; they look wooden and manipulated, the result of an unimaginative Director who doesn't seem to know how to set up a scene. The town is called "Pleasant Valley"; a more apt name would be "Amateur-ville", due to the acting. Actors recite their lines about as effectively as high school thespians. Prod values are cheap looking. And the sound is terrible. There's a subtle and unwanted echo on interior sets that makes some of the dialogue muffled and hard to understand. Color cinematography is adequate; images are clear and appropriately lit. A carnival-like tone drains suspense from a story that could have been interestingly thematic and eerie, if the script had been written, and the production directed, by Twilight Zone writer and host Rod Serling. Instead, what we get with "Two Thousand Maniacs" is a hateful plot, lacking suspense and mystery, in a film largely devoid of cinematic professionalism. Marketing the film in the Horror genre refocus the production to a friendlier niche audience, which explains its cult status.

What`s all the praise about?Beats me...I bought this film a while ago on the basis of a trailer.The trailer,I thought,had a sick and nice feeling to it,so I was expecting a bloody freak-fest.Boy was I disappointed!!I will not give you a runthrough of what is going on in this failure of a film,except that the acting is bad,the jokes are lame(perverse jokes can be fulfilling if they are done in a clever way,these are not though,just plain stupid!!),and the most disappointing thing is the shameful low amount of gore,and the few scenes where you actually see it,well,it just keeps you saying to yourself;BOOOOORING!!!Leaves no impact whatsoever,I am sorry to say.You don`t go and purchase a Lewis-film for the brilliant storyline,or to watch the interesting character development taking place,you want to see gore!!End of story.Should really have learned my lesson after watching the oh so infamous "Blood Feast",which was also a huge pile of crap.So if you own a copy,please burn it!A must do!!!!!

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.

I am prepared to concede one point here - if H. G. Lewis ever made a good film, this would be it. Having said THAT... the rest of this old comment stands... I was paging through the comments on this film, for god knows what reason, and was thoroughly appalled. I can't believe what I'm reading. Nowhere does anyone seem to grasp what is immediately obvious to any person of intelligence or taste - that Herschel G. Lewis is an incompetent hack who never directed anything even close to a good film in any genre. He is one of the most immoral filmmakers ever to set foot behind a camera. His "plots", if they can be called such, remind me of a Christmas tree. With a Christmas tree, one chops down and kills a fine, beautiful piece of nature's wonder and drags it into one's house for the sole purpose of hanging tacky, tasteless garbage on it for a brief time. And so it is with Lewis. His movies are nothing more than poorly crafted frameworks that exist to justify the depiction of various mutilations and murders that have no point and explain or illuminate nothing about the characters involved. They represent an immoral exploitation of various graphic forms of human suffering without point or purpose. There is no tension in a Lewis movie because he is congenitally incapable as a director of creating a character than a viewer would care about. They are just meat to be butchered. I have never been frightened by this or any other Lewis movie for just this reason. Yet there are people who praise this kind of immoral nonsense to the skies, because they think it representative of some kind of counterculture trash aesthetic. The only way I can explain Lewis's following is to remind myself that he is an acknowledged master of salesmanship, the apparent inventor of "direct marketing". Now, "direct marketing" is better known to people as "junk mail", and Lewis's involvement in selling junk is apparent in his films. They represent the height of mass marketing to the gullible - he wraps up garbage, not in a pretty new package, but in an ugly, immoral one, and sells it as "art". The only moral to the saga of Lewis is a reiteration of Barnum's dictum about what kind of person gets born every minute. Stay away from "Two Thousand Maniacs" and every other of Lewis's insults to the human soul as well.

Although I'm still a long way from being an expert on the matter, this definitely is the best Hershell Gordon Lewis film I've seen thus far! I really enjoyed the light-headed gore and splatter of "Blood Feast" and "The Gruesome Twosome" but their total lack of plot and continuity eventually made it impossible to consider them worthy horror movies. But, like other reviewers already stated, "Two Thousand Maniacs" actually has a real story to tell and, moreover, it even is a pretty good one! On their way to different tourist destinations in the South, six young people are re-routed to the peculiar little town of Pleasant Valley where they're given a warm reception as honoree guests to a centennial. One of the six, a schoolteacher, is rather suspicious and righteously so, because the town is celebrating the Civil War mass massacre of 1865 and they're planning to gruesomely kill their Yankee-guests! Unlike most other H.G. Lewis' films, "Two Thousand Maniacs" doesn't feature unnecessary padding sequences and strictly focuses itself on the absurd subject matter. The townsfolk's utterly gore killing methods are both blackly humorous and very ingenious and they unquestionably belong to the greatest horror moments I've ever beheld. To name just one: a man is forced to step in a barrel with nails hammered through it, and then he rolled down the hill! Seeing is believing!! The acting performances are surprisingly tolerable, probably because most cast members can deliberately go over the top with their atrocious Southern accents. Especially the kid Billy near the end of the film is a real joy to observe. Personally, I also like to believe that "Two Thousand Maniacs" was a rather influential film since many later (especially 80's) horror movies revolve on entire little redneck towns that hide strange secrets ("The Fog", "Dead & Buried" and maybe even "The Wicker Man"). The completely demented "Rebel Yell" banjo song is fantastic (and very catchy) and H.G. Lewis even thought up an ambitious, The-Twilight-Zone-like climax. Bravo, Mr. Godfather of Gore!

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.

2000 MANIACS! is the second of exploitation director Herschell Gordon Lewis' notorious 'blood' trilogy that began with the world's first gore film, BLOOD FEAST. This follows similar ground, using a lightweight story as an excuse for a string of shoddy but bloody gore sequences that still have the power to shock and disturb even to this day. The gore scenes are played out humorously, with a grinning bunch of loons taking great delight in dispatching their victims. There's a suspenseful scene where a girl has a boulder dropped on her; a genuinely ingenious bit where a guy is rolled down a hill in a barrel lined with vicious nails, an unpleasant murder where a girl has a arm hacked off (it's later barbecued) and a shoddy bit where a guy is quartered between four horses. The bright red blood splashes liberally about the scene in this excessive display of sadism. Otherwise, the movie is drab and dull. The amateurish cast give a range of performances. The two leads (slightly wooden William Kerwin and extremely pretty Connie Mason) are good, the rest aren't. The nadir is the redneck laughing boy whose overacting knows no bounds. The direction is pedestrian and the lengthy dialogue sequences are dull to watch. There's a good, suspenseful chase towards the end, but then the films goes on another TWENTY MINUTES to bolster the running time and these are even more excruciating than the epilogue scenes in RETURN OF THE KING: a real chore to sit through. In the end, it's obvious this film was written around four vicious, inventive death sequences but that isn't enough to make a good movie. 2000 MANIACS! is a bore for the most part. Great soundtrack, though.

A group of "yankees" from "up north" are driving on the highway when they are purposely diverted by detour signs into a small "backwoods" Southern town where a joyful local gathering invites them in with welcome cheers to be their very special, "selected" guests for a Centenniel celebration commemorating past history not revealed. Two different cars, one carrying two married couples, another with pretty Connie Mason(..as Terry Adams)and her hitchhiking passenger, William Kerwin(..referred to as Thomas Wood in the film's credits;portraying Tom White), whose car broke down as he was on his way to a teacher's convention, are removed from their vehicles pretty much against their will, set up in a hotel with food free, not knowing that they are actually to be the entertainment for their celebration festivities, victims of gruesome games arranged as a "blood revenge" for a dark period in Civil War history. This Southern town, Pleasant Valley, was actually slaughtered by Union soldiers and the vengeful spirits of those killed participate in the celebration of destroying yanks. While the other northerners are unable to see what horrors lie ahead, Tom is suspicious almost immediately and coerces a confused Terry into planning an escape..it won't be easy with hick crazies all over the place. Considered by his beloved fans as director Herschell Gordon Lewis' masterpiece, TWO THOUSAND MANIACS!, his second film, is much better than BLOOD FEAST, in that the black comedy works to a greater extent, and he's operating completely tongue-in-cheek. While the camera work is still suspect, there are some overhead set ups early on which are effective, and the film doesn't drag as much as in BLOOD FEAST, where scenes would often linger tediously. The non-actors in the film are not as dreadful as in HGL's previous flick, and the cast portraying the "rednecks" really get into their roles, particularly when the victims are about to be executed. Jeffrey Allen, as the blustery mayor, is memorable as the overseer of his town, really relishing along with the folks over executing the yanks one at a time, mocking each victim as they are about to die. The gory set-pieces are certainly shocking such as one poor soul whose limbs are pulled apart from his torso by four different horses going in opposite directions, a woman's finger(..taken off by a knife)and arm(..chopped off by an ax)being removed, another victim bound as contestants attempt to drop a boulder on top of her by hitting a target with a softball, and one victim is rolled down a hill in a barrel with nails hammered inside. The twisted imagination for coming up with such grisly set pieces, HGL deserves credit for setting a standard others would soon surpass as demand for such movies increased with talented make-up artists and production values emerging. Still, the film features crude photography and bad sound(..sometimes, the dialogue is a bit drowned out by bluegrass music)..and I wouldn't say the acting is of superb quality, far from it. But, there's an irresistible energy and a method to the madness, with some terrific bluegrass numbers to entertain as well. In order to appreciate a sick gore comedy such as this, you must gloss over HGL's inadequacies as a filmmaker, still learning his trade, but the man has a knack for repulsive murder sequences. As a gorehound, I admire his contributions to the artistry of graphic violence, even if I find his cinematic prowess lacking.

Two Thousand Maniacs! is the second installment in the sleazy classic "Blood Trilogy" by Herschell Gordon Lewis. It is a superb film and very important to the gore genre. This early splatter fest features enough carnage(and very realistic-looking blood for its time) to compete with any of today's modern gross-outs. The premise is simple enough. Travelers are lured to a small southern town full of blood-thirsty Confederates seeking revenge on Yankees upon the centennial of the end of the Civil War. Fooled into thinking that they are the guests of honor at the town's centennial celebration, the travelers soon find themselves in the middle of barbaric blood rituals with seemingly no means of escape. While the acting is a little sub-par and exaggerated at times, it does not detract from the film but, rather, adds to the sleaze factor. The action slows down a little toward the end, however, the ultimate conclusion is unique and quite chilling. Overall, Two Thousand Maniacs! is a very worthy watch and a great addition to any gore hound's collection.

Here at IMDb, there appears to be an interesting difference between the "splatter" film cult and those who admit they watch *. Since the 'splatter' film is really a kind of sadistic/violence *, 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-*, 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-* is just cruel and can never be funny. My psychic pain is not a subject for your profit or enjoyment.