Diagonaldi Very well executed

Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

trishaade This movie wasn't worth the time it took to watch it. Originally shot in 3D, I saw a video copy of 2D.The film is about rottweilers that have been trained by the military to be killing machines. They get loose and wreak havoc.First of all, let me say that I have no issue with that fact that this film is about killer rottweilers - there was a similar movie that featured German shepherds (I own one) in the same vein as this one that I thought was as ridiculous for the same reasons. I didn't dislike this movie because I'm loyal to the breed - I disliked it because it was pretty awful all around.For starters, Dogs of Hell suffers from poor acting that was just painful to watch. I don't know if it was the print I saw, but half of the actors sounded like they had been sucking helium. Even so, the way all of the actors delivered their lines was just terrible.Secondly, the script wasn't great - you have a doctor who can't even determine if a neck wound was made by something with sharp teeth or a "knife wielding maniac". I won't be making an appointment with him anytime soon. It was also really, really predictable to the point where I could tell who was going to die when and who, even though the character was taking a chance, wasn't going to be attacked. Too, the film has a fair amount of jump scares that did nothing but annoy me.However, the mud is the scariest stuff I've ever seen. I have no idea what that was that folks were wrestling in but it certainly wasn't mud (there is a mud wrestling scene in a bar towards the beginning of the film).The movie does have a fair amount of blood and gore, but only one scene where you see the dogs actually attacking two people in tandem. You can tell that all of the other killing scenes were filmed separately. Give this one a pass unless you really, really hate rottweilers. Even so, don't say you weren't warned.

stuarchie True story .. In 1990 I was a 5 year old harmless young lad. One day I was shown this movie by my loving sister' how bad could it be' well considering we had 2 fully grown Rottweilers living as happy family dogs May of caused the issue. After watching it I didn't feel any problems wasn't till it was bedtime then boom terrifying nightmares every week or so I was even scared of the tape itself. Actually destroying it in the end I was young never actually scared of Zara and Sugih They were great dogs. So after reminiscing and watching this film again I can say 10/10 for effort I'm properly still scarred in some way .

Backlash007 Okay, I give up. It really is impossible to make a good killer dog movie. This is a prime example of what not to do. Don't set the movie in Hickville, don't cast a bunch of real hicks, and don't take ten years to get to the dog action. The title was so promising: Dogs of Hell!! I was more than ready for some hell hound horror. You do get a small dose of that, it's just not what you want. Chick screams then gets covered in blood. You hear the dog panting but you never see him. The camera stays in the dogs POV. The Rottweilers and the humans are never onscreen at the same time. Dogs of Hell is a mega-low budget movie and is not worth your time. This dog just has no bite."They were perfectly trained for one task: Manslaughter!"

.gif Oh my, how scary. Nice doggies wagging their tails. What are they going to do? Lick my face 'til death?