The headline on the case looks like a sure fire winner: Tobe Hooper directing! Englund staring! Based on a Stephen King book! Well this movie just plain sucked. I remember reading the short story of the Mangler and thinking it was some of King's worst writing. Then I remember I have a weakness for really bad horror movies, so I picked this baby up. Aside from a few cool scenes of gore, this movie just drags on and on. Englund's acting is really not up to par on film; He seems wooden and not into the role. Also, films based on King novels are never that good, ive recently discovered. Read a book instead of watching this movie.

Best horror film i've seen in a while. Tobe Hooper does an amazing job with this film, the story the acting and the effects are all top notch. Very good atmosphere as with most horror films by Hooper. Can't wait to see the two sequels.

This movie, despite being quite... eh... I don't know how to put it, "Weird", is actually really OK to watch.
It's about a lanudry press-machine that is possesed by a demon, and it's up to a detective (in a really bad mood) to find out why people die in the laundy factory.
There is really good acting in this movie that dosen't make this movie boring, I especially loved Robert Englund's acting, you'll really hate the character he portrays.
There are some really good effects (people being murdered by the machine) and some really sucky ones ("magic" effects).
The ending is sort of funny, because it's so fake looking, but the movie ends well.

The Mangler's not one of the more popular King adaptations. The inspiration for King's story most likely was how nasty it would be if someone actually got caught in one of those steam irons. It certainly would be a horrific scene, but as nasty as that is, it's not a concept you can really make a feature film around. That's probably why King wrote it as a short story. Stretching the short story into a feature length film requires much more plot to be added(the short story may have had a half hour worth of film material, tops). Alot of folks who bash this film usually have something along the lines of...."With the talent involved, how could it be this bad?"...to say. Well, most horror fans have a hard time admitting to themselves that since Texas Chainsaw, Tobe Hooper has become increasingly schlocky as the years go by. We all know it, we just don't say it. Englund hasn't always made the best stuff, and not every King story is a winner. In The Mangler, Hooper is trying to actually make the film scary. The tone is much more serious than subject matter like this should be. Sure, the first scene where the machine claims it's first victim is effective, but by the time you reach two grown men performing an exorcism on a laundry folder, and then having the machine turn into a Lovecraftian monster, it's just too damn silly. So why the four stars? Well, I actually do enjoy this movie quite a bit. If you want to view this with the intention of getting your pants scared off, it'll fail. If you view The Mangler as drive-in fare, it's fun. It's got some nasty gore, an over the top villain played by Robert Englund, funny lines(both intentional and unintentional), and the film is actually shot very well. As others have stated, the acting is hammy, particularly in Englund's case. However, certain mention should go to Ted "wasn't she a great big fat person" Levine. The film is practically a showcase for Levine's odd performance. Is he being campy and over the top? Is he serious and coming off as goofy? It's hard to tell for sure, but he's always amusing and never boring to watch. I think the guy's actually a good actor and it was cool to see him in a leading role. If this were made today, it'd be Orlando Friggin' Bloom or some other schmuck that's mistaken for a good actor. My disappointment with this dvd is that it's the theatrical R-rated version. One of the special features shows a split-screen comparisson of the R and unrated versions. Why the hell not just put those snippets back in the movie? Especially in these days where studios are so "unrated" hogwild. I'm surprised we didn't see an unrated version of Happy Feet when it csme out on dvd. I used to have a vhs copy of this movie, and it was the unrated version with the extra nastiness. So, I know it can be done. The deleted bits are quick gore shots that actually do enhance the scenes and make them much nastier. But anyhow, I do actually think this is a pretty fun movie...depending on how you look at it,that is.

I liked this movie. It was different than what is out in theaters now and it is different in movies in general. I also thought that the acting was good and the special effects were good as well. I really enjoyed it and recommend it to anyone that likes horror movies.