Tied for the best movie I have ever seen

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

I hope you're reading this, Millard. And really--as the title states--that's the first question that comes to my mind: What were you thinking!?!? Seriously, the first Criminally insane was epic...almost a masterpiece of independent, sleazy film making. The original storyline, the blood that makes me LMAO every time I see it, the grainy REAL film that was actually used to shoot it on! Criminally Insane 1 was and is an amazing nostalgic gem that will live on in horror film history.Criminally Insane 2...not so much! So, what happened? Did you lose access to the camera that you shot Criminally Insane 1 on? Did it break sometime between that movie and this one? I understand your tight budget, but come on, did you really have to use the same camera that you filmed most of your family Christmases with? Also, were you suffering from writer's block? I mean, using scenes from the first film to fill in 40% of the film wasn't entirely a creative move. If I wanted to see Criminally Insane 1 again, I'd watch Criminally Insane 1 again!--Which I actually did want to see again after sitting through just 10 minutes of this waste of my time sequel! You messed up big time, Nick. Thanks for disappointing 100% of the fans of Criminally Insane 1. For that--1 star! And that's only because I can't give it zero!

Criminally Insane 2Where the first Criminally Insane has developed into a sort-of cult horror classic, the second has garnered much attention for its inability to live up to its predecessor and its obvious lack of imagination.The original Criminally Insane was truly an exercise in uncompromised creepiness, due partially to the director, Steve Millard, who seemed concentrated on delving into areas that were sure to offend mass audiences. The subject matter, a woman cannibalizing members of her family, and the alternate title, Crazy Fat Ethel, are enough in themselves to offend substantial groups of people. However, the merging of religious imagery, there's a statue of Jesus drenched in a victim's blood, alongside images of a deranged woman chopping to pieces members of her family, were sure to push fellows so inclined, over the edge, at the same time, garnering hordes of fans who enjoy that sort of thing. Personally, I loved the first picture, and consider it one of the truly great slasher films of the seventies. Sadly, my reaction to the sequel is something else altogether.Priscilla Alden, a little older and a little grayer, is back as Ethel Janowski, still confined to the Nappa Mental Institute, and still reliving, in her dreams, the nightmare that is her past. Thirteen years later, Ethel Janowski, a dangerously obese young woman, murdered and cannibalized six members of her family before being caught and sentenced to a mental institute -- all of which is displayed in gory detail in the original film. Her descent into madness was strangely remedied by a deranged compulsion to eat. When part two commences, we realize that the years haven't been kind to poor Ethel. A heavy stream of sleep-inducing medication combined with extensive counseling, has done very little to cure her. Ethel seems unable, or unwilling, to grasp the sheer horrific magnitude of her past deeds, something that is completely lost on the Nappa doctors, who seem more concerned with the overcrowding problem at the institution. This, of course, sets up the next function of the story. Funding and capacity problems at the hospital force the trustees into making a radical decision about what to do with some of their patients. So, after some careful consideration, they decide to release some of their more non-violent patients to a moderately supervised halfway house. Deemed passive by at least one of the doctors, Ethel is quickly put on the list to be released. Big mistake.The elderly owner of the rehabilitation house, Hope Bartholomew (Lisa Farros), who lives by the credo "There's always hope" quickly detects that her newest guest might be more dangerous than the doctors had specified, and grows even more weary when Ethel starts referring to her as granny -- the family member who set off Ethel's murderous rampage some thirteen years earlier. Ethel's mental condition starts to deteriorate rapidly in her new surroundings, as she spends more time alone in her thoughts, re-living her past murders, and dwelling on ways to partake in more. Her equally bizarre house mates, a fellow 'reformed' serial killer who likes to boast about the various ways he dispatched his ex-wives, and another fellow, who chases and eats bugs, only help to accelerate her descent into total madness. Ad to the mix the fact that Ethel's being deprived of her food and not taking her medication, and it's just a matter of time before she goes on another hack and slash campaign. When it starts, it's almost worth the wait, as Ethel puts much more thought into her second murderous gyration. One of her house guests, the wife killer, is somehow able to read Ethel like a book, slowly discerning each of her various plots to murder him, including a plan to get him to drink tea laced with rat poison. Strangely, it is the exchanges between these two slightly clichéd killers that provides some of the more interesting moments in the film.The story of Ethel Janowski comes full-circle at the end of the film when she wanders outside into the backyard and begins dancing about in the sunlight. Clad in a raggedy dress and holding a bloody knife, Ethel skips about gleefully, basking in her own madness. The macabre outdoor dance, which feels almost like a symbolic reclaiming of virtue by the main character, brings to mind images of the first film, where the younger Ethel had dreamed of dancing about in the sunlight just before she was arrested. This time, her dream is fulfilled.Regarding the technical aspects of the film, it is a mess. The 1975 original was shot on film, while the sequel was shot on video. The two formats are merged together in the dream sequences, and it just doesn't work. If anything, it helps to provide a visual confirmation of the superiority of film over video. Also, the acting is stiff, even by Alden, who has made quite a career working alongside such Hollywood heavyweights as Hugh Grant and Nicholas Cage. Here she isn't given much room to play character-wise, which probably accounts for her uninspired, dreary performance. The other actors, which include mostly amateurs and at least one former porn star, are just as rigid in their roles. The writer-director, Steve Millard, who started out making hardcore porn films in the late sixties, would pretty much finish his career with Criminally Insane 2. He would make only one other film before retiring in 1988. It doesn't so much matter I guess, as it became abundantly obvious while watching this sequel, that he was no longer the spirited director he once was.The Millard family, Nick, Frances, S.S. and, of course, Steve, are essentially legends in the exploitation-movie universe and their films, including the Criminally Insane franchise, have become rare treasures sought after by everyone from die-hard collectors to b-movie archivists. I'm optimistic that someday we'll witness a resurgence of their films on DVD. Like Ms. Bartholomew was so fond of saying, there's always hope.

This film was made only because of the first films success. It features the same fat killer but she's a lot older now. Not nearly as fat either. It shows a lot of the first films highlights, basically living off the gore in the first film. Because, this film has little to no money to spend on special effects. Later, "J" w KandJHorror.com

During the cheap filmed in video beginning of Crazy Fat Ethel II, I wondered if it was the same film that was on the cover. Unfortunately, it was. The story itself is mindlessly simple. Ethel, a homicidal maniac with an eating disorder, is released into a halfway house because of hospital overcrowding. She is by far the most sane resident watching while one man puts dead flies into another's soup. Ethel is then teased by one of the halfway house employees with a chocolate bar after he hits on the cost cutting measure of feeding the residents dog food. Ethel retaliates by strangling him with a wire noose on the stairs and then....well, you get the idea. If this all sounds like fun, it isn't. This film was poorly made with cheap effects and even worse acting. The characters are so wooden when delivering their lines that they should be standing out in front of a cigar store. To make matters worse, half of the film consists of flashbacks to the first Ethel movie, Criminally Insane, which is little better. A VERY poor effort.