Become a Premium Member | Only $2 a month

► You're making sure we survive
► Exclusive previews
► No more ads


The Mangler



Although our site is very popular, the current economic climate has reduced our revenues just when we need extra security to prevent attacks from hackers who don't like what we do. If you think what we do is worthwhile, please donate or become a member.


Unlike the MPAA we do not assign one inscrutable rating based on age, but 3 objective ratings for SEX/NUDITY, VIOLENCE/GORE and PROFANITY on a scale of 0 to 10, from lowest to highest, depending on quantity and context.

 [more »]

Sex & Nudity
Violence & Gore
1 to 10

MPAA Rating: R

A machine with a taste for blood mangles anyone unlucky enough to get caught in its cogs.

SEX/NUDITY 2 - A couple of passionate kisses. An insinuation of a sexual relationship between a man and his niece.

VIOLENCE/GORE 9 - A girl cuts her hand on the machine and bleeds profusely. A long graphic scene where a woman is pulled into the machine and is rolled through and crushed: there's a lot of blood, and her mangled body is shown. A police officer vomits quite graphically. A dead boy is found in a refrigerator. A group of women are sprayed with steam and one becomes bloodied and blistered; she is shown with gross, yellow, bloody burns. A couple of men fight a refrigerator. A woman loses a finger in the machine. A man's arm is caught in the machine and someone hacks it off with an axe. A mangled, disfigured body is shown in the morgue. Two more people are mangled with a clear, very bloody view of the process and result. A man is chomped by the machine and is left with his bloody guts hanging out.

PROFANITY 7 - About 20 F-words, another 18 scatological terms and a few milder profanities. [profanity glossary]

DISCUSSION TOPICS - Incest, the quest for power, human sacrifice

MESSAGE - People will do anything to gain power.

Special Keywords: S2 - V9 - P7 - MPAAR

Our Ratings Explained

Tell Friends About Our Site

Become a Member

A CAVEAT: We've gone through several editorial changes since we started covering films in 1992 and some of our early standards were not as stringent as they are now. We therefore need to revisit many older reviews, especially those written prior to 1998 or so; please keep this in mind if you're consulting a review from that period. While we plan to revisit and correct older reviews our resources are limited and it is a slow, time-consuming process.

INAPPROPRIATE ADS? We have little control over ads since we belong to ad agencies that serve ads automatically; a standing order should prevent provocative ads, but inappropriate ads do sneak in.
What you can do



Become a member: You can subscribe for as little as a couple of dollars a month and gain access to our premium site, which contains no ads whatsoever. Think about it: You'll be helping support our site and guarantee that we will continue to publish, and you will be able to browse without any commercial interruptions.


Tell all your friends: Please recommend to your friends and acquaintances; you'll be helping them by letting them know how useful our site is, while helping us by increasing our readership. Since we do not advertise, the best and most reliable way to spread the word is by word-of-mouth.


Alert local & national media: Let major media know why you trust our ratings. Call or e-mail a local newspaper, radio station or TV channel and encourage them to do a story about our site. Since we do not have a PR firm working for us, you can be our media ambassadors.

Copyright © 1992- Critics. All rights reserved. "Kids-In-Mind™" and "Movie Ratings That Actually Work™" are Service Marks of Critics. For legal queries please see our Terms of Use; for comments or questions see our contact page.