EVOL666 SAINT SINNER is pretty much what I would have expected from a Sci-Fi Channel made-for-TV Clive Barker story - it was entertaining enough, but lacked all the elements that could have made it something noteworthy. Pretty much mindless "fun" with no substance - I knew not to get my hopes up just because Barker's name was attached to it, and it's a good thing I didn't...A monk unwittingly unleashes a pair of succubi who use a time-machine to travel from 1815 to "modern times". Once here, they go around feeding on unsuspecting males and causing general havoc. The reluctant monk uses the time-machine to track the two and with the help of a blessed dagger, hopes to end their killing-spree...The main problem with SAINT SINNER, is that it's a made-for-TV film, which means no nudity, no real gore, none of the "good stuff" that could have made this better. The acting was OK if a bit goofy, especially from the succubi-sisters - but I wasn't expecting Oscar-worthy performances. The "action" comes pretty quick, so I was never really bored - but the whole show was pretty predictable and straight-forward, with no real interesting twists or surprises. In fact - the one "twist" that I thought was going to happen (involving the one succubi's "offspring") never came, and was never explained or resolved at all. I'd say this is an extremely mediocre rental at best for a "popcorn"-style horror film, but would honestly suggest not even bothering - those expecting a well-made Barker film will be severely disappointed...5/10

snoomip0 This movie is neither worth the cheap rental-quality disk it was printed on, nor the time spent to watch it. Fortunately I got some other domestic duties done while watching this flick; unfortunately, I paid 2,55 euros to rent it. Utter waste.¡¡¡COULD CONTAIN SPOILERS!!! Many of the faults of this film are pointed out in other comments, lack of acting, a story that appears to have come from a brainstorming session in a twisted-kid-only kindergarten class and horrible film-making to name a few. It's about 2 succubae who escape their imprisonment and manage to travel in time.Now, the succubus, on top of being a wise old demon, is supposed to be a sexy seductress, or at least as far as I have always known. You know, one that cleverly lures you with her sultry beauty, and eventually knocks you over the head (or whatever) and sucks the life out of you. So now being established what they are supposed to be, why are they disgusting slimy hags that are also dumb as rocks?And then we can start in on the priest/monk/some-sort-of-religious-trainee that gets sent to kill these beasts (and calling them beasts is very generous). Since the succubae couldn't even agree on whether this guy was a priest or monk, I'll just roll them up together, conserve the pronunciation, and call him a punk. Which is exactly what he is. He is the only demon slayer that can't even take out two stupid dogs (the succubae) while they are practically lying on their backs sleeping. Couldn't he have practiced with that thing a little before setting out?And the victims of the succubae, also well described in other comments: dumber than anyone. I was so mad I was wishing for this whole city of idiots to crumble under its own incompetence and fall straight down to the Inferno, taking the film crew with it. I was going to give this movie 1 out of 10, simply because it had some gross effects, but when the only horror I experience is from thinking that people spent time, energy and money on making this film, and that I spent money to watch it, it just takes away all merit. 0 out of 10, for what would be more aptly named "Killer Hookers from Hell"

menaraqudus don't know from where this master writer get these names (munkar & nakir),it's certainly in Islamic context but i don't about Christianity. Munkar and Nakir in Islamic eschatology are two 'malaikat'(angels) who test the faith of the dead in their tombs. After death, they prop the deceased upright in the grave and ask "Who is your Lord?, Who is your Prophet?, What is your Book?" A righteous muslim will respond correctly. He will then be shown the place that had been reserved for him in HELL, but told that Allah has exchanged it for a place in PARADISE. An infidel, of course will not respond correctly, and the angels will rebuke him: "Neither did you know nor did you seek guidance from those who had knowledge". Then they will hit him with an iron hammer between his ears, show him the place he could have had in Paradise, and throw him into HELL. IF THIS MOTHER/DAUGHTER DEMONS/SUCCUBI did not appears in the Bible. THIS CERTAINLY IS AN INSULT.

johnnysugar I admit it, I have a problem: I'm too suckered in by Clive Barker's name. He's a wonderful writer, and his adaptation average is slightly better than that of Stephen King's, so I decided to watch "Saint Sinner." Clive Barker stands as story-provider and executive producer of this unfortunate and at times incomprehensible movie. In 1815, a pair of young monks accidentally releases two succubi -- ravenous female demons -- loose from their prison. The two escape through the "Wheel of Time" to the modern day, where one of the monks, Tomas, must follow in order to destroy them. He teams up with a skeptical detective to find the succubi.This movie seems to have abandoned all sense of logic or continuity in its plot, and it has a lack of character development that is truly amazing. Greg Serano, as Tomas, is attractive enough but lacks the conviction his character requires. Gina Ravera is an almost non-presence as Dt. Rachel Dressler, seeming to know that she got the role because Gina Torres was busy. But pity Mary Mara and Rebecca Harrell, who play the demons Munkar and Nakir, who do little more than grind and glower in undead makeup that looks like it came from 1985 and who had to have all their lines of dialogue altered down 1.5 octaves.With a director that's watched too much "X-Files" and with a script that seems to have been written by a 16-year-old, "Saint Sinner" is an unfortunate event that the Sci-Fi channel will undoubtedly play three times a week in the misguided sense that people will watch (and they cancelled "Farscape" to make stuff like THIS?). It's saved from being a total waste by an above-average score and Greg Serano's knack for looking like a saint and a sinner at once. Don't be like me: if you want some Clive Barker, next time pick up a book. 3 out of 10.