Watch
Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer
Your probable score
?

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer

1986
Suspense/Thriller, Crime
1h 23m
Your probable score
Avg Percentile 55.45% from 1209 total ratings

Ratings & Reviews

(1209)
Compact view
Compact view
Rated 04 May 2017
75
68th
Totally forgot to rate this ages ago. Pretty damn gritty and grim, one of those 'pretty good for what it is but I never want to see it again' type-a-things. Rooker just disappears into the role and it's pretty damn frightening to see. Killer ending.
Rated 15 May 2019
74
73rd
The grim and brutal realism of the movie made my shoulders slowly rise up over my ears like they were trying to swallow my head and neck in an attempt to safely retreat into my body, and away from the ugly non-stylized violence on the screen. Although the low-budget and questionable acting only added to the film's gritty 'charms', with Rooker being great as 'Henry', however overall, while worth a watch, at least once, there isn't much that's going to entice a second viewing out of many fans.
Rated 25 Jul 2020
100
98th
A bleak and miserable 83 minutes.
Rated 05 Nov 2008
76
71st
It's funny to see how much perception has changed since 1986. In those days it was supposed to be vulgar and growse, but 2 decades later we don't even frown when some sociopath slaughters a dozen people without any emotion. And maybe it's just that what makes this movie so good nowadays. It shows how numb we've become for violence in just a few years. ... In the end who knows, we'll end up like Henry.
Rated 04 Jun 2008
80
76th
Unyieldingly cheerless and informal. Michael Rooker is excellent as Henry, the perverted murderer we follow through times of neither joy nor sadness. McNaughton depict a world so virulently cold and drab, you almost reach out for fresh air amidst the violent carnage and silent tension. The glum and dreary atmosphere establishes itself early on and impudently persists to the very end; turbulent music and clammy images (there's some intense close-ups here) makes this a compelling experience.
Rated 20 Aug 2014
4
70th
I'm sure there were some charismatic serial killers (Ted Bundy), but the truth for most is far closer to what's presented here: a couple of yokels living in a hovel, exacting crude and unplanned violence. Really ups the ante on what "gritty" entails in a film. The ending is a great fuck-you to propriety.
Rated 27 Sep 2008
90
79th
Very hard to watch at times but also wonderful.
Rated 08 Feb 2012
70
65th
He kind of just travels around killing people. Innovative.
Rated 12 Jun 2019
50
31st
Hands down the craziest and most believable slasher film I've seen Most ironic scene when your watching them kill then camera pans out and you realize their watching themselves on VHS STRANGE!
Rated 09 Sep 2009
81
77th
Nihilistic and doggedly bleak, but thoroughly compelling. Portrait is perfectly apt, this often feels static; from the aftermath tableaux of bodies to the mired characters and confined plot. Henry's joyless, simmering intensity and the ever present threat of violence create a heightened level of tension throughout: bursts of violence fervent, but rarely bloody. Immersed in Henry's world we share his disconnection, the muted city only populated, as we now see, by potential victims.
Rated 22 Apr 2011
75
44th
The low budget feel only adds to the film's incredibly disturbing atmosphere created by creative editing and a creepy lead performance. The rest of the acting is under par, though. A very unique experience, though not one I'm much interested in re-experiencing.
Rated 11 Feb 2015
70
51st
Michael Rooker is really, really good, and there is some seriously disturbing material here, hidden among the ultra-low budget. Certainly worth watching if a movie called "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" sounds like your cup of tea.
Rated 26 Feb 2015
39
51st
Surprised I can't think of any power electronics / death industrial project that's sampled this.
Rated 06 Nov 2018
60
20th
Sometimes a movie's reputation can do it a disservice. Pretty sure if I'd watched this in 1993 on VHS, or on TV late at night, I would have been fucked up for months after. As it is, it's hard to get past the fact that half of it looks and sounds like a Hungarian tele-play, or that several murders are one-handed neck-snaps (something I didn't think I'd ever see outside of a Kevin Smith movie).
Rated 30 Apr 2008
77
78th
Incredible. And I never want to see it again.
Rated 22 Mar 2009
88
85th
While this lacks the layered perversity of David Lynch's _Blue Velvet_, for sheer relentless, painstakingly rendered ugliness, McNaughton's snuff-fest is fairly unparalleled in the annals of quality genre cinema. The pic's penultimate sequence alone piles on the atrocities as if they were going out of style, in crazed but uncomfortably credible profusion. This plays it both ways, simultaneously exposing and exploiting our mundane modern monster's vile crimes.
Rated 03 May 2009
80
52nd
Disturbing and yet you can't look away, this movie would've been so much better if it actually had a budget. It's still unsettling and has a couple very unpleasant scenes, which are actually helped by the low budget even if the rest of the movie suffers for it.
Rated 06 Oct 2011
86
66th
"Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" isn't made for "gore-hounds." It's as if the director looked at all of the kills of slasher movies and decided to slap us in the face with the reality of murder. It's not glamorous, it's not impressive, and it's not sensational. Henry doesn't look like a decaying corpse like Jason Voorhees; Henry doesn't crack jokes like Freddy Krueger. Henry is just a man like you and me. He could be the guy down the street. He is not a horror icon: he is a man.
Rated 23 Oct 2011
40
43rd
I can see why it is acclaimed...but that still didn't help me enjoy it. The movie was a tad too long, and often quite boring. The randomness of the killings (and non-killings) becomes grating...but then again, I suppose that's why it's so disturbing to some.
Rated 11 Oct 2012
80
71st
I was well warned, but that wasn't enough to protect me from being disturbed by this low-key, depraved, and truly exceptional work that exacts hopelessness on the viewer like a knife to the heart. On top of that, there's this element of sexual deviance and voyeurism that essentially condemns the role of the cinemagoer, much in the same way as Peeping Tom. The performances are incredible; Becky is naive, Henry is cold, and Otis is unsettlingly charismatic despite being so repulsive. I need a hug.
Rated 06 Aug 2014
90
82nd
The best film about a serial killer ever made. Rooker remains criminally underrated.
Rated 25 Dec 2014
90
81st
McNaughton's clinical social realism and sense of doom frames this hardball-playing, direly dismaying vignette of a killer, a gritty snapshot of a totaled psyche that declines to rationalize, criticize or stylize cold-blooded and indiscriminate brutality, but that is certain to traumatize and revolt any viewer with a soul, and is driven by a career-making performance by Michael Rooker, who incarnates the fragmented, disjointed behavior of the title character.
Rated 16 Mar 2015
65
12th
"theres nothing nice to say so i wont say anything at all" is what im saying instead of leaving this blank so i get to be a dick and save face at the same time
Rated 13 May 2017
68
72nd
Unceasingly bleak and unhappy, but all the better for it. I agree that this is something to be seen once, then never again. Who knew Mary Poppins was such an amazing serial killer?!
Rated 16 Aug 2017
72
24th
More lo-fi and threadbare than I expected, this feels like it belongs in a seedy 1970s fleapit cinema which patrons like Henry might have attended. Not much happens in this movie except a bunch of killings he executes fairly spontaneously and gets away with easily. A couple of those scenes are memorable, and Rooker does give good sociopath. It's the lack of surrounding story and lack of consequence that makes the killing seem even more bleak and disturbing. Wouldn't recommend to happy people.
Rated 11 Oct 2018
4
59th
It wasn't quite as difficult as its reputation had led me to believe, but still pretty rough. Not a movie that leaves you feeling good. The quiet lack of action while still communicating all of the horror in that opening scene was the most disturbing for me. A few unexpected moments of dark humor that were very effectively unsettling
Rated 01 Apr 2019
63
19th
Commendable in its decision to depict material very easily rendered exploitative as otherwise coldly brutal and non-aestheticized; unfortunately, its novelties in theory are rendered moot by poor execution due probably largely in part to what is evidently a horribly low budget.
Rated 02 Nov 2019
90
92nd
I've seen a lot of horror and slasher movies that go for gusto, but this is the one that left me with things I can't unsee.
Rated 14 Mar 2021
60
20th
Top badass moment? The relief of discovering that this film wasn't about a green tender engine who'd ended up on the wrong side of the tracks; he always was the most unreliable and in my opinion the most likely to go postal. Also, I was reminded that old TVs used to regularly get thumped in an attempt to improve the picture. With hindsight, does that even make any sense, considering they were full of delicate shit? Humans are weird. 1 decapitation (and it’s a good one), no cats or chainsaws.
Rated 20 Oct 2021
60
35th
I'm generally not one for horror films, but this might be one of the most disturbing ones in the genre: not for the jump scares (there really aren't any), or for the musical build-up that increases the tension (here, done quite poorly), but for the simplistic mundane nature of a person who feels a compulsion to keep killing. There's no illusion of conquest or revenge. It's just truly senseless acts done by a simple man who doesn't know any other way of life. Chilling, but at times very slow.
Rated 22 Feb 2007
70
82nd
Very good.
Rated 23 Feb 2007
86
80th
Retrato de um Assassino estreava há 35 anos no Festival de Chicago. O filme foi tão assustador no modo de retratar um serial killer real que só passou por anos em Festivais, só estreando em circuito de cinema nos anos 90, a galerinha anestesiada de hoje em dia não acha grande coisa, mas para quem estuda a mente humana ainda é um retrato assustador da perversão, sendo Lucas culpado ou não dos crimes que relatou. Box OP Serial Killers.
Rated 30 Mar 2007
100
95th
Wonderfully grim and disturbing film. You will never forget
Rated 25 May 2007
25
12th
As a fan of much low-budget horror fare, I must say I am stupefied as to what people find in this. Its main function is as a reminder of just how terrible it's possible for acting to be.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
85
91st
Watching Henry kill people with the same emotional detachment as when he eats breakfast is chilling.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
40
26th
Not interesting enough. Directorial debut that attracted some attention at time of release, paving the way for an unremarkable career.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
70
9th
left me feeling hollow and sad for mankind
Rated 17 Sep 2007
75
79th
disturbing
Rated 19 Oct 2007
89
61st
The home invasion scene is one of the most realistically shocking scenes ever put to film.
Rated 17 May 2008
90
71st
Darkly disturbing due to Rookers portrayal of the serial killer Henry Lee Lucas has got to be one of the most riveting performances Ive ever seen.Not for the faint of heart!
Rated 13 Jun 2008
90
89th
One of the best thrillers ever. Hard to watch but impossible to ignore. A must see for anyone slightly interested in serial killer flicks.
Rated 24 Aug 2008
40
18th
Keep in mind, all the critics that talked about this film being "disturbing and amazing" were speaking from the mindset of 86'. Even still, that was the same year as Blue Velvet which really makes me think, "WTF?"
Rated 29 Sep 2008
85
91st
Michael Rooker is as creepy as, and the film is very low key which is why it works so well. If you're expecting big over the top serial killers in the way they tend to do these days this isn't for you
Rated 17 Jan 2009
93
92nd
This is right up my alley. Being into forensics and especially serial killers and their psychology, this movie was everything I hoped it would be.
Rated 06 Feb 2009
88
67th
Without a doubt, one of the most disturbing films ever made. This was a brilliant, terrifying piece of art. A powerful, brutal and unique psychological horror thriller with excellent performances by Rooker and company. The film is completely unflinching and grimly realistic and brilliantly acted and directed. This is a solidly horrifying film that you wont soon forget.
Rated 05 Mar 2009
75
44th
Doesn't quite live up to the notoriety, but still manages to be a disturbing little ride.
Rated 18 Mar 2009
85
80th
In its simplicity lies its brilliance, and Michael Rooker is awesome as Henry.
Rated 10 Apr 2009
50
67th
Oddly compelling, it is often hard to watch because of its violence and, perversely, hard not to watch.
Rated 13 Jul 2009
76
25th
its kind of terrible how much i love this movie.
Rated 01 Aug 2009
67
55th
Ne ahlaksız bir film öyle!
Rated 25 Nov 2009
23
0th
The ending is pretty effective in a creepy way, but everything else just seemed pointless.
Rated 17 Jan 2010
70
83rd
Genuinely disturbing film. Small budget works as an advantage here. Everything feels authentic. Rooker gives a near perfect performance. Highly recommended.
Rated 19 Mar 2010
79
52nd
An uneven film. There's a few genuinely creepy moments and a convincing sense of gloom, but there's also bad writing and acting.
Rated 07 Jun 2010
90
94th
Henry is a chilling and fascinating serial killer. This movie disturbed me a lot more than most horror films, probably because camera is there for the planning, execution and aftermath of the sprees. Henry is oddly charming, without being manic like most screen killers.
Rated 10 Jun 2010
80
80th
Uncompromising. It might be a little too Hill-billy for some, but McNaughton's insistence on dwelling on the scenes of murder, discovering their own strange aesthetic appeal makes this what art should be: Dangerously seductive and thus very thought provoking.
Rated 05 Jul 2010
78
60th
there are some scenes in this movie that really creep me out..this movie is really a good character study and the story and mood is so unpredictable,,,,this movie is a must but be warned its kinda unsettling
Rated 08 Nov 2010
35
90th
"As an emotional map, Henry is decidedly raw, personal, and unrelenting." - Jeremiah Kipp
Rated 13 Nov 2010
94
79th
crazy
Rated 16 Nov 2010
8
78th
(2nd viewing) An ending that felt arbitrary at first, sent chills down my spine the 2nd time around. This film truly defines the character study: contrasting Henry's casual way of life with his pent-up sociopathic nature reinforced his chilling chameleonic presence. Otis' laid-back, redneck appearance did annoy me at times but McNaughton presents a horrific cycle of events that captured my attention from its graphic first frame. Really good.
Rated 21 Nov 2010
75
70th
The acting isn't always good, but the movie gave me a really uneasy feeling. Also the killing on camera scene is extremely nauseating. The ending is quite sick too
Rated 17 Jan 2011
80
66th
79.500
Rated 03 Mar 2011
80
78th
I'm glad someone made it, and they made it well, but I really really REALLY wish I hadn't seen it.
Rated 03 Aug 2011
2
21st
Hasn't aged well at all. First off, the acting is horrendous. I mean, really really awful. But ultimately this film just has no point or purpose and had no message or no clue what to say about it's main character. It's obviously supposed to shock you (cue the creepy soundtrack during the killings!) but it just made me feel numb and distant. If that's what they were going for good job, I guess. But I've honestly seen it done way better before and so have you.
Rated 24 Aug 2011
40
8th
seri katil, psikopat katil, ensest, cesedi parcalamak (Annesi hayat kadini olan Henry annesini öldürüp cezaevine girmis ve arkadasi Otis ile birlikte kalmaktadir. Otis'in kiz kardesi de onlarla beraber kalmaya baslar. Bu arada Henry ve Otis psikopatca cinayetler islerler. Bu cinayetleri de video kameraya kayit ederler. SP finalde kiz kardesine tecavüze yeltenen Otis Henry tarafindan öldürülür. Henry Kizla kacar, Fakat sonunda kizi da öldürür.) Cok agir bir film üstelik bogucu...
Rated 13 Sep 2011
78
47th
This widely acclaimed docu-drama doesn't quite live up to the hype, but it compels nonetheless. Michael Rooker is strong as Henry, powerfully contrasting his vicious killings with an almost gentle nature. Fine script and direction; the film looks and sounds pretty good given the tiny budget. The music is dated and a bit overdone, however, and the film sometimes feels like a TV production; even the infamous violence isn't all that horrific. But as a look at unlovely lives and times, it works.
Rated 12 Oct 2011
82
53rd
the acting is impressively awful
Rated 02 Dec 2011
55
10th
#898
Rated 21 Jan 2012
90
94th
I'm always glad to know that I can still be disturbed or upset by something I see in a movie; makes me feel healthy. Anyways, this is some heavy stuff and there's nothing to comfort the viewer, even though there's a fair amount of humor in it, but I think that helps create a different kind of discomfort.
Rated 08 Apr 2012
30
7th
Michael Rooker is good, but it's not a movie I'll ever want to watch again. The writing is piss poor and everyone not named Rooker is a below average actor. Just a lot of scenes where either awful stuff happens or making you dread the awful things that are going to happen.
Rated 23 May 2012
62
20th
Rooker delivers an excellent performance as Henry, but I think the direction lacks the charisma necessary to make the narrative seem more authentic and cohesive. It's correct to refer to the film as a portrait because it's disjointed and never builds on the raw momentum of a serial killer on a rampage. Ultimately I think that the sections where Otis and Henry do some team killing is where the film really drags, especially since it's so prominent.
Rated 18 Jun 2012
60
11th
A disconnected and static portrait of Henry Lee Lucas. If it wasn't for Rooker's performance this film would be significantly worse, it has its brief moments of evincing heightened impressions of numbing discordance on Henry's bit, but the overall coarse direction of the film left it bankrupt of uniformity.
Rated 26 Oct 2012
74
70th
* Casting, Acting : 8 * Script : 7 * Directing, Aura : 8 * Ease of Viewing : 7 * Naked Eye : 7
Rated 09 Jan 2013
64
60th
It feels almost like watching a snuff movie; that disturbing. I don't even know if I mean that as a compliment or not.
Rated 29 May 2013
55
53rd
Although it's an excellent character study, and it allows Michael Rooker to show off some real acting ability, the fact that it's more a vignette than a complete story robs it of a greater possible emotional impact (the film's detached viewpoint didn't help either). But although Henry driving off into the distance may be a disappointing conclusion, it does put the finishing touch on a truly uneasy and bleak tone developed throughout the film, which alone makes this worth watching.
Rated 18 Aug 2013
72
75th
McNaughton's low-key film rejects any attempt of redemption, because this Chicago-based serial killer isn't really hiding who he is or trying to escape from his crimes. He lives with a pervert dude and his younger sister, has no sexual interest in women and basically hangs around teaching his roommate how to kill. If he saves someone -- someone being the sister --, it is to kill her and put her body in a bag, like an unknown victim. It starts and ends with a dead woman. Simple, yet disturbing.
Rated 12 Oct 2013
80
37th
Becomes consistently more cold and disturbing until it finally reaches a rather horrifying breaking point, where all of these really terrible people are doing the most terrible things to each other and to innocent bystanders and somehow getting away with it all.
Rated 30 Oct 2013
93
79th
Disturbing and powerful, completely unflinching in its depiction of evil. Rooker is excellent here in the title rule, his face revealing his true nature even as people ignore it at their own peril. This was really hard to watch and yet it gives insight into the black heart of a ruthless murderer.
Rated 07 Nov 2013
75
59th
Too 80s in its stylistic choices (like the overly loud synth), and too scattered at the beginning. But the farther we get into Henry's world the more effective it becomes, and there's some very high minded reason behind this. The last few scenes showcasing the inevitable cycle of violence starting again are hauntingly great.
Rated 18 Nov 2013
4
91st
[Distant] The mix of hyper-and-realistic styles that some call 'bad acting' made this far more disturbing. Voyeurism seems worse from 'inside' an 'unreliable narrator's' fantasies/memories.
Rated 14 Mar 2014
80
64th
79.500
Rated 15 Sep 2015
13
2nd
The dialogue is so broken, it almost helps build an accurate depiction of the characters. The acting is unforgivable, it renders quite a violent film, bland. At least PoaSK stays true to its tone right to the last scene.
Rated 29 Oct 2015
20
6th
The last 10 seconds were neat. DON'T MOVE IN WITH YOUR WEIRD RAPEY BROTHER.
Rated 25 Sep 2016
65
31st
The ending is chilling and nearly makes up for how bland the rest of the film is.
Rated 24 Mar 2017
60
72nd
Not the great movie I was expecting but you can see the whole thing and even has good parts.
Rated 17 Jun 2019
68
46th
It paints a surprisingly realistic picture of people living on the fringes of American society. The main characters' detachment from the world at large around them makes the murders all the more unsettling.
Rated 16 Nov 2019
76
77th
A hard movie to like, Michael Rooker puts together a fantastic performance which makes the material come alive in a very gritty way.
Rated 10 Aug 2020
66
59th
The producers wanted a horror/slasher flick, and got instead something a lot more thoughtful and stylish. Based only superficially on the real-life Henry Lee Lucas, its real strength is visual. Chicago is utilized beautifully as the perfect bleak backdrop for the goings-on, and (having spent quite a bit of time there then) is captured utterly realistically.
Rated 05 Oct 2020
72
66th
This is the worst Mary Poppins reboot I have ever seen.
Rated 09 Oct 2020
27
4th
This movie scarred me in the way Kubrick has with Clockwork Orange (ONLY in how disturbing scenes were, not filmmaking). Wish I hadn't seen it. Film is excellent at what it does, it seems accurate in its portrayal of serial killers and violence in extreme poverty and I think this is probably how those people should be portrayed. It's not scary-fun type of stuff, it's not fun at all. If you're one of the reviewers saying this didn't affect you, you scare me.
Rated 25 Aug 2021
65
28th
Dirty, low budget. Some pretty hard to watch shit. My step brother made me watch this way too young and I'm still recovering from it.
Rated 05 Jan 2022
95
84th
Disturbing but well done.
Rated 03 Feb 2022
78
55th
Utterly unpleasant “portrait” is unconcerned with painting the full picture of Rooker’s sociopath; keeping its characters as superficial ciphers makes the film more effective at showing the pitiless mundanity of “evil”, violent behaviour, but this also means there’s not a great deal of substance to be gleaned here, leaving the film lacking lasting resonance. Low-fi, gritty aesthetics are an asset; the only clanging misstep is an overstated music score, which undermines the tension occasionally.
Rated 20 Jun 2022
81
79th
A trailblazer in the "banality of evil" genre. The wellspring from which many early 21st century TV dramas would flow, though none match its creepy stillness and blunt, confrontational violence.
Rated 26 Oct 2022
80
72nd
Disturbing and intense, but I was somewhat surprised it wasn't even more graphic given the reputation and the fact that it couldn't get an R rating. A lot of the actual violence happens off camera (though plenty happens on.) It does not glamorize the title character, unlike many films about serial killers. Henry's just a bad dude. Occasionally it seems that some redeemable qualities are showing, but the film's ending extinguishes that line of thought thoroughly. The score is very effective.
Rated 04 Mar 2023
5
81st
Like The House that Jack Built with all the artistry pulled out and replaced with grime. Good movie.
Rated 05 Jan 2024
20
4th
Horrific movie; it's a gritty portrayal that is hard to watch. It's really good at what it does but I never want to see it again .
Rated 14 Mar 2024
79
67th
An effectively patient and bleak dramatization, but not one to be taken super serially since the majority of the Henry Lee Lucas murders were deemed false confessions.

Collections

(42)
Compact view
Showing 1 - 24 of 42 results

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...