Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Patience Watson One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Fulke Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

jamesgandrew Mesa of Lost Women follows a scientist who creates spiders and dwarfs at his secret lab on Zarpa Mesa in Mexico. He also plans on injecting women with spider venom to potentially turn them into female super spiders to fulfill his plan of world domination.The pacing is dreadful. It's so bad that it makes a 68-minute film feel like 3 hours or an eternity for that matter.Not to mention this has quite possibly the worst soundtrack in film history. It repeats the same flamenco guitar music throughout most of the film and combined with the terrible pacing it's just horrible.Well at least it's not as bad as Manos but it's close... very close!

Leofwine_draca MESA OF LOST WOMEN is a legendarily bad B-movie that would make Ed Wood proud. It's a tacky science fiction epic about a mad scientist and his sinister plan for world domination which involves injecting a bevy of women with spider venom in order to turn them into an army of femme fatales. Of course it's up to the good guys to thwart his nefarious plans and restore peace and order to the world.While the plot sounds fantastic, in reality MESA OF LOST WOMEN is pretty disappointing. It raises a few laughs here and there but overall the effect is subdued. One of the reasons for this is the lack of budget which means there are hardly any special effects to enjoy, just endless talk and back-and-forth stuff. Some evil dwarfs are the best the film has to offer. Jackie Coogan has fun in his mad scientist role but this is an example of so-bad-it's-average rather than so-bad-it's-good entertainment.

MarplotRedux Thanks to IMDb's kindness, I watched this for free. Thank you, IMDb!!! I watched it after spending most of a day doing family bookkeeping on my laptop. This may have left me in an especially appropriate mood. I'm 80 years old. Truly inept, minimal-budget movies are a new experience for me, and I love them. I sit back speculating how they could have built their sets and animated their monsters at the least possible expense.Despite what other reviewers have written, the actor who portrays the visiting scientist and who is transformed into a ... well, to avoid any spoiler, make it "a different sort of person" does a lovely job. I mean that seriously. The brunette who dances seductively does so well --- though even in my long-vanished youth she'd have terrified me, and the (admittedly repetitive)loud guitar music is generally superior to the dialog. The blonde who serves as Heroine is perhaps the nastiest person in the film, though this doesn't seem to be intentional. And actually the admittedly inexpensive monster was pretty good in its brief, brief appearances. So, in their brief appearances, were the dwarfs, midgets and poor scantily-attired young ladies.Logic? Sensible behavior in dangerous situations? Competent acting by all but one of the cast? Of course not: that's part of the fun.

lemon_magic Man, what a piece of work this is. Written by jaded monkeys hammered on bad tequila, apparently directed by a 14 year old who saw a Hammer film once, and edited with a weed-whacker, this is the kind of movie you think of when you think of Grade Z, bottom-of-the-barrel sci-fi from the "Bad Old Days" of drive-in triple features and Saturday night "Creature Feature" shows.Even for sympathetic and easy-to-entertain bad movie fans,it's hard to get a handle on the screenplay. Narrated by Lyle Talbot in his most portentous and hammy voice stylings, the story line makes no sense - it's told as a flashback, but the whose flashback is it supposed to be? The movie doesn't seem to know, and we never find out. There's no coherent,logical answer to that question...nor anything else in the screenplay. I think the endless flamenco guitar loop on the soundtrack is meant to distract the audience from this, or at least fill in some of the dead space in the acting and the blocking and the dialog. Even for such a lame premise, the movie has a bone-thin plot that requires endless padding and extra footage - apparently from another movie - that doesn't really jibe or blend with the footage about Coogan and the party of adventurers who get stranded on his Mesa.Meanwhile, poor Jackie Coogan tries to salvage his dignity while playing a mad scientist who unleashes the forces of darkness on the party of adventurers/kidnappees, only to have everything go wrong in, what else, a lab fire. I added two extra stars to the score out of sheer pity for him.This isn't actually the worst movie I've ever seen, since a few scenes would have actually have worked if the tempo was snappier,and the basic premise of the screenplay holds some interest in spite of its hamhanded execution. Also of interest because it makes the work of Ed Wood Jr. look good by comparison, and I didn't think that was possible.