Judged against the majority of Clive Barker adaptations, this one ranks as one of the better; not as good as 'Lord of Illusions', 'Hellraiser', or 'Midnight Meat Train', but far more enjoyable than the dismal Candyman/Hellraiser sequels, about on par with 'Night Breed', 'Book of Blood', or the original 'Candyman'.In 1815, a curious monk accidentally unleashes a pair of lethally seductive succubi, who swiftly kill his brother and then flee through time. Wishing to atone for his sins, the monk follows the pair to the 20th century where he must slaw them with a magical dagger. He is arrested after arriving too late to one of their murder scenes and is forced to try to convince a female cop with no religion to believe him.Produced for the SciFi channel (or now SyFy, how dorky), the movie has some of the problems connected with made for TV flicks; that is a few tacky sets, less-than-stunning visual effects, and some cheesy lines of dialogue.On the plus side, the film has an excellent color pallet and a good sense of mood lighting. The lead protagonists (the monk and the cop) are a likable pair of heroes and the succubi sisters manage to be both desirable and repulsive in just about equal proportions.As mentioned, this was intended for cable broadcast, so the movie has to conform to TV standards of content; meaning no nudity or graphic violence. That being said, the film is surprisingly sticky (even without excess blood, there are a couple noteworthy gross-out scenes) and there is a fair amount of sexual content. On a side not, the DVD has a couple of unrated scenes in the special features which contain some nudity for those that absolutely can't do without it.Imperfect, yet still satisfying; worth a look.7/10

"Saint Sinner" is decent enough but not altogether spectacular.**SPOILERS**Uncovering a strange amulet, Tomas Alcala, (Greg Serano) learns from Father Michael, (William B. Davis) that the amulet was supposed to keep Munkar, (Mary Mara) and Nakir, (Rebecca Harrell) sister succubi from exiting their dimensional trap. Released into our world, he is sent out to stop them from unleashing their fury and destruction on mankind. Reluctantly accepting, the job, he sets out to the city to find that they have been on a giant rampage leaving bodies everywhere they go that eventually catches up to him. When Det. Rachel Dressler, (Gina Ravera) is assigned to the case, it takes them awhile to believe that the actions he's saying are happening until an unexplainable encounter forces her to consider the story. Finally on the same side, they decide to track them down before more fall to their fury.The Good News: This here wasn't that bad and had some halfway decent moments in it. The main part of this one is that there's a whole lot of great special effects work in the film. This is due to the manner in which the deaths are accomplished, sucking out the life-force physically from the subject. To accomplish this, a small tube is dug into the back of the neck from which it's sucked out, while the victim is also seen to be completely covered in a strange goo from everywhere on the body, and these are greatly realized with some rather brutal scenes showing the fluid being drained through these devices. The manner of killing, by slicing open the neck to apply the tube also means that there's a large amount of blood to be seen, and a couple of non-fatal encounters also produce a fair amount of bloodshed to the mix. The film also has a rather incredibly disgusting birthing sequence where a pregnant stomach is seen with some form of creature scratching and clawing from behind it, with a large tentacle erupting forth and soon after a hideous millipede-like creature is seen to be coming out, later to turn on the mother in a fantastic scene. Mixed along side this with some nice brawling, a couple of decent action-packed encounters and a fun, exciting finale that has a large amount of life and entertainment, this one here has some really good points to it.The Bad News: This one here wasn't terrible, but there was a few flaws to it. One of the big ones is that there's very little in here that go explained. The whole story starts with his letting them go, and in a sign of God, chosen to stop them, which really doesn't make sense as a colossal mistake of that kind doesn't really earn the kind of reward given to it. There's also the series about how the creatures haven't had trouble adapting to the new generation in the present time. It certainly should've come up, how that makes for fun times is missing as here, there's no scenes involving either of the time travelers having any trouble adapting to the changes between the times when they're really should've been. The film also fails to mention how the source of the demons power is achieved through their killing method. It's shown to be a form of hose coming out of the back of the neck, but whether or not it's a device planted on the back from the creatures or just the spinal cord ripped out. That others would find the deathly pale glow of their skin as attractive is yet another one, and these here are some of the minutiae flaws found. The film also has areas that aren't all there, especially the slow later half where the cops take over and the back-story is given. This is slow, meandering and doesn't really have a lot to offer in terms of entertainment, and combined with the other flaws, are what's really wrong with the film.The Final Verdict: With a few good and bad moments, this one here manages to stay watchable through the bad even though it is flawed. Give this one a chance if you're into the creative side of the film or find the topic or the film in general interesting, otherwise there isn't enough for others to get into it.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Language, Nudity and a clothed sex scene

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.

This movie has too many disgusting scenes that seem to get in the way of enjoying the plot.For instance the demon secretions on the monk that seem to stay on him too long it's just gross.I'm a big horror movie buff and enjoy a good thrill but where's the suspense and element of surprise.