What makes it different from others?

Some things I liked some I did not.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

I am a big fan of After dark films production/distribution company. I always look forward for their annual horror films festival know as After dark horror fest aka 8 films to die for. Agree that some of their films r utter crap. Saw this film in late 2007. It's a terrific film. It has one of the most nerve shattering, horrific opening. Borderland is a great horror film that gets under your skin. I highly recommend it to those with strong stomachs. The script was solidly scary. It is loosely based on the true story of a drug lord and the leader of a religious cult that practiced human sacrifices. The tension in this film is very high and the atmosphere is genuinely scary. The direction by Zev Berman was really good. I don't know y he ain't doin any more movies.Decent acting by Rider Strong (Tooth n nail, Cabin fever). Was surprised to see Sean Astin (Lord of the rings trilogy, The goonies, Rudy). Nice cinematography by Scott Kevan (Death race, Cabin fever,Underworld awakening). Lastly some really hot chicks n a very sadistic, creepy bald villain.

For those familiar with the case of the Adolfo de Jesus Constanzo and the „Matamoros"-killings, you might probably agree that it had been one of the most bizarre and shocking cases from that period in time. It had everything that would eventually make a riveting movie: crime, drug-dealer cartels, black magic (a hotchpotch of Christianity, Voodoo and Palo Mayombe), human sacrifice and more sadism then the average mind would feel comfortable with. Having read a fair share about the case, I had waited and rooted for an adaptation and this adaptation came 2007 with "Borderland".Naturally, in times of "Saw", "Turistas" and similar "Torture-Porn", making a straight thriller or Slasher would not suffice (nor would it have done reality justice). "Borderland" starts promising, suspenseful and very brutal. Then it moves into familiar territory: a group of party-hungry American youngsters go across the border and soon fall into the crowd of the bad guys.In essence, to make a cut above the rest, the movie would have had to concentrate on the antagonists rather than the tourists (all of which are portrayed as stereotypical and, concerning acting skills, forgettable as can possibly be, I might add). Indeed, "Borderland" had a colorful and interesting band of antagonists, like the creepy Gustavo (Marco Bacuzzi), tattooed cult-leader Santillan (Beto Cuevas) or the menacing "Ghost Rider" (Wilebardo Bucio), who appears in a few scene and is never really seen again. Sadly, the movie never digs deeper into those characters, giving us no background story, in the end killing them all off rather unspectacular.What's left is an average, run-of-the-mill torture-porn with a few grisly effects, no more than many other "Hostel"-clones and many wasted opportunities. Hence, we'll have to wait for the movie that will tackle the horrible story of "Matamoros" adequately.4/10 points is the maximum I can give for this. A note and recommendation to those interested in the "Matamoros"-case would be "Perdita Durango". Though the film isn't actually based on the crime itself, Javier Bardem plays a Palo Mayombe priest-cum-gangster, that comes much closer to the Santillan of "Borderland)

This movie has kind of flown under the radar for most people and I don't see why. It is a very scary and chilling true story. The acting is good and the atmosphere is creepy as hell. There is some moments that make you want to look away but you just cant.This movie is a bout a group of friends who travel down to Mexico to get their friend a hooker and party. Once they go their however they find out they are the target of a santanic group who wants to use them as human sacrifices.Not many people have seen this movie and if you are into horror movies it really is a must see. It will leave you on the edge of your seat and straining to look at the screen.

Three libidinous college dudes from Texas head to Mexico to party, only to find that their bravado and swagger get the attention of a vicious satanic cult that also deals in drugs. It's a dark, dreary story premise transferred to screen through irritatingly revved-up action and lots of gore. Though the script borrowed its idea from the real-life Matamoros Cult Killings of 1989, the film offers very little narrative realism.Our three youthful gringos are all jerks. None of them are worth caring about. They make one stupid mistake after another; but that keeps the plot moving. Character stereotypes abound. The script's first ten pages or so could have been condensed into about three. Plot structure is chaotic. And we never get a sense of where in Mexico we are. A few references to "Mexico City" confuse, it being nowhere near the American border. The "border" seems to refer to anywhere along the two thousand mile stretch of land between Tijuana and Matamoros. But who cares about facts when there's so much visual torture to gawk at ...Cinematography trends dark. That jerky camera gets annoying rather quickly. Background music is highly manipulative. Acting skill is largely irrelevant. What counts here is the ability of a performer, helped along by the makeup and costumes department, to look suitably grungy and/or bloody. As such, these "actors" do a fine job.Though the film advertises itself as based on a real event, that real event involved only one college guy, not three. And the lack of geographic specificity renders the entire production overly generalized. I was expecting a film that stayed closer to the facts of the 1989 incident, not a horror story that looks and feels more fictional than real.