10 of 36 people found the following review helpful
VERY DATED NOW,
This review is from: Bloodsucking Freaks - Extreme Uncut Collector's Edition [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray)
I have had a dvd of the uncut version for many years..It may have been violent for it's time but it is very mild today..Rather hammy acting (if you would call it acting!).It borders on being a comedy when seen today.It never shocked me when it was originally released .
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-9 of 9 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 26 Mar 2014 05:01:50 GMT
Is there any way you could add more information in regards to the video and audio quality (is it an upconvert or an actual HD presentation? Does it retain any film grain, or is it heavily DNRed?)? I have a few friends who would be interested in this.
In reply to an earlier post on 28 Mar 2014 23:43:49 GMT
A few friends! Sick deviants I'm sure. I don't think he's seen the Blu-ray based on his musings.
In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2014 01:37:24 BDT
W. Musson says:
Considering it hasn't been released yet, it seems unlikely.
In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2014 12:42:00 BDT
Not an upscale
pretty unfair review.
2* based on age of the film :S
In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2014 14:44:54 BDT
It's perfectly reasonable to dis a flick based on its advancing age.
Plenty of online fanboys are of the opposite kneejerk bent of course...
ie Trashing a film because it is brand new; you know, artlessly incorporating big-budget CGI to ineffectual cartoonish effect, or some such nonsense!
There's a good reason why most 21st century remakes improve upon their progenitors; Technical Competence, and Artistic Superiority!
Why does anybody feel the need to endure the cheerless swill churned out by Cronenberg, Romero or [clears throat] Joel Reed anymore anyway!?
In reply to an earlier post on 10 May 2014 01:08:32 BDT
Last edited by the author on 10 May 2014 01:09:34 BDT
Anthony M Dawson says:
But so many modern films DO drown the film in slick but heartless CGI and choppy editing, remakes seldom improve on the original because its all so cliché without a smudge of originality, style or individuality, the production values are better but its all so artificial. By the standards Hollywood set Joel Reed is a legend, he had no budget and the acting wasn't great but his film has great gore, gross out humour, satire and most importantly those jaw-dropping moments where you can't believe or predict what you're seeing... of course its all a matter of opinion. You want technical prestige and slick movie-making so buy Hollywood, I want something bold and raw so I'll take an old cult curio instead. To each his own.
In reply to an earlier post on 10 May 2014 14:12:48 BDT
Mr. Dawson, you WOULD say that wouldn't you; being as you directed one of the best of the old-time meat 'n' potato schlockbusters - the cracking 'Cannibal Apocalypse'! You're right, "heartless CGI and choppy editing" is certainly a problem when it comes to Action movies - Checked out 'White House Down' last night on Blu-ray rental, and right now I'm finding it very difficult to disagree with anything you say on the matter. It's a schlopped-off mess of over-edited, super-human fistfights and exploding cartoon helicopters! In comparison with it's barely-disguised progenitor; the credibly REAL 'Die Hard', it certainly is, as you say "artificial", with no "originality, style or individuality"! Roland Emmerich is clearly no more (or less) talented than Mr. Reed; and consequently, both of their movies' can disappear into a black hole as far as I'm concerned! When it comes to Horror flicks though, give me the recent Hollyweird upgrades of 'Piranha', 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre', 'The Crazies', 'The Last House on the Left', 'Dawn of the Dead' and 'The Hills Have Eyes', etc. over their now irrelevant namesakes any day!
In reply to an earlier post on 10 May 2014 17:10:57 BDT
Been checking out your reviews - Great stuff!
Clearly a man with the courage of his convictions.
I see you're a Fulci man. Interesting. I'm a big fan of 'Zombie Flesh Eaters' myself - FAR superior to Romero's monumentally over-praised 'Dawn of the Dead' - and the first film I ever saw hired out on 'tape; Easter weekend 1983. Needless to say it blew my pants off, and has remained a solid favourite ever since. I had the opportunity to tell the man himself in person, but I blew it! I attended a film festival in London in the Maestro's honour (in around '94/'95) but I couldn't summon up the guts to approach him, to my eternal regret. A lot of the films you talk about being "bold and raw" (presumably, the Video Nasty-era stuff) just seem old and knackered to me these days. Not all of 'em though; 'The Burning', 'Zombi Holocaust', 'Vampyres' and especially 'The Evil Dead' continue to cut the mustard (The 'Evil Dead' remake was equally great, though)
Thinking about it, I saw Dario Argento's cut of 'Dawn' at that FulciFest back in the mid-90's, and I dug it much more than the draggy Romero version... Maybe it's time for a re-think...
Whatever, keep up the exceptional work, Anthony; whoever you are.
In reply to an earlier post on 14 May 2014 22:11:32 BDT
Last edited by the author on 14 May 2014 22:32:44 BDT
Anthony M Dawson says:
Hi again Nomar, thanks for the complements, as you say I'm a man of my convictions and respect you for yours, its nice to be able to disagree without WWIII breaking out as so often happens on internet forums. Nice to see you're a Fulci fan I love his work, even some of his lesser films, Zombie Flesh Eaters is simply amazing and as it has virtually nothing in common with Romero's film I don't see why the two are compared, I do think Fulci won that one by quite a longshot though! As for my comments on raw films I don't know how to explain it but 70's and 80's low budget horror had an edge to it, something cheap and nasty that gave you the vibe anything could happen, often the imagination surpassed the eventual outcome in these cases but still I love to feel I'm in unsafe territory with a madman at the wheels. I don't think he was a talented director but Joel Reed was a madman and I think Bloodsucking Freaks holds up in spite of its many, many flaws. As for remakes VS originals guess its all a matter of opinion, I didn't mind the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake for example but the original is one of my favourite films for similar reasons to why I defend Bloodsucking Freaks. I think Vampyres which you mentioned has a similar feel.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›