A very dear film to my gory, blood-filled heart5/10
This is the splatter anticlassic all us sickos know and love. The non-plot is, well, pretty simple and it's only an excuse to cut loose with loads of very extreme gore and sadism. Fuad Ramses (Mal Arnold), an Egyptian maniac of pagan bloodlust, must serve up a "blood feast" to Ishtar, his horrible goddess of gory days gone by. Y'know, back when chicks used to get their hearts yanked out on altars IN BLOOD COLOR! How does he get the morsels for his feast? It's an easy guess! Tongues pulled out. Limbs cut off. Brains hacked out in a blood-splattered mess. It's the grand-daddy of all the sickest stuff you've ever seen, and even though it's pretty stupid and bad, it sure is fun! It's even funny on purpose (as well as the other way around). For those of you who dig this unsavory and depraved type of junk the way I do, find this bad mother as soon as possible and surrender to the forbidden pleasures of the first splatter-comedy ever! (I think...)
Oft-credited as the first traditional "gore" pic, 'Blood Feast' establishes all of typical conventions of the genre; including nubile, young women (including a Playboy Playmate), excessive blood and guts, and even some dark humor (including the "hamburger" line and the trash-compactor ending). It's also inept in every way, from the atrocious acting and horrible directing to the dumb-as-dirt characters. Hell, the most intelligent character in this movie is the murderer, Faud Ramses - what, with him having penned a seemingly popular non-fiction work and running a bang-up catering business to boot - and even he is not too bright, which unfortunately catches up with him in the end.
If you love bad movies in that MST3K kind of way, than this is one to see. It's laugh-a-minute riot (and you've go to love the score). So put down that copy of 'Ancient Weird Religious Rites' and check this movie out.
Blood Feast by H. G. Lewis was the first splatter film ever made, and it changed the path of the horror film forever. Its importance, whether good or bad, is undeniable. The film is in many ways the very essence of amateurishness. I do not believe I have ever seen a film where no one...and I mean no one...had ANY acting ability. For me, the only one that comes closest is Mal Arnold as the Egyptian caterer Fuad Ramses. These people cannot laugh, cry, scream, or even speak with any degree of credibility at all. I mean you would have to train people to get results like this if you had wanted them to be like this in the first place. I can only think that maybe with the leads being so poor...the other actors had no inspiration. The direction is not a great deal better...but then the film was made in 9 days. The script is silly and filled with lamentable dialogue where every facet of the plot must be explained and re-explained. What then does this "classic" have going for it? Well, it is fun to watch. It will make you laugh at its unreal gore and its poor acting and direction. The gore is a given and it is abundant....bright red dapples and drapes the bodices of many victimized girls...all of which I might point out are very easy on the eyes...another plus for male viewers. The music, created by Lewis, is surprisingly very good and stylish, helping create the mood and pacing of the film. All in all, I recommend seeing Blood Feast for its ineptitude and the laughs it will derive. If you are a fan of horror, it is a must see to satisfy your curiosity of what caused the change from good horror stories to graphic horror films. The answer lies with Blood Feast.
anyone who views themselves as a serious horror fan should praise HG Lewis as GOD!!! although his movies are dated and somewhat cheesy by todays jaded standpoint, without his contributions, the horror genre would not be what it is today. this film is the first of the revolutionary (for their time...) "trilogy of blood", which were among the first films ever to show graphic depictions of bondage,blood, mutilation and all things near and dear to true horror fans hearts. obviously upon current viewing of the film, the gore effects will seem amateurish and silly, but you have to remember, this film was made in 1963. NO ONE was making films like this back then and we can all thank Mr. Lewis for his contributions, because without them, horror would not be what it is today. 8 1/2 out of 10 for the genre also see "The GORE GORE GIRLS" (aka BLOOD ORGY) - in my opinion the best (and goriest Lewis film)
Some day, I hope to travel to Clearwater, Florida, to place a manikin leg before the Sphinx in the patking lot, in honor of this classic of trash cinema which was filmed there. This is the one film I can think of that succeeds brilliantly in every frame to be deeply entertaining because it's so profoundly inept. Though I have, on repeated viewing, developed a special fondness for Mal Arnold's interpretation of Fuad Ramses. It's the essence of camp. He might have been a neighbor on Pee-Wee's Playhouse! Has anyone else noticed the perverse giddiness of the scenes where he fondles womens' entrails?
There's a cut-rate irony at work here, too. The only things happening in this town are Suzette Fremont's party and those horrible murders. Yet only we, the audience, know that they're related. And what about that book club? Do they only offer one title?
Also, the tongue-pulling scene had to be the first occurance of slapstick gore. I mean, he didn't knock her out or anything. He just jammed his fingers into her mouth as soon as she opened the door. And she didn't particularly struggle with him. She just went "Ngaahhh!" and "Lleeehhh," as he yanked. And when he got the tongue out, it was about a foot long. Did it get stretched out of shape like taffy?
For a movie to be that entertaining to me every time I've watched it (which must be more than fifty by now)represents some weird kind of accomplishment. Do yourself a favor and buy the DVD. This is perhaps the best unintentional comedy ever made!