Eine Reise in unerforschtes und verbotenes Gebiet durch drei in Raum und Zeit verwickelte Geschichten.Eine Reise in unerforschtes und verbotenes Gebiet durch drei in Raum und Zeit verwickelte Geschichten.Eine Reise in unerforschtes und verbotenes Gebiet durch drei in Raum und Zeit verwickelte Geschichten.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
Empfohlene Bewertungen
"Books of Blood" is based on the works of UK writer Clive Barker.
There' s a certain symmetry and maturity to the characters, that suggest's this film's screenplay is based on the work of a capable author. That said, as is often the case, a lot can get lost in translation, from book to screen.
Having read two of Barkers books but not the works this film is based upon, I know his writing is often complex and intricate. You get the sense of the underlying work in this film but unsurprisingly, it feels incomplete.
That's not to say this is a bad horror film. The characters are, for the most part, developed enough to offer moderate insight into their motivations. In addition, its intersecting tales have a tidy symmetry once the conclusion has been reached
Pacing is decent, scares are more of the gruesome variety than the jump scare's you find in films like "Friday 13th". There's also a lot of creativity on offer, that taps into and blends, familiar horror tropes.
In summary, I'd say this is a reasonable watch. Yes it does feel like something is missing. That said, enough horror fundamentals are on offer, I feel, to satisfy most fans of the genre, like myself.
6/10
There' s a certain symmetry and maturity to the characters, that suggest's this film's screenplay is based on the work of a capable author. That said, as is often the case, a lot can get lost in translation, from book to screen.
Having read two of Barkers books but not the works this film is based upon, I know his writing is often complex and intricate. You get the sense of the underlying work in this film but unsurprisingly, it feels incomplete.
That's not to say this is a bad horror film. The characters are, for the most part, developed enough to offer moderate insight into their motivations. In addition, its intersecting tales have a tidy symmetry once the conclusion has been reached
Pacing is decent, scares are more of the gruesome variety than the jump scare's you find in films like "Friday 13th". There's also a lot of creativity on offer, that taps into and blends, familiar horror tropes.
In summary, I'd say this is a reasonable watch. Yes it does feel like something is missing. That said, enough horror fundamentals are on offer, I feel, to satisfy most fans of the genre, like myself.
6/10
I almost abandoned watching it after discovering the overall rating but glad I didn't.
Grippy horror movie consisting of 3 stories that of course are kind of linked together.
Relatively short, relatively terrifying and pretty watchable. In fact I would enjoy this as a TV series.
Grippy horror movie consisting of 3 stories that of course are kind of linked together.
Relatively short, relatively terrifying and pretty watchable. In fact I would enjoy this as a TV series.
If you're looking for a constant jumpscares fest, this is not for you. Books of Blood delivers a slow burn anthology with decent acting. Some of the stories are a little drawn out and could've done with some trimming. The pacing is where this movie suffers but it is definitely worth watching.
This is the first time ive seen mysophonia referenced in a film. Both my husband and i experience it; him with mouth noises and me with water noises, and it was a realistic portrayal of how overwhelming it can be. This anthology was an unexpected find and I'm glad we gave it a go. The actings great, the stories are engaging and varied and it wasn't predictable. I know clive barkers books are visceral and complex and I certainly understand why some fans would feel short changed, but it's worth taking a look
What shines through is that it seems to be "made for TV" .. but not like Game of Thrones or so ... but "made for early evening TV ... in the early 2000s" or sort. It never dares to go all the way. It hints at it .. it shows potential - but it backs off.
I actually liked the first story (and conclusion) .. it was kind of powerful. Scenes, images and ideas were well done - and it was a nice, sad tragedy. The other stories however felts like re-tales of older stories. They were not nearly as well done and seemed much, much cheaper - both in creativity and cinematography.
For a full length suspense/horror movie, i can only give it a low score though. The stories are not good enough - they are not intertwined cleverly .. and they never exceed a rather low budget TV format.
I actually liked the first story (and conclusion) .. it was kind of powerful. Scenes, images and ideas were well done - and it was a nice, sad tragedy. The other stories however felts like re-tales of older stories. They were not nearly as well done and seemed much, much cheaper - both in creativity and cinematography.
For a full length suspense/horror movie, i can only give it a low score though. The stories are not good enough - they are not intertwined cleverly .. and they never exceed a rather low budget TV format.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesBooks of Blood adapts Clive Barker's framing device story from his "Book of Blood" but also includes brand new stories written for this film that Barker was involved in creating.
- PatzerMary says Miles died at 7 years old, but the dates on his gravestone span less than 6 years.
- SoundtracksDeep Six
Performed by Marilyn Manson
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 47 Min.(107 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2:1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen