Beast of Blood

Please forgive me but what follows are my memories encountering this movie 30ish years ago as a teenager of about 13 who had never seen an R-rated movie. I suspect only those of you who lived in the middle of North America cut off from the coasts will really appreciate this story. I lived in Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada just above the barren expanses between us and North Dakota so that map goes. One of our main contacts with the outside world was a US border TV station with the call letters KCND. KCND knew Canadian advertising was central to its bottom line. It served admirably as a cross border institution serving both southern Manitoba and Northern North Dakota with offices in both countries before switching call letters to CKND. I don't know if K/C-C/K-ND survives today either as a US or Canadian outlet. Anyway this station had a movie on Saturday night at 10:30 PM which I think was called Chiller Theatre or something like that. As I remember, the movies were the usual stuff for the time, mostly 1950's fare which I still enjoy to this day. Then one night Beast of Blood appeared. From the opening I knew this movie was completely different. The camera effects, a hideous and to this day still frightening, dripping, oozing chlorophyll monster, a guy falling into a pit of wooden stakes pumping-- no gushing-- blood from his wounds... and John Ashley and Celeste Yarnell naked. I had never seen anything like it. The other two "Blood" movies followed on CKND one of which featured the mamorable, I mean memorable, Angelique Pettyjohn from Star Trek naked with John Ashley. Beast of Blood stayed with me for 30ish years. Then I saw the DVD and confirmed that in in the 70s my prairie TV station showed it completely uncut! I miss the renegade drive-in days. This, even though I saw my drive-in movies on TV.

This the direct sequel to Mad Doctor of Blood Island. Its the fourth (or third if you don't count the unrelated Terror is a Man) in the Blood Island saga. Literally picking up hours after the first film, the film begins on the boat sailing away from Blood Island. As John Ashley waxes poetic about his time on the island fighting monsters the man beast from the first film appears (he was seen to have secreted himself in a lifeboat at the end of Mad Doctor) and a battle occurs which destroys the ship and leaves Ashley as the only survivor. A year or so later Ashley heads back to Blood Island to investigate stories that weird things have begun to happen again despite the death of the evil Dr Lorca. On the island Ashley finds that many people he believed dead survived the final battle of the first film and that some how the "green men" have returned. It isn't long before its realized that Dr Lorca is back and up to his old tricks.

Finally watching this in close proximity to Mad Doctor I found that the film plays much better than it does as a stand alone film. I was never a big fan of this film prior to the back to back viewing because I always felt that it was missing something. What it was missing was the set up that the first film gives it.If you watch the two films together I think you'll find it a better film than when it's viewed all alone.

A sequel it is, but its not as scary (nor as gory nor as titillating). Sure there are some horrifying moments, but on some level this is more an adventure/ mystery film than a real horror movie. The man-beast is effectively off camera for most of the film following the opening battle (I have to say the make up here is infinitely better than in Mad Doctor). Some of Lorca's victims do cause mayhem, but the majority of the film concerns trying to find Lorca and the kidnapped reporter. Its not bad, but if you are expecting a straight horror film you may end up very disappointed, despite a great monster.

What can I say, I took it on its own terms and I liked it, high art its not. Definitely worth seeing especially as part of a double feature with Mad Doctor of Blood Island.

BEAST OF BLOOD is the third installment in Uber-Director Eddie Romero's shock / schlock trilogy. Picking up where the second film left off, John Ashley stars as Dr. Bill Foster, who manages to battle a murdering monster about 30 seconds into the movie! Said monster winds up back on the island. Foster arrives later, accompanied by nosy reporter, Myra Russell (Celeste Yarnall) to hunt the creature.

Let the terror begin!

Not surprisingly, Dr. Lorca returns, this time played by Eddie Garcia. Lorca's henchman-in-chief, Razak is also back, with the magnificent Bruno Punzalan once again in the role. Ashley, as always, delivers his lines as though he's aggravated that someone has interrupted his nap. His acting style could be called anti-dynamic, seeming as if he might drift right back to dreamland at any moment! He is perfectly suited for this film.

The "Beast" takes an eternity to reappear, leaving us stranded in the jungle with Foster and Russell getting into scrapes with Razak and company. At his fortress homestead, Lorca reveals his latest, eeevil experiment, leading up to the big finish.

Romero's signature elements are all on hand: mad science, mutation, green slime, topless females, Ashley's sideburns, etc.

Another triumph for Filipino filmmaking...

Dr. Foster (Ashley again-damn, look at those sideburns) comes back to Blood Island when the creature escapes (in a great opening sequence). Can the nefarious Dr. Lorca (now played by Eddie Garcia) be stopped.

While it all seems like a lot of fun, "Beast of Blood" is actually the weakest in the series. Sure, there's the requisite gore and nudity (including the creatures severed head-and when it talks!), and some nice action scenes come in. The thing is, the movie fails to keep one's interest as much this time, as there's a feeling of deja vu. Sure, the creature looks better this time, but you can only put up with it the premise of the series for so long before it starts to get stale.

Also, there isn't as much carnage from the creature this time around (and what happened to those killer trees?), meaning we have to put up with some tedium-such as scene after scene of people going through the jungle. Really, it grows quite tiresome.

"Beast of Blood" is far from horrible, but it's the weakest entry in the series, as it showing that the creators have milked the concept dry-in spite of some nice moments.

BEAST OF BLOOD (3+ outta 5 stars) This is one of those iffy movies that I just can't quite bring myself to recommend to other people... though I have seen it many times and will probably see it many more. It is just so cheesy... the acting and voice dubbing so poor... the dialogue so overwrought... the storyline so clichéd... sex and violence for no reason but to show sex and violence... I mean, what's not to love about a movie like that? (Well, if you're in the mood for it, that is.) This is one of those cheaply-made horror movies from the Phillipines in the early 70s starring John Ashley. (Didnd't *every* movie made in the Phillipines in the early 70s star John Ashley?) In this sequel to "Mad Doctor of Blood Island" (which I have never seen, but, really, I don't think I need to) Ashley once again fights a monster inadvertently created by a mad scientist and tries to put a stop to his insidious experiments on human beings. That's all you need for a plot, right? So there's lots of fighting... and shooting... and lovemaking (Ashley manages to find not one but TWO willing females on the remote island... what luck)! I thought the movie was pretty cool when I saw it at the drive-in when I was 14... and dang it, I still think it's pretty cool! Why is it that bad movies made 30 or 40 years ago are so much more entertaining than bad movies made NOW?