Bloodlust

I have seen way too many bad movies in my life. And by "bad" I don't mean "hilariously inept" or "funny cheesy b-grade trash". I'm talking about BAD - so bad you wonder why you bother continuing to watch until the end. 'Bloodlust' is as bad as any movie I have ever seen. There is absolutely no reason to endure this movie, except just to say you have seen one of the worst movies ever made in Australia.

Now look, I'm all for the idea of saying "major studios be damned, I'll just do it MY WAY". It certainly worked for Roger Corman, Russ Meyer, Andy Warhol and John Waters. More recently, Jorge Buttgereit's astounding 'Nekromantik' has shown what can be achieved with little or no budget, no apparent outside censorship or compromise, and an original vision. That movie is genuinely exciting and disturbing. 'Bloodlust', despite the publicity screaming it is the first Australian movie banned in Britain, isn't. Buttgereit has talent and chutzpah in spades. 'Bloodlust' director Jon Hewitt, and co-writer Richard Wolstencroft don't.

This is an amateurish mess, with absolutely nothing original to say, with an abysmal script (? I'm assuming their really WAS a script) badly acted by a bunch of low lifes, druggies, and non-actors. The latter inexplicably includes respected underground musicians Ian Rilen (of legendary punk band X) and Frank Brunetti (former member of 80s indie faves Died Pretty). The involvement of those two is really the only interesting thing about this whole fiasco. Maybe 'Bloodlust' was a lot of fun to make, but watching it is a chore. If you want to see some genuinely entertaining b-grade Aussie trash check out 'Body Melt'. It's everything 'Bloodlust' would love to be.

I feel no remorse is saying that Bloodlust is quite possibly one of the worst films ever made. Not because of the fact that the budget looks lower than that of the average backyard porn flick, or that the acting sucks or whatever...

It's more about the fact that this is advertised as being a "vampire movie", however, for anybody who's ever seen a vampire film, it's nice when they actually feature some characters that you can say without a doubt, "yep, that person's a vampire" rather than "yep, that person's a wolf-haired gimp in fluoro sweatpants".

Truly bad.

I didnt think it was possible, but i have found film worse than 'Body Melt'. This film is really really bad! And what makes it worse is that its another Australian film...

Shot on what looks like VHS, and with a terrible 80's rock soundtrack, it just keep getting worse and worse, which is hard to believe seeing how bad the beginning is (skinned male hanging up-side-down in a white tomato sauce sprayed room anyone?).

And why do their accents keep changing? From bad New York drawl, to prissy english, then pure Aussie! And it happens to the whole cast!

This film also claims to have won some film festival on the cover (i believe it was the Utah Film Festival). This has to be a lie because no-one in their right mind would nominate this for anything (perhaps the Golden Rasberries but i thinks its too bad for that aswell).

Come on guys! This film has to be number 1 on the bottom 100!!! It has to be ten times a bad as those films already on there.

Well done to the "film" makers of this trash, for proving there is a reason not to see films..... 0/10

Bloodlust is a spectacular achievement. Richard Wolstencraft and Jon Hewitt's opus is a very fine film of its own accord, however its importance ultimately lies in the fact that it is an example of that rarest of breeds - an Australian film with balls. Bloodlust spits all over the dreary crap that regularly gets churned out with the assistance of funding bodies. At the time of its release, this film was a much needed shot of adrenalin in the arm of the limp and pathetic Australian independent film-making scene.

I don't care if each character has a different, equally unconvincing, accent or that the calibre of acting displayed in the film makes the average porn star look like Laurence Olivier. The film was obviously made on the sniff of wet rag with a cast of amateurs. Get over it. Bloodlust is all about ideas, in particular exploring the cinematic boundaries of sex and violence. In that regard, Bloodlust is the least patronising film I have ever seen. It gives the viewer large doses of sex and gore, often both at once, without all the garbage in between. For me, Bloodlust is like getting a huge serving of dessert without having to eat your mangy vegetables beforehand.

The film revolves around three blood drinking killers - Tad, Frank and Lear. Our three heroes spend most of their time having sex and murdering people, although not necessarily in that order. When the local stake wielding religious fanatics almost succeed in killing Tad, the lovely threesome decide to rob a casino and retire. This sets off a chain of events that result in Tad and his ladies being chased by police, mobsters and the religious slayers. Bloodlust does not waste a second of its running time being boring. If someone is not being mutilated or having sex, then one of the characters is spewing out a tasteless joke. In fact, Bloodlust is a very funny movie. The screenplay is wonderfully literate and the humour, while not exactly subtle, is dark and pointed.

The technical aspects of the film are just as inspiring as the subject matter. The direction is innovative and the film is lovingly constructed. The film's pacing is relentless and the final showdown counts as one of the finest moments in independent horror movie history. The special effects are extraordinary for such a low budget film. Olaf Ittenbach would be proud of the stakings, shootings, be-headings, bitings and general dismemberment. With the exception of one dodgy decapitation, the gore effects are hugely impressive for both their over the top detail and sheer frequency. The sex scenes are kinky and fetishists will love the liberal use of whips and constraints. There is even the occasional sex act with a corpse, which never fails to liven up a film in my humble opinion.

The voters who have trashed this film have either entirely missed the point or simply do not belong to the intended audience. Bloodlust is made for connoisseurs of underground horror. If you like Ittenbach, Buttgereit or even dirty, old Andreas Bethmann then this should be right up your alley. Richard Wolstencraft is truly Australia's finest cinematic export. Bloodlust comes very highly recommended.

Some people are born clueless I guess. The movie is AUSTRALIAN - the "fake" English accents are in fact Australian accents! The actors who are speaking in this dialect happen to be real junkies, prostitutes and pimps which certainly adds a bit of authenticity if not an interestingly perverse element to the movie. Also, the music is by The Buzzcocks, a well thought of Industrial/Punk band that sure ain't "80's hard rock" and is totally appropriate to the approach of this revisionist vampire outing. Yeah, sure they can walk around in sunlight, so what? If no filmmaker could diverge from the exact formula in popular mythology things would get pretty boring and predictable and we would be missing out on a lot of classic cinema. Though admittedly the drooling masses like their mindless entertainment to adhere to predictable rules. Actually I'm amazed that there was only one entry here for this movie. It's been banned in the UK due to the copious amounts of sex and gore, but still there are other places where this has been seen, where are the real trash movie fans when ya need 'em?