Beast of Blood

1970 "See Human Heads Transplanted!"
Beast of Blood
4.9| 1h31m| PG| en| More Info
Released: 06 May 1970 Released
Producted By: Scepter Industries Production
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

A mad scientist creates a monster, but after its head is cut off, he keeps it alive in a serum he has invented.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Scepter Industries Production

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Uriah43 This is the third film in the "Blood Collection" series and it takes up where the last movie, "Mad Doctor of Blood Island" left off. As everyone knows from the last exciting movie, "Dr. Bill Foster" (John Ashley) and "Sheila Willard" (Angelique Pettyjohn) managed to survive the explosion at the lab of "Dr. Lorca" (played by Ronald Remy) and were last seen on a ship heading away from Blood Island. However, one of the green creatures had managed to smuggle himself aboard just as the film ended. Sure enough, he comes out of hiding right as this film starts and causes the ship to explode killing everyone on board except for Dr. Foster and the green creature—who is seen slinking into the jungle as the opening credits appear on the screen. We then learn that Dr. Foster was rescued by a native woman named "Laida" (Liza Belmonte) and was sent to a hospital on the mainland. Months later he decides to return to Blood Island and is followed by an attractive journalist named "Myra J. Russell" (Celeste Yarnall) who wants the inside scoop on what happened. Now, although this movie doesn't quite have as much eroticism as its two predecessors, it does have some decent jungle combat scenes if that's any consolation. Likewise, Celeste Yarnall filled in quite well as the mandatory damsel in distress. All in all then, I rate this movie about the same as the last two films and recommend that it be seen after "Mad Doctor of Blood Island" if for no other reason than to obtain some kind of continuity. Slightly below average.
edwstraker 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.
lovecraft231 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.
dbborroughs 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.