Zeegrade I'm kinda torn on how to rate this movie. On one hand "Blood Freak" has some of the worst "acting" I have ever witnessed on film including a chain smoking narrator that constantly looks down at his script who at one point goes into a serious coughing spell that is not edited out at all. On the other hand this is a one-of-a-kind insane combination of drug propaganda, slasher films, monster movies and Christian evangelism that has never been repeated to this day. With both of these factors in mind I decided on a score between the two which is why I gave it a 5 out of 10.Steve Hawkes is Steve Hawkes as Herschell. Why they choose to show his name twice is a mystery but make no mistake that Mr. Hawkes is the star of "Blood Freak" as he looks like a combination of Lou Ferrigno and Elvis. Herschell is a biker riding the Florida highways when he meets free spirited Ann who becomes instantly smitten with the soft spoken brute. She takes him to a drug party where he meets Ann's sister Angel who represents the straight and narrow path. Her words of warning to Herschell seem to resonate with him yet after one toke he becomes instantly hooked. Yeah, that happens with marijuana a lot. With his addiction growing and the need to satisfy his fix overpowering Herschell agrees to an absurd experiment where he eats turkey meat that has been tampered with by two scientists that are probably the worst of the so-called actors in this movie. Sure enough the infected meat turns Herschell into a turkey-headed beast that must feed on blood. From here he goes on a murderous rampage of neck slitting and leg hacking that takes "Blood Feast" from simple anti-drug screed into a gory hack-n-slash. To say that somewhere along the line "Blood Freak" got lost in translation is an understatement. How this was supposed to bring more Christians into the fold after watching this is beyond me. For bad movie enthusiasts out there this is THE MOVIE that you must see at least once in order to give you a true barometer as to what is considered bad in the bad way and bad in the awesomely bad way. I only remembered to review this when I stumbled upon Steve Hawkes on an episode of "Fatal Attractions" using his real name of Steve Sipek and his dangerous lifestyle of living with multiple lions and tigers. It's good to know that he continues to live beyond the norm.

jfgibson73 I'm giving this movie an 8 out of ten because I find it very entertaining. However, anyone thinking about watching it should know it is a terrible movie, very low-budget and amateurish. I happen to be a fan of movies that are so bad they're good, and this was the one that got me into them.I happened to see this movie for the first time on Thanksgiving night, 2001. I was living in the Detroit area, and a local horror host called The Ghoul happened to be showing it that night. I was flipping channels while over at a friend's house, and we were doing something else, not really paying attention. However, the longer the movie went on, the more difficult it became to look away. I was transfixed by the absurdity. I had watched campy movies before, but something was different about this one. Something about the atmosphere it created, the unusual characters, and the ridiculous dialog and situations.I eventually ended up buying on the Something Weird DVD, loaded with TONS of great extras. Now, I am interested in finding more movies like it. Because of Blood Freak, I have discovered many other movies that may seem unwatchable, but are actually a lot more fun than the slick, predictable formula that makes it to the theater. I think that my love for movies was broadened as a result.I realize this is more of a personal memoir than a movie review, but that is mainly what I use this site for. It helps me keep track of the movies I've seen and what I thought about them at the time.

MartinHafer This is a rare film that has a much higher IMDb score than it deserves simply because reviewers don't know whether to give it a 1 or a 10. That's because although the movie is terrible, it also is so unintentionally funny that it makes a great party film--where everyone can sit around and make fun of how dopey the whole thing is--much like PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE.The film begins with an introduction by one of the directors, Brad F. Grinter. Frankly, Grinter looks like an over-the-hill porn star--with his greasy hair, unbuttoned shirt and smirk. Plus, every time he interrupts the film with his irrelevant musings, he's chain smoking. Practically everything he says during each interruption is pointless and his delivery is so bad, he's the funniest thing about the film. I especially loved near the end of the film where he's going off on the evils of drugs--yet at the same time he's practically coughing up a lung due to his continual smoking. Think about it--he doesn't even bother to put down his cigarette to do these short segments and when the tape is messed up by coughing fits, they don't even bother to re-shoot these scenes. Talk about incompetence! The rest of the film is a confusing mess. It begins with a woman having a flat tire and a biker stopping to help. She takes him home and your brain already starts to hurt. She says she's a good Christian lady yet she lives with her sexy sister who is a drug-addicted nympho who throws wild parties. And the audience is then treated to Bible reading and confusing theological lessons from this lady to the biker--in the midst of a party where everyone else is doing inhalants and pot!The nympho sister makes it her mission in life to get the biker to take drugs and do the naked limbo with her. He seems like a nice guy and so far has adamantly refused any drug. However, after the sisters ask him to live with them (which makes sense for the nympho but not for the Bible-thumper), he agrees to take a few hits of pot solely because the nympho dares him to. Unbeknownst to him, the pot is laced with something strange and addictive--the results of which you'll hear more about in a moment.The next day, he goes to his new job at the poultry farm. Two "scientists" who work there have gotten him to agree to be a guinea pig and eat a batch of turkey laced with some "harmless chemicals". However, after consuming practically an entire turkey, he goes into convulsions and the combination of the drugs in the turkey and the crap he smoked the day before have an unforeseen result--he turns into a combination turkey and vampire!! Seeing this guy run about for the next 20 minutes wearing a very cheesy turkey head as he rips open women's throats in order to drink their blood is something I'll never forget and might just be one of the silliest things in film history.So, from the plot, it's pretty easy to see how this could all be rather funny. Combining that with poor acting (mostly from the supporting actors), lousy camera work and dialog that it laughable, it's pretty obviously why I gave this turkey a 1. My advice is that if you can't laugh at bad films, don't watch. However, if you are like me and love to occasionally laugh at such ineptness, try this film!

raymondnyc I have a great sense of "camp" - I thoroughly enjoy films like "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls," "Queen of Outer Space," all Paul Morrissey & John Waters films, etc. So when I saw the listing for "Blood Freak" on TCM's schedule ("Derelict biker goes on drug trip and transforms into killer turkey") I thought - what a hoot this is gonna be! Yet I kept waiting for the payoff, and instead just wasted 86 mins of my life I'll never get back. Does ANYONE think this picture is funny? How in the world did "Blood Freak" wind up on Turner 'CLASSIC' Movies?! Bad acting is a staple of movies of this type, but when it's THIS bad it's just distracting. (David Lochary & Monique van Vooren would deserve Oscars if compared to Steve Hawkes & Dana Cullivan.) So can anyone tell me what I was missing?