Michael_Elliott Color Me Blood Red (1965)** 1/2 (out of 4) The third film in director Herschell Gordon Lewis' "blood trilogy," this one here centers on a crazed painter (Goron Oas-Heim) who finally reaches his breakthrough when he realizes that human blood is the perfect red for his paintings. This here is pretty much a re-working of the Roger Corman classic A BUCKET OF BLOOD with the biggest difference being that this here is in bright color, which perfectly shows off the various bloody scenes. Look, if you're wanting some sort of masterpiece or brilliant filmmaking then this here certainly isn't going to be for you. With that said, film history has all sorts of items that remain important and there's no doubt that Lewis' blood trilogy is one such thing. The movie contains some awful acting, a silly script, lame dialogue and there are countless other things that you could pick on but in the end the picture is at least fun. While I'm sure all the shots of blood were shocking back in 1965, when viewed today they're more campy fun than anything else. The movie managers to move at a very good pace, which is certainly important as there's nothing worse than one of these films that just drag along. Another important thing is that the lead actor at least keeps you entertained in everything. Yes, the performance isn't great or even good. It's over-the-top and rather campy but this here is actually very entertaining. The supporting players don't come off as well but I'm sure director Lewis wasn't too worried about performances. As for the red stuff, it's cleverly done and especially the "big" sequence early on when a woman is tied up and the painter has to use one of her organs to fill up his paint cup. COLOR ME BLOOD RED doesn't come close to the same level as BLOOD FEAST or TWO THOUSAND MANIACS but it's still a nice entry in the series.

BA_Harrison For the second film in his infamous 'Blood' trilogy, 'Godfather of Gore' Herschell Gordon Lewis gleefully rips off Roger Corman's beatnik horror A Bucket of Blood, but fails to deliver in almost every department: the direction is dull; the dialogue is awful ('Holy Bananas, it's a girl's leg!' exclaims one character upon finding a dead body); the acting is atrocious; the music is bland, generic jazz; and the one factor that audiences have come to expect from Lewis—outrageous 'grand guignol' style splatter—is notable by its absence (only one scene, in which the protagonist squeezes blood from one of his victim's intestines, comes close to providing gore-hounds with the goods).Gordon Oas-Heim is reasonably convincing as obnoxious artist Adam Sorg, who discovers that he produces his best work when painting in blood, but almost everyone else puts in absolutely dreadful performances, with special mention going to Pat Lee as wig-wearing teen Sydney: her incessant use of hip 60s slang ('where's the snacks, Jack?', 'on the patio, Daddio', 'dig that crazy driftwood') might be amusing at first, but is guaranteed to eventually grate on the nerves.Fans of Lewis will no doubt wish to see this film so that they can complete the trilogy, and those with a thing for curvaceous cuties in big bikinis might get the occasional thrill, but it's hard to imagine anyone else finding Color Me Blood Red to be anything other than a bore.3.5 out of 10, generously rounded up to 4 for IMDb.

Scars_Remain I haven't seen too many HGL films but the ones I've seen are Two Thousand Maniacs, The Wizard of Gore, The Gore Gore Girls, Blood Feast, The Gruesome Twosome and now Color Me Blood Red. This was definitely my least favorite so far because it was dull and didn't even keep my attention for longer than 5 minutes. I think I might give on HGL because I've only liked two of his films so far.The thing about Herschell Gordon Lewis is that his films are either so bad that they're good or so bad that they're unwatchable and not worth wasting time on. This film falls into the latter category. Bad acting, editing, writing, pacing, music placement and lighting are all expected of these films so those aren't what ruined this one for me. It was how it was dragged out and went on for too long even though it was under 90 minutes and where was the gore? After the two films that came before this, I expect a lot more gore, and it wasn't there. Oh well, I guess I'll just have to stick to Two Thousand Maniacs.

CMRKeyboadist Hershell Gordan Lewis, you all should know him from his cult classics like "Blood Feast", "2000 Maniacs!", "Wizard of Gore", "Blood Feast 2", etc. "Color Me Blood Red" is the third installment in his notorious "Blood Trilogy" series and holds its own as a genre favorite. Although, this movie has nothing to do with the other two films (not like 2000 Maniacs! has anything to do with Blood Feast) it is still a lot of fun.The story opens with a disgruntled artist who isn't getting enough respect from the local art critic. His girlfriend is quite annoying and after she nicks her finger on a nail and gets blood all over a painting the artist gets the idea to start cutting his fingers and painting with the blood. After draining as much blood as he can from himself, he murders his girlfriend by stabbing her in the head and then wiping the blood all over the picture he has been working on. He then brings the picture to the local critic who believes it to be the best piece of art since Picasso. Having such success, the crazed artist wants to make more work in the same fashion. Can you guess what happens from there?This was a fun flick. Although, it wasn't Gordan's most disgusting movie it still has certain moments that are cringe-worthy. Look for a scene in which the artist is squeezing blood out from a woman's intestines. Pretty gruesome for the time. 7/10