Blood Feast Remake Best Buy Exclusive?

[eric_angelus]

Blood Feast Blu-ray

I could not find any info on this anywhere but I found the 2016 remake of Blood Feast w/ Robert Rusler and Caroline Williams at Best Buy for 12.99 today. No exclusive stickers on it but I can't find any listing for this being out anywhere. Picked it up. Just noticed the back cover says it is R rated...I believe the theatrical release was Unrated. Anyone have any ideas if this in fact exclusive to BB?

[MifuneFan]

Here's the cover art, and BB link:



https://www.bestbuy.com/site/blood-f...?skuId=6166922

It also shows on Amazon, but temp. OOS:

https://smile.amazon.com/Blood-Feast...s=761450171138

[MifuneFan]

I've submitted a DB entry for it.

[Vixen of the Night]

Originally Posted by eric_angelus

I could not find any info on this anywhere but I found the 2016 remake of Blood Feast w/ Robert Rusler and Caroline Williams at Best Buy for 12.99 today. No exclusive stickers on it but I can't find any listing for this being out anywhere. Picked it up. Just noticed the back cover says it is R rated...I believe the theatrical release was Unrated. Anyone have any ideas if this in fact exclusive to BB?

It was released with an R rating in theaters, but did run into trouble with the MPAA at first. Supposedly only 'minor' cuts were made to get an R rating. But the rating description gives one hope it's not too chopped up. Rated R for “strong sadistic violence and gore, language including sexual references, nudity and some drug content.”

But why the distributor didn't release the uncut version is beyond me.


http://bloody-disgusting.com/news/34...stic-violence/

[NoirFan]

Weren’t Arrow supposed to be releasing this at some point?

[GasmaskAvenger]

Originally Posted by NoirFan

Weren’t Arrow supposed to be releasing this at some point?

no that's Blood Feast 2: All U Can Eat

[NoirFan]

Originally Posted by GasmaskAvenger

no that's Blood Feast 2: All U Can Eat

Yeesh. In either case, they can take their time!

[HorrorBlu]

I watched it last night and it's not very good. But fun to see Robert Rusler in a leading role.

[El_Fez]

Originally Posted by HorrorBlu

I watched it last night and it's not very good.

More clarification on that please. The original version wasn't very good either, but it was entertaining as hell. Is the new one just bad, or is it so-bad-its-good, or somewhere inbetween?

[HorrorBlu]

Originally Posted by El_Fez

More clarification on that please. The original version wasn't very good either, but it was entertaining as hell. Is the new one just bad, or is it so-bad-its-good, or somewhere inbetween?

Somewhere in between. I would say bad, but watchable.

The big difference between this and Blood Feast 1 / 2 or Blood Diner is that it's played entirely with a straight-face. Rusler, Williams, and Monk have fun with what they're given, but unfortunately the script is super clunky and the dialogue almost entirely expository.

Rusler is the star of the film and has a lot of screentime, and he's easily the highlight of the film. Great to see him in a leading role! Even though Caroline Williams plays his wife in the film, it didn't feel like she was in the movie very much. Third billed Sophie Monk definitely had more screentime.

It's more or less a slasher movie with Rusler killing random 20-somethings in Paris. As for the kills, he mostly chains them up in the diner basement and tortures them, but the kills and gore are fairly limited. The most entertaining part of the movie is about a ten or fifteen minute chunk in the middle where Sophie Monk and her friends sneak into the museum where Rusler works and are quickly picked off. But again, that's a really brief chunk of the movie. The rest is all random people chained up in a basement. There's no real chase scenes or fighting back.

As for it being edited to an R-rating... you're probably not missing much. There's a castration scene that was probably trimmed (no pun intended), but the rest of the gore is pretty routine. There's an eye-gouging in the opening minutes, slashed throat, etc. Nothing too wild or outrageous. Personally, I think it needed to be more outrageous. The aforementioned castration, you see a partial glimpse of a prosthetic penis for about a second, aside from that there are breasts from Ishtar and two of the victims (although one is mostly covered by her hair). There are R-rated movies that have gone much further than what you see here.

Oh, and H.G. Lewis does have a brief cameo in the film.

Overall, I thought it was just bland. The script is clunky, the kills are routine, and it takes itself way too seriously.

[eric_angelus]

Originally Posted by HorrorBlu

Somewhere in between. I would say bad, but watchable.

The big difference between this and Blood Feast 1 / 2 or Blood Diner is that it's played entirely with a straight-face. Rusler, Williams, and Monk have fun with what they're given, but unfortunately the script is super clunky and the dialogue almost entirely expository.

Rusler is the star of the film and has a lot of screentime, and he's easily the highlight of the film. Great to see him in a leading role! Even though Caroline Williams plays his wife in the film, it didn't feel like she was in the movie very much. Third billed Sophie Monk definitely had more screentime.

It's more or less a slasher movie with Rusler killing random 20-somethings in Paris. As for the kills, he mostly chains them up in the diner basement and tortures them, but the kills and gore are fairly limited. The most entertaining part of the movie is about a ten or fifteen minute chunk in the middle where Sophie Monk and her friends sneak into the museum where Rusler works and are quickly picked off. But again, that's a really brief chunk of the movie. The rest is all random people chained up in a basement. There's no real chase scenes or fighting back.

As for it being edited to an R-rating... you're probably not missing much. There's a castration scene that was probably trimmed (no pun intended), but the rest of the gore is pretty routine. There's an eye-gouging in the opening minutes, slashed throat, etc. Nothing too wild or outrageous. Personally, I think it needed to be more outrageous. The aforementioned castration, you see a partial glimpse of a prosthetic penis for about a second, aside from that there are breasts from Ishtar and two of the victims (although one is mostly covered by her hair). There are R-rated movies that have gone much further than what you see here.

Oh, and H.G. Lewis does have a brief cameo in the film.

Overall, I thought it was just bland. The script is clunky, the kills are routine, and it takes itself way too seriously.

Just watched it, this sums up my feelings pretty well.

[HorrorBlu]

I posted these at horrordvds.com yesterday, but here's a look at the back of the case if anyone is interested. A lot of the info on there is wrong though, including the rating description and aspect ratio.

[El_Fez]

Ouch, that's too bad. You kind of have to play a movie like that, with a sly wink to the camera, full on knowing what kind of movie you are making. And you REALLY have to go gonzo with the gore.

I might check it out if I ever find it on sale, but with expectations tempered.

[roberteklund]

There seem to be both an Unrated and NC-17 version of this. Here are the difference between them. https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=333844

Also, I get a kick of seeing the Blu-ray cover speaking of DVD features!

[Vixen of the Night]

Here's the difference between the R rated and NC-17 version of the movie, and it shows plenty of gore being trimmed alongside any glimpses of cannibalism.

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=244512