The Red Tide Massacre

I felt the story was very good. Interesting characters and plot line. The film kept me engaged till the end. I hope they make a prequel about the guy who ran the museum. He was by far the most interesting character in the movie. The producers did a good job of casting. Most of all Michael Pare and Sam Schweikert. I hope the producers use Sam in future projects. I think his quirky looks and acting style would be perfect for horror and comedy. I am a long time fan of John Russo. He is an excellent director and did a good job on this one. I hope the producers of this film make more horror films. I would be happy to see any and all they make in the future.

Yet another horror movie that I hadn't heard about prior to stumbling upon it here in 2024. And given my love of all things horror, of course I opted to sit down and watch what director John A. Russo had to offer.

Now, the storyline in the movie was actually fair enough. Hold your horses, because I am not saying that writers Palmer Edward and Joe Majestic put together a fantastic script and storyline, far from it. In fact, it was a pretty generic storyline that was somewhat reminiscent of the 1980s creature features.

However, the execution of the movie felt amateurish. There was nothing scary about the movie, and it was actually campy and cheesy, but not in a particularly enjoyable way.

The acting performances in "The Red Tide Massacre" were fair. Again, nothing outstanding, but taking the limitations of the script into consideration, then the actors and actresses did fair jobs. I have to say that it was actress Susan Elle who carried the movie. Of the entire cast ensemble, I was only familiar with actors Michael Paré and Nils Allen Stewart.

Something that worked well enough, despite it being cheesy effects, were the evolution of the mutation that happened to the convict. And the final creature design were actually fair enough if you like cheesy and campy monsters reminiscent of something from a 1950s movie.

All in all, "The Red Tide Massacre" is not a must-watch movie if you're a horror fan. And it most definitely is not a movie that will grace my screen a second time.

My rating of "The Red Tide Massacre" lands on a three out of ten stars.

If IMDB is good for one thing it's to laugh at the arm chair critics and trolls. I saw this on Ham Books website and picked it up during an order, being from the area it's set in, didn't recognize anyone except Michael Paré in the cast but found the pitch interesting enough to buy. I was pleasantly surprised, I'm not too stuck up when it comes to b-movies and indies and love giving them a chance.

The cast did well, I found no problem in the acting 98% of the time. And only then maybe 1 or 2 few seconds from an extra here and there, the actual cast did fine. Story wise it kept my interest and entertained. The makeup effects for the mutant was pretty good and the kills were nicely done. The practical effects were fine and It all kept my attention. This score is has on here the typical pearl clutching over reacting silly "horror haters: on expects and you should give it it's due worth, which as usual is near none LOL. If you like horror and mind GOOD low budget with an overall good effort in general. You can safely pick it up. As a film collector I'm approaching the big 3K films and I'm perfectly ok with having this one in the collection.

I've always been a fan of horror as a genre. So, now we have streaming services I will happily give pretty much anything in the genre a go. However, there's so much utter dross on there that it seems nowadays the mark of whether a film is 'good' or not is whether I can actually sit through it. I managed to last the entire of 'Red Tide Massacre,' not that it's exactly a 'great' film - merely watchable for ninety minutes.

There's a monster on the loose by the beach in Florida and a young deputy must team up with a reporter and a scientist to stop the 'massacre.' Oh, and I should probably say that 'massacre' is not the term I'd use for the amount of killing on display here. Mild deadly rampage would suit it better.

Despite not outright hating this movie, there isn't much to recommend. Although the acting is competent, the leading man comes across as miserable and surly (despite the amount of female attention he receives!). If you're hoping for scares, there isn't any. It utilised many a 'horror cliche' including the one about when a character says 'I'll be right back' they're about to be murdered brutally (didn't 'Scream' point this out back in 1997?) and the 'gore effects' are possibly some of the most laughable I've ever seen. If blood is required it's - presumably - computer-added in post production and it looks like someone has drawn the red liquid on afterwards like an animated cartoon!

The creature itself is hardly groundbreaking. It's a guy in a mask. End of. Okay, it's actually quite a good mask, but it's a 'good mask' if you saw it on someone trick or treating on Halloween, not in a theatrical film.

Most of the victims you won't really care about because they're only introduced into the very scene where they're due to die in. And if any water is required to be red, the film-makers just slap a red filter over half the lens! Maybe it would have worked better if it was a bit more 'self-knowing.' Perhaps they could have played into the overall 'cheap' feel. Sadly, every scene is played straight - sometimes TOO straight and the dramatic music can even drown out the (supposedly!) deep and meaningful dialogue.

So, it has a lot of cons and not many pros. It's probably not that good if looked at objectively, however, if you compare it to 90% of the horror films that seem to be made deliberately for streaming sites, then it's actually a bit better, or at least watchable, as I proved by getting to the credits only checking my Instagram on my phone a few times during the runtime.