Sangre

Andy Milligan's "Blood" has everything:werewolf who happens to be an amateur scientist and his vampire bride,legless butler and his frustrated wife,enormous man-eating plants thirsty for human blood plus some sort of serum from the roots."Blood" is one of the most professional Andy Milligan's horror efforts,but it's still not competent enough.The plot is delightfully absurd,the editing is awful and the location sets are obviously modern.The characters are truly hateful and frustrated and the mood is strangely hypnotic.The acting is surprisingly good but the gore effects are abysmal.Overall,"Blood" is a delirious piece of zero-budget cinema that trash fans everywhere need to see.6 killer plants out of 10.

This is one of Milligan's better Gothic style horror dramas. It's a lot in the style of THE RATS ARE COMING!THE WEREWOLVES ARE HERE! But not as dull. The acting is much better than in most of his films and the camera work is not bad.

The film does have two strikes against it. 1)When the wolf man turns into a werewolf he is wearing a silly looking werewolf mask and 2)The action scenes seem to being missing something as if something was cut out. This is how most of Milligan's films seem to be edited though so I can't tell if I was watching a censored print or if it was edited that way.

Blood (1974)

** (out of 4)

Downright craziness from director Andy Milligan has Lawrence Talbot working under the last name Orlovsky. He moves his wife, the daughter of Dracula, into a house where he also brings along a wide range of weird people. Inside the house he is growing plants, which will eat humans but there are more dark secrets within these walls.

Milligan has a huge cult following and it's really easy to see why. I've gone through a hand full of the director's films and for the most part I've found them ranking from downright horrid to suicide worthy. With that said, BLOOD is probably the best film I've seen from him because of how crazy and bizarre it is. I'm not sure if the director just figured he'd throw everything into a film and see what would stick but you've got a werewolf, Dracula's daughter, a deformed mutant and of course the man-eating plants.

There are some really kooky moments throughout this thing ranging to some bizarre dialogue where the wife wants to know if her husband still loves her to a werewolf attack that is filmed in such dark conditions that you can't even see what is happening. The melodrama that Mulligan adds to a lot of his horror pictures is something that actually works here because of the fact that it's a werewolf and a vampire. The added supporting of the other freaks is just a good bonus.

The performances really aren't all that bad and the film has a much more professional look that the majority of the director's work. At just under 70 minutes the movie manages to keep your interest throughout.

Blood - 1972 ( This Films Rates a D+ ) The year is 1883. Strange characters travel from Europe to America and are engaged in human experimentation. A werewolf doctor is married to a vampire who have assistants growing flesh eating plants. These plants are growing stronger and can devour a whole human body. Eventually everything is in chaos. Poor scripting with even worse acting. It is as if I am watching a high school play. Some of the camera angles and sequences are out of focus with poor sound transitions between scenes. At 57:44 and for about 1+ minute, the whole sequence is nothing but a black screen. The film is intentionally funny, from the make up to the costumes to lines like this "Not so fast my pretty, I aint finished yet", But often times its not intentional. Minimal gore though not absent of it. There is not enough action going on for me to love this film (and I love cheese). It has fun moments but overall it falters in to many places.

How can someone call themselves a fan of cult horror movies like "The Blob" and the various "Godzilla" flicks, and call this movie "cheap trash. "Blood" is basically a low budget love letter to other low budget cheapies, which are also considered classics today, movies like "The Wolfman" and "Satan's Cheerleaders," are cult favorites. Maverick director Andy Milligan has taken his love for Dracula and The Wolf man, and perhaps the cult tv show "Dark Shadows," which this movie has a lot of similarities to, and created this stylish horror opus. . A cursed family arrives from an obscure part of Eastern Europe, and holes up in a large, gothic home in Staten Island, New York. They harbor a hideous secret, as the lady of the house has a rare disease in which she needs a constant supply of blood to keep her alive. Without her "medicine," she turns into a monstrous creature. The gore is brief, but when it's on screen it can be quite nasty, Fortunately Milligan doesn't let his camera linger on those gore shots for more than a couple seconds. Being a period piece, we get some lovely, albeit cheap 1930's era costumes and hairstyles. Before Milligan turned to horror, he directed a collection of erotic, sometimes even pornographic films, which he was surprisingly good at making. His films are dialog-heavy, but the fact that the dialog is so zany and bizarre, becomes a good thing. If you have patience, "Blood" is considered one of the director's more ambitious works, with it's costumes and music score. It also scores high marks on weirdness, and most importantly, "Blood" is one of the more atmospheric horror movies to come out of the 70's. But it's not recommended for cinema snobs, self-proclaimed critics who are going to rip something apart because of some imperfection. With films like this, the flaws sometimes become their greatest asset. Presently I am working through Milligan's body of work, at least the films that weren't lost due to the neglect of his careless family, and admittedly, there are some bad titles. There are also some real gems among them, the absolute best being "Fleshpot On 42nd Street," which was one of the director's non-horror efforts. I recommend "Blood" to fans of true cult horror movies.