The Flesh and Blood Show

Performers auditioning for a British "Grand Guignol" show are murdered in mysterious ways in this deranged horror directed by Pete Walker("Frightmare","Schizo","House of Whipcord").The film is pretty creepy and offers a nice amount of sleaze.There are decapitations,drownings,psychotic elderly tramps,naked women and some gruesome killings.The cinematography is pretty gloomy and the location sets are suitably eerie.A must-see if you're a fan of British horror!

Walker's first horror film is an intriguing and enjoyable mix of sex and chills set in an abandoned theater; interestingly, in the accompanying interview on the DVD, he states that the nudity was deemed obligatory at the time if the picture was to hope for a distribution deal (particularly since Walker was his own financier).

The plot starts off by having eight out-of-work actors being convened to the aforementioned remote location by a mysterious employer; though they occasionally indulge in the kind of silly yet pretentious improvisational exercise also at the core of Jacques Rivette's insanely-long (13 hours!) OUT ONE: NOLI ME TANGERE (1971), they're often just interested in getting laid and the girls in particularly act like sluts most of the time!! At first, I was annoyed by this apparent laziness in scripting (by Alfred Shaughnessy, a respected if little-known director in his own right) – but, then, it's revealed that this was the reason these young and 'morally corrupt' folk were called upon to begin with (as the continuation of a notorious incident from the wartime era which had actually caused the theater's closure).

The male members of the cast are effectively enough led by Ray Brooks (from Richard Lester's Swinging London comedy THE KNACK [1965]) and also include Robin Askwith (soon to rise to dubious prominence with the smutty "Confessions" films) and veteran Patrick Barr (who turns in a bravura performance, particularly once his true identity is exposed). As for the girls, they all look great in and out of clothes – particularly Jenny Hanley (who, interestingly, discovers to have an inextricable link of her own with the gloomy theater) and Luan Peters (who escapes the murderer{s}' clutches the first time but not the second).

The film attempts a reasonable imitation throughout of the Italian Giallo style (that country, then, paid it the compliment by borrowing its single setting for Lamberto Bava's popular but third-rate DEMONS [1985]) – though it culminates with a rather unnecessary 3-D gimmick (which Walker had already utilized in the lackluster "Rashomon"-type sex comedy THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF GRETA [1972]). For the record, of the director's horror outings, I've yet to get my hands on SCHIZO (1976) and HOME BEFORE MIDNIGHT (1979)

A group of actors and a director are gathered together by a mysterious producer to rehearse a play in a creepy abandoned theater at the end of a pier off the English coast. In "Ten Little Indians" fashion they begin to disappear one by one. This sounds like a typical slasher movie, but in fact it preceded the slasher craze by many years. It was one of those movies like "Schoolgirl Killer", "Fright", and "Bay of Blood" that contained many of the elements of the slasher films and may have even influenced some of them a little, but was made well before "Black Christmas", "Halloween",and "Friday the 13th" initiated the deluge of slasher flicks.

This movie avoids many of what would later become tedious clichés of the slasher films. There's no heavy-breathing POV camera shots. The characters are stupid, but they are not so stupid that they don't notice their friends disappearing. The killer's motivation is actually somewhat believable and doesn't seem like something the filmmakers just pulled out of their collective keisters to justify the carnage. Actually, there isn't much carnage either. Most of the murders actually occur off-screen (blasphemy, I know). But what the movie lacks in blood, it makes up for in T and A. This movie marked a transition in British director Peter Walker's career from softcore sexploitation fare like "School for Sex" and "Four Dimensions of Greta" to his more mature and superior 70's horror films like "Frightmare" and "House of the Whipcord". Not surprisingly, Walker offers a hot shower of generous female nudity to prepare viewers for the sudden cold shower of the terror scenes.In the hilarious opening scene, for instance, an incredibly voluptuous actress is awakened by a knock on her door at three in the morning, so she gets out of her female "roommate's" bed and answers the door completely naked.

I'd recommend this movie to anyone, but people who like Pete Walker, and slasher movies that are actually well-crafted and scary will especially enjoy this one.

I have been a fan of director/producer Pete Walker's 1970's horror films in the past. I never knew he had a filmography of what shall I call them 'sexploitation' films earlier in his filmmaking career.

Now this 1972 UK film has elements of sexploitation in a slasher horror film as several members of an acting group are murdered at a disused theatre at the end of an old pier in a seaside town in England, out of season to add to the ambience of proceedings!

Now my review title is a play on the Confessions films which were hugely successful in the 1970s starring Robin Askwith who is incidentally in this film as well as one of the young actors. Askwith plays a typical Timothy Lea type character from the Confessions franchise and points to the 'sexploitation' scenes in this film, which is a shame in my opinion. It puts the UK film industry of the period in a bad light. Mixed in with the gore of a slasher horror are scenes of the characters in semi-naked scenes.

Atmospheric and a mediocre early Pete Walker horror. I have found his later 1970's films better if I am honest. This film is very low budget. Scream (1996) it isn't!

To me, Pete Walker is most famous for mature horror works such as House of Whipcord and House of Mortal Sin, but apparently he used to direct silly sex flicks and this was the film that was the stepping stone between those and the horror that he would go on to direct. The Flesh and Blood Show is a slasher at heart; but it deserves more respect than the average slasher flick because it came out before the big 'boom' in the eighties, and is therefore a precursor to the genre. As such, the film doesn't feature many of the over-used clichés of the genre - but I was disappointed as while Walker doesn't hold back with the nudity, he does with the blood - and that's not good in a film called 'The Flesh AND Blood Show'. Anyway, the plot focuses on a troupe of actors and a director that decide to go to an old abandoned theatre in a quiet town to rehearse their play and (hopefully) become big names on the London circuit. However, soon enough members of the troupe begin to vanish one by one, prompting an investigation into the theatre's unsavoury history.

Aside from Walker regular Patrick Barr, this film featured two recognisable actors for me, one for his looks and the other for the sound of his voice! Robin Askwith I recognised immediately as the star of the superb Michael Gough trash flick 'Horror Hospital', while Ray Brooks' voice sounded familiar. It didn't take me long to figure out that he sounded like the 'Joe' from Eastenders, and after looking on here - it's the same guy! The female stars I didn't recognise, despite the fact that most of them had appeared in various Hammer films; but they do their job well - that job being providing eye candy! I'm guessing that Pete Walker hadn't met Sheila Keith when The Flesh and Blood Show was made. The old theatre provides a good location for the horror; its ominous rooms and corridors help Walker to create the much needed atmosphere. The film does have a lot of good points; but unfortunately for me it all comes down to the lack of blood, and the fact that it's not always interesting. The ending didn't inspire me much either, although it's not the worst I've seen from a slasher flick.