Bloodthirst

This movie is horrible, the acting and the special effects. What a waste of talent. Costas Mandylor, Tara Reid, and the B horror movie King Robert Lasardo. The movie centers on an apocalyptic world run by Vampires, Mandylor Character is John Shepard a vampire hunter. He tracks down vampires in order to eliminate the master. We seen it all before, but at a much grand scale, as I said earlier this movie is very amatuerish. The acting and special effects. It was definitely wasted time spent. Watch John Carpenters Vampires instead or Near Dark. Two great vampire classics. Tara Reid needs a good comeback and this isnt it.

What's with the "1" ratings? Very few films are really a "1." Those who give this film a "1" clearly have something against the makers of the film.

Moving on...

This is a low-budget, independent horror film. It was probably made for less than most movies spend on craft services. But that doesn't make it bad - far from it. With stars such as Costas Mandylor, Tara Reid and Robert LaSardo, there's some real talent on board.

And, unlike some other low-budget indies, the stars aren't in it for 2 minutes - they have major roles.

I'll avoid spoilers and say this: There's plenty of gore, laughs, and campy-cheese (or is it "cheesy-camp?") to make this film enjoyable. Most of the acting is good (Robert LaSardo is always a pleasure to watch) and the costumes/locations are believable - they keep you in the film.

If this was a $50 million movie, I'd give it a 3. But it's not. It was probably made for less than 1% of that amount...and, honestly, it's better than some big budget movies.

The Mahals have carved out a nice niche in the industry. This is another good one from them. Overall: 7.

OMG! Full disclosure: I only watched this to see how bad Tara Reid looks these days.

It's a train wreck of a movie.

Funny-talking, post apocalyptic, vampires wander the Earth in broad daylight biting people left and right willy nilly.

There are fight scenes that are totally laughable. The movie appears to be shot as if it was direct to video (dunno). The acting is quite simply horrible, but then the story-line is idiotic. Some guy dressed in an Australian coat with a three dollar mask hunts the vampire but no one else seems to know they can fight back with a stake. Also, for some reason it appears you can kill them with a shotgun.

I'll admit I had low expectations for this one but man-o-man did it come in even lower.

Why someone put money into backing this is beyond me.

Oh, and BTW Tara Reid looks like she was drinking something other than blood in this one.

I'm writing this 'cause it's a pity that people rate this so extremely.

There's no way this is a 10 movie and no way it's a 1.

It's a pity as some of the reviews are quite good, but they lose credit by trying to massage the ratings.. we get it.. just, if you are gunna do it, don't mix it with a review.

The story is fairly good, a few twists but ultimately predictable, but that doesn't take away anything from the film: Many big budget films have insanely predictable stories.

The camera work and music scores were brilliant.

The acting was on par with any low budget/indie movie, with notables (as has been mentioned) Sarah French, Elissa Dowling and Johnny Huang. I don't think there was much Tara Reid had to offer, but willing to forgive as that outfit and makeup must have been nasty to work in.

Costumes/makeup were, sadly, too stereotypical, especially for the vampires... and Rico (Rich R. Rendon).. why did he have to look like a grease monkey.. I ride a Harley so therefore I must be covered in grease... even the main protagonist John Shepard (where have I heard that name before?) (Costas Mandylor) what was he wearing? Seriously, A load of pill bottles? Or shotgun cartridges.. but he uses a crossbow!

All in all, if you're gunna take the movie seriously then it's not for you... but if you don't mind hanging out with a few, not overly cynical, friends, opening a few bottles and chill to a nice story told on a budget, then go for it.

My personal critic would be something low budget vampire movies seem to like doing, but makes no sense (it's been done and hammered): I get it for the gore factor, but, why do the vampires waste such a valuable resource as blood by spilling it down their chin? I just don't get it. Also the first 5 minutes(ish.. didn't time it) really didn't do the movie any favours.

... and no vampires where paid for being in the movie.. that hardly seems fair.. don't they have a union?

Living in a post-apocalyptic wasteland, a vampire hunter and his protege manage to find an outcrop of survivors in the desert and enlist their services to help them track a vicious vampire clan running through the area feeding on the weak and must try to stop them before it's too late.

There was a lot to like with this indie vampire effort. One of the better features here is a rather intriguing storyline that attempts to employ an intriguing post-apocalyptic setup for vampires. As this opens in the aftermath of these works have taken place and the exploits of the gang running around feasting on the hold-out of survivors at the one location, this manner of bringing vampires into this setup is quite fun. It allows for the film to work within it's low-budget featuring the creatures coming down to enforce their superiority over the victims while they can think of a means of escape. As well, there's also the tracker coming for them hunting them down which has some equally fun means of trying to catch up for a great setup. This all lets the film have a solid and generally fine if somewhat low-key series of confrontations throughout. As the early scenes of them taking over the farm or hunting the stragglers in the wasteland have a nice bit of brutality alongside the cheesy situations, it comes off nicely against the later scenes where they've got the victims hostage in the basement and arrive mainly to taunt them before feeding. The concurrent scenes of the hunters going through the desert taking them out and hunting the creatures in the abandoned town where the vampires have kept their captives and the series of battles here provide some fun action featuring solid indie gore. These features all manage to have a lot to really like about it. The film does have some minor drawbacks to hold this down. One of the main factors against it is the somewhat repetitive first half that never gives the vampires much urgency for what they're doing. The idea of the vampires staying at the house of their prey, holding them like hostages, and coming back down on several occasions is a pretty underwhelming one that doesn't have a lot of interesting aspects to it. As well, this one tends to go through ill-thought-out material for twists in the finale merely to prolong the running time as the series of double-crosses and allegiance shifts that don't make much sense and well thought-out how it would play out in the story are what end up being the issues that bring it down.

Rated Unrated/R: Graphic Violence and Graphic Language.