VALUTAZIONE IMDb
3,9/10
1219
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaMarijuana growers deep in the woods are hit with a new toxic herbicide, and they turn into mindless cannibals killing everyone they come into contact with.Marijuana growers deep in the woods are hit with a new toxic herbicide, and they turn into mindless cannibals killing everyone they come into contact with.Marijuana growers deep in the woods are hit with a new toxic herbicide, and they turn into mindless cannibals killing everyone they come into contact with.
Charles McCrann
- Tom Cole
- (as Charles Austin)
Recensioni in evidenza
Still not sure why this movie qualifies for the dubious video nasty distinction but aside from it being an amateurish production and abysmally acted, it features a coherent plot, generally well-executed suspense, and some effective makeup effects when a backwoods drug operation is disrupted by an experimental herbicide that turns the hippie cultivators into bloodthirsty maniacs.
Aside from the atrocious acting, lighting is the main challenge, the night-time scenes almost too poorly lit to be discernible. The other constant irritation is the not-so-subtle anti-government rhetoric which could've been jettisoned in the editing room, it adds no value to a film of this scale other than to make its inclusion seem glib and self-indulgent.
Low-budget 'redneck horror' is tedious at times, but the frequency of the violence almost compensates, the audience only left despairing at the sheer ineptitude of the victims as they repeatedly stumble their way into the waiting arms of the rabid cannibal hippies who've abandoned peace and turned to violence. Some of the gore scenes are quite effective (e.g. The bludgeoning at the camp site is quite brutal and realistic), whereas others are valiant efforts that don't quite execute as intended (e.g. The fountain of sauce spurting from the severed hand looks comical rather than scary).
If only there were a few more professional actors on hand (Amplas being the only name I recognised although his performance isn't one of his best), better lighting and a tighter ending, 'Toxic Zombies' might've been a minor horror classic. As it stands, whilst it's suspenseful and bloody and I'd choose it any day over today's Hollywood twaddle, it's going to be a little too amateurish to reach a wider audience and gain the appreciation it deserves.
Aside from the atrocious acting, lighting is the main challenge, the night-time scenes almost too poorly lit to be discernible. The other constant irritation is the not-so-subtle anti-government rhetoric which could've been jettisoned in the editing room, it adds no value to a film of this scale other than to make its inclusion seem glib and self-indulgent.
Low-budget 'redneck horror' is tedious at times, but the frequency of the violence almost compensates, the audience only left despairing at the sheer ineptitude of the victims as they repeatedly stumble their way into the waiting arms of the rabid cannibal hippies who've abandoned peace and turned to violence. Some of the gore scenes are quite effective (e.g. The bludgeoning at the camp site is quite brutal and realistic), whereas others are valiant efforts that don't quite execute as intended (e.g. The fountain of sauce spurting from the severed hand looks comical rather than scary).
If only there were a few more professional actors on hand (Amplas being the only name I recognised although his performance isn't one of his best), better lighting and a tighter ending, 'Toxic Zombies' might've been a minor horror classic. As it stands, whilst it's suspenseful and bloody and I'd choose it any day over today's Hollywood twaddle, it's going to be a little too amateurish to reach a wider audience and gain the appreciation it deserves.
Bloodeaters (a.k.a. Toxic Zombies) seemed to be a 1980's satire on propaganda such as Reefer Madness or Teenage Devil Dolls. The movie itself is toxic, but the entertainment factor delivered by such makes this movie more than what it is. I'm surprised that it is not more of a cult classic. It doesn't take itself seriously, but neither does much satire. This terrible movie is a gem simply to sit and laugh at. For this factor, we'll give it a three out of ten.
Another one of those horror films that has more alternate titles than it has ideas, this zombie movie uses the moral standpoint of the anti-drug governmental policy for its main premise. A group of young people are growing their own cannabis plants in a remote area of wilderness. A strange and cheap looking government body, arranges a toxic chemical crop spray, to eliminate these plants. However, the secretive chemical used, turns its victims into flesh eating aggressors.
After this event, of course, various groups of campers are attacked, eviscerated and left in parts around the forests. The groups are filled with generic characters with uninteresting stories. The opening moments of the film is intriguing and slightly dramatic, but this moment of interest is short-lived, as it simply falls back into the standard zombie film of the time - and of course the trend for the zombie increased again in the 21st century, but this wave was indisputably horrific (in the sense that almost 90% of output was awful).
It was obviously a project made from the heart, with passion at its centre, as director Charles McCrann also wrote, edited produced, and even played the lead role of Tom Cole. This passion does show, despite the shoddy production - and you have to give someone a little credit for at least attempting to realise their dream. With a slight ecological message within the plot, it is absolutely not the worst of its kind, but not enough for a thorough recommendation. Also alternately known by Bloodeaters and Toxic Zombies (amongst others), we at least have a denouncement of right-wing governmental policy amongst the grue, lame zombie attacks and distressingly annoying screaming women.
www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com
After this event, of course, various groups of campers are attacked, eviscerated and left in parts around the forests. The groups are filled with generic characters with uninteresting stories. The opening moments of the film is intriguing and slightly dramatic, but this moment of interest is short-lived, as it simply falls back into the standard zombie film of the time - and of course the trend for the zombie increased again in the 21st century, but this wave was indisputably horrific (in the sense that almost 90% of output was awful).
It was obviously a project made from the heart, with passion at its centre, as director Charles McCrann also wrote, edited produced, and even played the lead role of Tom Cole. This passion does show, despite the shoddy production - and you have to give someone a little credit for at least attempting to realise their dream. With a slight ecological message within the plot, it is absolutely not the worst of its kind, but not enough for a thorough recommendation. Also alternately known by Bloodeaters and Toxic Zombies (amongst others), we at least have a denouncement of right-wing governmental policy amongst the grue, lame zombie attacks and distressingly annoying screaming women.
www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com
Using the paraquat controversy as a plot peg, "Bloodeaters" is a very low budget horror pic joining the hundreds of gore films inspired by George Romero's "Night of the Living Dead" hit. Pic was filmed in Pennsylvania in 1979 under the title "Forest of Fear".
A set of young criminals are harvesting a $2,000,000 crop of marijuana, when a Federal agency orders the forest sprayed with Dromax, an experimental herbicide. Chemical turns the sprayed humans into bloodthirsty zombie-like monsters who prey on unwary victims in the remote forest.
Film's main subplot deals with corrupt government agents, but by film's end the morality of heroes, villains and zombies is foolishly subordinated to audience-baiting "survival is everything" tactics.
Grainy 35mm blowup of a film shot in 16mm is a tipoff to the amateur efforts here on all artistic and technical levels. McCrann's corny script consists largely of vamping between gore scenes, with plenty of blood and ugliness for what used to be called the "slob" trade in the heyday of William Mishkin pix. Zombies emit dumb grunting sounds comically reminiscent of Soupy Sales' old White Fang and Black tooth tv sketches.
Acting in "Bloodeaters" varies from the monotone of nonpros to very hammy comic relief, the latter including Hariet Miller's turn as the shrewish wife of the cropduster. It is distressing to see John Amplas, who received critical kudos in the title role of Romero's "Martin" (shot in 1976) reduced to playing a stock heavy in another regional production.
My review was written in October 1980 after a Times Square theater screening.
A set of young criminals are harvesting a $2,000,000 crop of marijuana, when a Federal agency orders the forest sprayed with Dromax, an experimental herbicide. Chemical turns the sprayed humans into bloodthirsty zombie-like monsters who prey on unwary victims in the remote forest.
Film's main subplot deals with corrupt government agents, but by film's end the morality of heroes, villains and zombies is foolishly subordinated to audience-baiting "survival is everything" tactics.
Grainy 35mm blowup of a film shot in 16mm is a tipoff to the amateur efforts here on all artistic and technical levels. McCrann's corny script consists largely of vamping between gore scenes, with plenty of blood and ugliness for what used to be called the "slob" trade in the heyday of William Mishkin pix. Zombies emit dumb grunting sounds comically reminiscent of Soupy Sales' old White Fang and Black tooth tv sketches.
Acting in "Bloodeaters" varies from the monotone of nonpros to very hammy comic relief, the latter including Hariet Miller's turn as the shrewish wife of the cropduster. It is distressing to see John Amplas, who received critical kudos in the title role of Romero's "Martin" (shot in 1976) reduced to playing a stock heavy in another regional production.
My review was written in October 1980 after a Times Square theater screening.
One of the infamous video nasties that were banned in Britain, this one known as Forest of Fear, is still banned. It was released on video in the US as Toxic Zombies, and is also known as Blood Butchers. With all these names changes, maybe they can sneak it past the British Film Board.
It is a typical zombie movie. The government sprays some unapproved substance (DROMAX) on marijuana fields on government land, and it turns the pot growers into zombies. They start killing their friends that didn't get infected, then move to campers in the woods.
Lots of blood and body parts, but only one gratuitous nude scene (Debbie Link) before the whole thing starts as one pot grower is bathing out of a pail.
Cameo by John Amplas (Dawn of the Dead, Day of the Dead, Knightriders).
For zombie completists.
It is a typical zombie movie. The government sprays some unapproved substance (DROMAX) on marijuana fields on government land, and it turns the pot growers into zombies. They start killing their friends that didn't get infected, then move to campers in the woods.
Lots of blood and body parts, but only one gratuitous nude scene (Debbie Link) before the whole thing starts as one pot grower is bathing out of a pail.
Cameo by John Amplas (Dawn of the Dead, Day of the Dead, Knightriders).
For zombie completists.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizCharles McCrann, the film's director, writer, and one of the actors appearing in it, died in the September 11, 2001 attacks.
- Versioni alternative(spoilers) The banned UK video by Monte Video was cut. An epilogue about an FBI worker quitting his job was cut, but all violence remained.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Mad Ron's Prevues from Hell (1987)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Toxic Zombies?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Il ritorno degli zombi (1980) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi