Avaliações de usuários

While the 2020 movie "Bloodthirsty" is an interesting approach on the werewolf genre of movies, then it wasn't really an overwhelmingly good horror movie. This was more of a psychological supernatural drama than it was a horror movie.

The storyline told in "Bloodthirsty", as written by writers Wendy Hill-Tout and Lowell definitely deviated from the usual straight forward and no messing around tendency that there usually is in a werewolf movie. So if you sit down to watch "Bloodthirsty" and expect to see a creature feature with impressive human to beast transformation scenes and an abundance of carnage, then you will be sorely disappointed. Because that is by no means what "Bloodthirsty" turned out to be.

I found the storyline interesting, but the pacing of the movie was a bit too slow and mundane for my liking. And that resulted in director Amelia Moses delivering a lukewarm movie for me.

"Bloodthirsty" has a pretty small cast ensemble, but I will say that the cast really carried the movie well and put on great performances. Especially Greg Bryk (playing Vaughn Daniels), he was just phenomenally cast for the role. It was a shame, though, that Michael Ironside didn't have a larger part to play in the movie.

Visually then "Bloodythirsty" is not a movie that relies on special effects. There is a little bit of blood in the movie. And some fairly simplistic transformation scenes from human to werewolf. It wasn't impressively done, but the effects served their purposes well enough.

All in all, "Bloodthirsty" is a watchable movie, and an interesting and different take on the werewolf genre. But ultimately, the pacing of the movie just held the movie back from achieving greatness.

My rating of "Bloodthirsty" lands on a mediocre five out of ten stars.

I felt like it was more of a promotion for a singer rather than a real movie about a werewolf. The acting wasn't bad overall but the effects were iffy at times. No real character development and what was the point of the rude housekeeper? Save your time and money for another film.

I really tried to like this movie but the story took so long to get going that I soon became bored. The constant singing in the recording studio could've been cut in half and there was no real body count or excitement I speak of.

I stayed with it in the hope of some werewolf action but the monsters were the actors with longer teeth and wigs. Pretty lame effects and not nearly enough action.

This couldn't be described as a horror and is more of a thriller.

I watched until the end but this was instantly forgettable. Very poor!

2/10.

From the beginning of the plot, nothing new has happened from what is written in the description of the film, so it is monotonous and without plot. It is quite predictable and we wait all the time for something to happen but nothing. Also, they could at least find someone who sings better because this was scary to listen to. It's not horror.

Discovered this little Canadian indie gem by accident - and there's a lot to like here!

Some of the negative review comments talk to how this film doesn't have enough typical horror film stuff in it. To me, that was a definite plus.

Amelia Moses is clearly a very talented new director, and she delivers a well-paced beautifully shot film here. It is so nice to see such great use of locations made - always a challenge for budget-constrained, small films. But this movie doesn't look low-budget. For a story about a songwriter, it also has some excellent music by Lowel, daughter of screenwriter/producer Wendy Hill-Tout. They wisely use the werewolf effects sparingly, and make good editing choices around these.

The cast is strong across the board, everyone giving fine perfromances. The character elements are all fine here, which is important because this is, in my mind, a character drama with horror elements. And I found this very refreshing. Bare of many of the standard horror tropes, Moses doesn't resort to throwing in superfluous jump-scares and other nonsense. The horror here is understated in favour of focusing on the lead's struggle with both her creative life and her transformation.

It would have been nice to see more of Michael Ironside's character in this, and maybe give a chance for the lead to delve deeper into that struggle. One criticism I have of the script is that it is a little too "functional," and giving the characters room to breath would have helped. The script is a little too tidy in terms of explaining everything, which has a negative impact on some of the dialogue as characters explain things. Leaving some of this open to the audience's interpretation wouldn't have been a bad thing.

Script issues aside, this is well worth a watch as a refreshing variation on Werewolf horror films.

...although I do appreciate the craftsmanship involved. That, along with Greg Bryk's strong screen presence -which seems to be an involuntary, natural aura that he projects even when his part asks for the kind of overly subdued performance that leaves little room for entertaining theatrics- and Michael Ironside's small part are the sole reasons why I'm giving this a three stars rating instead of the bare minimum that the site allows and my guts were stubbornly insisting on leaving.

Pedestrian, boring and unimaginative direction not only hampers an equally pedestrian, boring and unimaginative script but also exacerbates its flaws: soulless main characters, the most egregious one for starters, who engage in melodramatic and humorless conversations -peppered with an annoying over abundance of tired 'in-show-biz-dog-eats-dog' cliches-, that get increasingly redundant as the movie goes on and its overstretched plot runs out of wind. Meanwhile, a couple of criminally underdeveloped supporting characters meander around aimlessly looking for a purpose that the writers actively deny, which renders their predicament during the third, final act pointless to the emotionally detached viewer.

There's also, as I just mentioned, this dull and tired metaphor about the ruthlessness of entertaining industries running under this trainwreck's rails, but the less said about it the better; except, maybe, for the fact that everything this movie tried to tell, or imply, was better told and successfully implied almost three decades ago in Mike Nichols' vastly underrated "Wolf". A movie, by the way, from which this inferior copycat not only borrows most of its subtext but also dares to steal entire scenes, almost shot-by-shot, without understanding how and why those scenes worked perfectly in harmony with a coherent story, well-paced plot development and fully fleshed characters, both main AND secondary ones. In fact, it's better to enjoy your well-deserved leisure time revisiting -or experiencing for the first time, if you happen to be that lucky- Nichols' "Wolf" than wasting it on this self-important, derivative succedaneous. Don't make the same mistake I did and avoid it as much as you can.

These reviews are way too low. The acting is good. Writing good. Direction good. It's not totally predictable either. I think this is at least a 6 out of 10.

The cast has no quality, and ideas are very few. This movie of Canadian art-origin has no chance to frighten and has no suspense. Absolute lack of talent and all her songs are extremely poor.

Bloodthirsty is an enjoyable film to watch and would recommend checking it out. It adds a different spin to the stereotypical werewolf film by focusing on a female lead struggling with her personal transformation and career goals. Also, while sharing her experience with her supportive loving girlfriend during their getaway to a secluded mansion. The film is loaded with some good, old school special effects which is a plus for this horror fan. Although, the film is lacking where the director failed to deliver by not using a variety of camera angles and different shots during some of the general dialogue scenes. That may have picked up the pace and made the film more intense. Overall, the film is well worth watching. Great locations. Good acting. Real gore and costuming. Amazing sound and incredible soundtrack!

But once the story started to unfold, it seemed to start working with the characters through the characters to get somewhere and it did finally take us where it needed to go. Since it is a sort of psychogenic fugue type thing where the story dissolves from a big giant greyish obfuscated matter it could of been a little more taut with the material but like just in a few lil' areas. But regardless, it all worked out and the writing did its job and churned out something pretty nice. I would recommend it as a nice well-crafted story.

Very atmospheric film through and through. Singing wasn't obnoxious, it was very well put. Strongly recommend this if you want an atmospheric-story horror instead of blood and gore for 1 hour 25 minutes.

As far as people complaining about the pace of this film, the slow pace is exactly what builds up all the tension and gives it more significance.

The couples relationship could've been expanded, it felt like there wasn't much background. Likewise, the ending could've and should've been longer. Missed opportunity for 8/10 movie.

The visuals were very nice, acting was decent, plot is straightforward. I wouldn't say it's anything new but it has a different spin on the genre and I quite liked it. 6.5/10.

I can smell something from you. Something primal.

Not sure how I found out about this movie, but it seemed promising with a high Rotten Tomatoes percent and critics saying that there's a lot of gore. And boy if that wasn't a big lie.

For an hour and 24 minutes runtime, this sure felt long. However, this slow pace made sense considering what the movie was aiming for. Some parts crept me out a bit, but the whole time I was hoping that this would lead to a crazy, bloody, and gory ending.

Sadly I didn't get that. Clearly this was a low-budget movie. Most of the gores were quickly edited and only the blood on the character's face was shown. Honestly if there's more dedication to the gore and designs, this movie could have been entertaining.

The acting was quite bad, especially from the actor that played the painter girlfriend. I did not buy her reactions at all. Also, one scene was incredibly cringe between her and the main character.

Overall, I was very disappointed with the boring ending and lack of real gore. 5/10.

It's most definitely not the best either, but it was watchable, at least for me. Was it good enough to go out and buy? No. However not many movies are these days especially when it comes to most in the horror genre for me. Once I have seen them thats usually it. There are some that I watch once every decade or so but not many. This one falls into the category of being worth watching once, especially if its free, but not worth going out and buying. The graphics are decent, not all cartoonish or anything. I would class it as one of the better done made for TV type movies. There wasn't much action (kind of hard with most of the movie being a cast of 4, only 3 of which have much screen time and only 7 people total in the cast) and it was slow till the end but the acting was decent, so, between those observations I can't really say the movie was terrible, just not impressive. I may be a bit prejudiced as a fan of Greg Bryk, I loved him in Bitten and in Frontier. He is really good at the odd character types. It was a different take on a werewolf movie, but not scary at all unfortunately, and average in the forgettable kind of way most movies like this are. However, I still feel like it was good enough to merrit 5 stars. For me 5 out of 10 would be average, not terrible but not great. Would I recommend giving it a shot? ... That mostly depends on the person. If they are just looking for something to pass the time and have nothing better to watch, are not looking for a diamond in the rough or nail biting suspense then maybe give it a try if they can see it for free. It kept my attention well enough even though it didn't have me holding my breath.

This was a very posh film much in the way that Ann Rice's, Interview with a Vampire was, minus all the foundational talent. Sure Micheal Ironside stars but its more like a cameo appearance. Also the run time was too short to warrant anything other than a passing glance.

What is notable about this piece is that it manages to hit all the timely topics as if they were prerequisites to syndication: climate change, overpopulation, & same-sex relationships.

What could have been...... This could have been special. Instead, it's just another dull Shudder Exclusive that isn't very good. Slow, tedious, predictable, and just not very good.

This movie is getting really bad reviews. It seems to think that it's saying something about art and madness, but it's not a very interesting something.

That being said, there are a few good moments, and the lead actress turns in a commendable performance.

Give it a shot. Enjoy the good that's there.

Don't go into this film expecting a straight werewolf flick. This isn't a supernatural horror or gore-fest so much as a tense psychodrama. The main character sometimes cannot trust her own senses, and so you can't always trust that what you're seeing is her reality.

As a lifelong fan of the werewolf subgenre I always appreciate a movie that can take the tropes and turn them into something new. This film didn't disappoint.

Well written storyline, although was very slow. Premise of who are you really and are you sure that's who you are. Musician gets a chance to work with a maestro of the industry but is everything as it seems.

Singer Grey (Lauren Beatty) dreams of disturbing animalistic devouring of prey. After a smash hit, she gets invited to work with famed music producer Vaughn Daniels. She brings her girlfriend Charlie to stay in his remote mansion. He brings out something from within her.

I like the concept, but the build is just too slow. They don't have enough dialogue or character drama. The plot is limited. It could do more with the idea of her artistic self connecting to her animalistic urges. Wolves come in packs and that could be another element in this that is missing. The makeup is mostly fine, but the transformations need to be better. Charlie cannot accidentally crash the car. She needs to be taken down by a deliberate attack. Generally, this movie is a step below.