Blood Feast

One thing this got right is the amount of blood it has. And without having seen the original this is based on (I can only assume that it wasn't a masterpiece either, but still way better than this, it has to be), I can say, that this is really bad. Now I do see the rating this received from others (though none wanted to comment on their rating?) and I can only assume that they were enjoying how bad this is.

Like having a blast watching a bad movie with mates/friends. Kind of like "Tulpa" where I had a really good time, despite (or because) the movie was awful. Now this is more or less aware of how bad it is, it actually tries to play into that fact. But just by acknowledging that you are doing something intentionally, doesn't make it fun. There is also a craft in being bad by purpose. This just is infantile (in more than one way). One example is a sign at the diner, that has a joke, but is being shown for way too long. It's in your face, waving with both hands jumping up and down, right in front of your nose. Again, this may be able to entertain in times (for all the wrong reasons), but it's not good - no pun intended

Ishtar was Sumerian, not Egyptian. This is a sad attempt to make Goddess worship about sacrifice, which it isn't.

I didn't connect this film with the original until I heard the crazy mans name. Not exactly sure why this is set in Paris or why they changed the focus to the chef. The chef in the original while still being a crazy man was really more of a side character. The casting was OK except for the 30 year old not so fresh faced daughter, who is a horrible actress at least in this but some of that falls on who ever cast this movie because she is clearly 10 + years to old for the character she plays. In a pleasant surprise the mother who I recognized but couldn't place her for awhile in fact it was past the midpoint of the movie until I put it together, I let you figure it out. If your a big horror movie fan you should know who she is. If you read this before you watch the film watch the original at least part of it because I most likely would not have watched the whole movie if I didn't make the connection to the original. Its public domain so it's on YouTube as well as most of the old horror movie channels on Roku or whatever service have like that. It's not horrible but it's not great if you have a problem finding something to watch the 1963 version first the stories are different enough so it won't feel like you've watched twice.

Such big disapointning, pathetic acting, not bad idea of story but such poor way this story was told. Didn't even had pation to watch it till end, canceled at midle of the movie.

I rarely write reviews, but I must save the viewing audience. I waited 2 years for this disappointment! Poor script and pointless Gore.. Oh and the worst part, it ends abruptly as if they ran out of film or money... Don't waste your time or you'll be sorry. I can promise you that..