This 1987 horror film features a psychiatrist and her group of odd patients traveling to the desert in an RV for isolation therapy. Soon, they're stalked by a killer who slaughters them one by one using a Jack-in-the-Box as bait. This isn't bad, except for some the acting, but the cast is OK, I like the setting(s) and the bloody make-up effects. The film sort of combines elements and makes fun of "The Hills Have Eyes" & "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and Lisa Loring from the original, "The Addams Family" also appears as patient, Dory. If you enjoy slasher/horror flicks, I'd probably give this a view at least once.
17 Reviews
Hammy slasher in the Mojave Desert
Wuchakk3 September 2023
A Los Angeles psychologist takes six troubled patients (three men and three women) out to an isolated mine in the arid wasteland, but the situation turns ugly when someone's neck is slashed.
"Blood Frenzy" (1987) has an engaging set-up and a unique location for a slasher. While the tone is too exaggerated and mixed with droll humor to take very seriously, the characters are fleshed out enough to make them interesting.
Masculine Tony Montero is effective as a Vietnam Vet with PTSD while petite Lisa Savage is a highlight on the female front. Meanwhile Lisa Loring (Wednesday from The Addams Family) is striking as an adult and very good at playing a biyatch. Actually, she might do it too well, not to mention she hams it up a little too much in the last act.
An eye-rolling sapphic episode in a dirty cave (off camera, for the most part) dooms any possibility of taking the flick seriously. Why Sure! Still, there are some positives if you like 80's slashers and don't mind low-budget ones released direct-to-video. Think "Sands of the Kalahari" if it were a low-rent slasher.
The film runs 1 hour, 27 minutes, and was shot entirely on location at Calico Mines, Barstow, SoCal, which is a 2-hour drive northeast of Los Angeles in the Mojave Desert.
GRADE: C.
"Blood Frenzy" (1987) has an engaging set-up and a unique location for a slasher. While the tone is too exaggerated and mixed with droll humor to take very seriously, the characters are fleshed out enough to make them interesting.
Masculine Tony Montero is effective as a Vietnam Vet with PTSD while petite Lisa Savage is a highlight on the female front. Meanwhile Lisa Loring (Wednesday from The Addams Family) is striking as an adult and very good at playing a biyatch. Actually, she might do it too well, not to mention she hams it up a little too much in the last act.
An eye-rolling sapphic episode in a dirty cave (off camera, for the most part) dooms any possibility of taking the flick seriously. Why Sure! Still, there are some positives if you like 80's slashers and don't mind low-budget ones released direct-to-video. Think "Sands of the Kalahari" if it were a low-rent slasher.
The film runs 1 hour, 27 minutes, and was shot entirely on location at Calico Mines, Barstow, SoCal, which is a 2-hour drive northeast of Los Angeles in the Mojave Desert.
GRADE: C.
Meh
ofumalow5 August 2016
A four is generous. This is a mediocre low-budget slasher with poor gore effects (that it inexplicably dwells on, so you really have time to appreciate how unconvincingly rubbery that neck-slashing looks) and dumb characters. The premise is entertaining--a psychiatrist takes a group of patients out to the desert for presumably healing encounter-group-type work--but even by the usual know-nothing standards for such subjects, "Blood Frenzy" really botches it. The characters are all one-note caricatures of various conditions (nymphomania, alcoholism, frigidity, anger management, post- Vietnam PTSD, and what seems to be simply a case of "bitchy lesbian"), and it's ridiculous that anyone would think they could all be treated together. But OK, it's a slasher film, we're not here for realism.
The "name" actor here is Lisa Loring, who plays the lesbian, which in this kind of movie of course means she's a "man-hater" and puts the make on every woman in sight. (She also wears too much makeup that still seems to be perfectly fresh after a couple days' desert camping and various travails...but there I go, looking for realism again.) Hoo man, she is terrible. She starts out yelling and just gets hammier. The other actors are adequate given their silly roles and sometimes sillier dialogue.
You don't expect a lot from a movie like this, but it really does a poor job of building any suspense, delivering shocks, and other horror basics. By comparison "The Hills Have Eyes" is a masterpiece of complex plotting (among other virtues), if we're talking stuck-and-terrorized-in-the-desert movies in general. Why DID I give it a four? Well, you know--we'll all seen worse.
The "name" actor here is Lisa Loring, who plays the lesbian, which in this kind of movie of course means she's a "man-hater" and puts the make on every woman in sight. (She also wears too much makeup that still seems to be perfectly fresh after a couple days' desert camping and various travails...but there I go, looking for realism again.) Hoo man, she is terrible. She starts out yelling and just gets hammier. The other actors are adequate given their silly roles and sometimes sillier dialogue.
You don't expect a lot from a movie like this, but it really does a poor job of building any suspense, delivering shocks, and other horror basics. By comparison "The Hills Have Eyes" is a masterpiece of complex plotting (among other virtues), if we're talking stuck-and-terrorized-in-the-desert movies in general. Why DID I give it a four? Well, you know--we'll all seen worse.
80s slash flick on the lesser end of average.
EyeAskance30 June 2007
A female psychotherapist and her small group of emotionally troubled patients trek into the middle of the desert(where it's free to film a movie) for some solitude, and a bit of therapeutic soul-purging and brain-picking. Once settled at their destination, members of the group begin to disappear, leaving the others to nervously unravel the mystery while eyeing each-other suspiciously.
A fairly pissant little production, BLOOD FRENZY isn't exactly a marvel of filmmaking genius, but there are scores of truly wretched titles from the slasher canon which make it at least seem somewhat more substantial than it actually is. Formulaic, featureless, and for the most part watchable, this is a nondescript film which serves up the barest meat-and-potatoes provisions and makes zero attempt to distinguish itself with fresh ideas or impressive showmanship.
BLOOD FRENZY should manage to appease most undemanding slash-cinema enthusiasts, but mostly in a tap-water flavored sort of way. 4/10
A fairly pissant little production, BLOOD FRENZY isn't exactly a marvel of filmmaking genius, but there are scores of truly wretched titles from the slasher canon which make it at least seem somewhat more substantial than it actually is. Formulaic, featureless, and for the most part watchable, this is a nondescript film which serves up the barest meat-and-potatoes provisions and makes zero attempt to distinguish itself with fresh ideas or impressive showmanship.
BLOOD FRENZY should manage to appease most undemanding slash-cinema enthusiasts, but mostly in a tap-water flavored sort of way. 4/10
If you've ever wondered why Lisa ( Wednesday Addams ) didn't continue acting...
Zbigniew_Krycsiwiki31 October 2017
Supremely annoying characters are driving through the desert, when their van breaks down, only to be set upon by an unseen killer.
As in the vastly superior 1977 film, The Hills Have Eyes, the desert location gives a creepy atmosphere to the proceedings, but the characters are all so very annoying, and the gore effects are all so underwhelming they aren't worth waiting for.
Directed by hardcore pornographic filmmaker Hal Freeman, and allegedly based on a script by Ray Dennis Steckler , pointlessly titled " Warning - No Trespassing " , which was rewritten by Freeman's frequent collaborator, Ted Newsom, this will, at least, answer anyone's questions about why Wednesday Addams didn't continue acting.
As in the vastly superior 1977 film, The Hills Have Eyes, the desert location gives a creepy atmosphere to the proceedings, but the characters are all so very annoying, and the gore effects are all so underwhelming they aren't worth waiting for.
Directed by hardcore pornographic filmmaker Hal Freeman, and allegedly based on a script by Ray Dennis Steckler , pointlessly titled " Warning - No Trespassing " , which was rewritten by Freeman's frequent collaborator, Ted Newsom, this will, at least, answer anyone's questions about why Wednesday Addams didn't continue acting.
Dud Frenzy
archive16 October 2002
Ah, the 80's...big hair, twelve step programs, bad slasher films..."Blood Frenzy" features all three, in a way that is at least mildly interesting. The central plot device involves a therapy group cavorting around Death Valley for a weekend "away from it all" in the 110 degree sun! Just as they are settling into their weekend digs (the whole thing would fall apart as a premise now because of cell phones) , the slicing and dicing starts. Of course, the van they came in has been sabotaged, so they have to figure out how to get away from the crazed killer, while dealing with their own psychological problems. This film is quite similar to the far better "The Hills Have Eyes". The dialog is sometimes laughably bad (the last line of the movie is "It's over"...) and the acting rarely gets to a level above your average student film. That said, there is something almost endearing about "Blood Frenzy", maybe in the way it encapsulates the first wave of Straight-To-Video movies, when local Mom and Pop stores were filled to the brim with cheap, knocked off junk like this. No one is ever going to do a delux DVD remaster of "Blood Frenzy", and even at a distance of 15 years it seems almost as quaint and dated as a 1950's low budget drive-in movie. To me, this is part of its off-the-wall charm, but if anyone actually wants to watch an atmospheric horror flick...avoid this title!I gave this movie a rating of **** , largely for personal nostalgia for this kind of stuff, but the actual rating in any sort of objective sense would really be a * or at best a **! Enjoy!
One Of The Better SOV Horrors
ObscureCinema10124 May 2012
BLOOD FRENZY is a SOV (shot-on-video) horror film I'd heard lots of good things about, yet after I watched it, I have to say that I feel it is overrated, which might be the first time I've ever said that about a SOV movie!
A psychiatrist takes six of her patients in an RV out in the desert for a little isolation therapy, where each will confront his/her problems in an attempt to fix them. However, someone begins killing them in bloody ways, leaving an old jack-in-the-box as their calling card. Is it someone in the group? Or is it someone else?
BLOOD FRENZY started off strong, yet petered out during the last half or so. One of the film's strong suits is the entertaining and three-dimensional characters. I can't really pinpoint many really likable characters, but as quirky as the bunch was, I thought they were all believable, due, in part, to the strong performances given by the cast.
The writing was above average, and I feel the desert setting is a sadly underused setting in slashers. There's a good amount of bloodshed and some realistic throat slashings, including a really good opening murder.
Unfortunately, BLOOD FRENZY became a little too repetitive for its own good. The murders seemed like they were all the same, and even the characters grew to be a bore. Throughout the film, the tone was serious yet a bit goofy at the same time. During the climactic showdown, it just turns to all out goofiness, which really doesn't work in the film's favor.
The movie also features Lisa Loring (Wednesday from THE ADDAMS FAMILY), who would go on to be in the much more entertaining slasher (this time in the snow!) ICED (1988). As it stands, I'd say it's worth seeking out, but don't expect much out of it.
A psychiatrist takes six of her patients in an RV out in the desert for a little isolation therapy, where each will confront his/her problems in an attempt to fix them. However, someone begins killing them in bloody ways, leaving an old jack-in-the-box as their calling card. Is it someone in the group? Or is it someone else?
BLOOD FRENZY started off strong, yet petered out during the last half or so. One of the film's strong suits is the entertaining and three-dimensional characters. I can't really pinpoint many really likable characters, but as quirky as the bunch was, I thought they were all believable, due, in part, to the strong performances given by the cast.
The writing was above average, and I feel the desert setting is a sadly underused setting in slashers. There's a good amount of bloodshed and some realistic throat slashings, including a really good opening murder.
Unfortunately, BLOOD FRENZY became a little too repetitive for its own good. The murders seemed like they were all the same, and even the characters grew to be a bore. Throughout the film, the tone was serious yet a bit goofy at the same time. During the climactic showdown, it just turns to all out goofiness, which really doesn't work in the film's favor.
The movie also features Lisa Loring (Wednesday from THE ADDAMS FAMILY), who would go on to be in the much more entertaining slasher (this time in the snow!) ICED (1988). As it stands, I'd say it's worth seeking out, but don't expect much out of it.
A worthy addition to the genre.
BA_Harrison31 August 2015
A late entry in the '80s cycle of slasher movies, Blood Frenzy sees psychiatrist Dr. Barbara Shelley (Wendy MacDonald) driving to the desert to conduct a spot of confrontational therapy with six of her deeply troubled patients: macho douche-bag Dave (Hank Garrett), Vietnam veteran Rick (Tony Montero), bitter man-hater Dory (Lisa 'Wednesday Addams' Loring), sexy blonde nymphomaniac Cassie (Lisa Savage), alcoholic Crawford (John Clark), and Jean (Monica Silveria), who has a fear of being touched. No prizes for guessing that one of the group is a lot more disturbed than the rest and proceeds to kill off the others one-by-one, slashing their throats with a knife and gashing their stomachs.
This relatively obscure slasher starts with a gory prologue in which a drunken father tries to punish his child with his belt, paying the price for his abusive ways when the kid gets the upper hand and rips open pop's neck with a gardening tool! The desert-bound action leading up to the other murders is, by comparison, rather mundane—assorted bickering between the patients, with sex maniac Carrie trying to calm the situation by sleeping with the men (AND, later in the film, a woman)—but hang on in there: once the killer gets their game on, Blood Frenzy more than lives up to its title, the claret flowing freely throughout with plenty of throat cutting and a demented finale that features a juicy knife in the neck, a pick-axe in the back and an impaling on a wooden stake.
This relatively obscure slasher starts with a gory prologue in which a drunken father tries to punish his child with his belt, paying the price for his abusive ways when the kid gets the upper hand and rips open pop's neck with a gardening tool! The desert-bound action leading up to the other murders is, by comparison, rather mundane—assorted bickering between the patients, with sex maniac Carrie trying to calm the situation by sleeping with the men (AND, later in the film, a woman)—but hang on in there: once the killer gets their game on, Blood Frenzy more than lives up to its title, the claret flowing freely throughout with plenty of throat cutting and a demented finale that features a juicy knife in the neck, a pick-axe in the back and an impaling on a wooden stake.
This was a SOV movie?
forecastfortoday31 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Wow, 'shot on video' and 'great movie'. Those are two terms I never thought belonged in a sentence together. While shot on video horror movies are considered borderline porno, this movie rises out of that pit consisting of movies like Blood Cult (1985) and Video Violence (1987).
The movie starts with a little girl playing with a jack-in-the-box. Her alcoholic father comes into the room and starts verbally abusing her. She inches away from him when he starts getting angrier. Conveniently, she stumbles upon a sharp garden tool which she uses to gouge out her father's throat. We are then introduced to a psychiatrist Dr. Barbara Shelley (Wendy McDonald) and some of her mental patients. Her patients don't really seem crazy, just a little out of it such as a blonde nymphomaniac named Cassie (Lisa Savage), a middle aged alcoholic named Crawford (John Clark), a jumpy Vietnam veteran named Rick (Tony Montero), an asshole of a repressed homosexual named Dave (Hank Garrett), a young haptephobic girl named Jean (Monica Silveria), and a bipolar lesbian named Dory (Lisa Loring). Dr. Shelley and her group of wackos are going off into the middle of the desert for absolute seclusion because it would be a good place for 'confrontational therapy.' The group of patients immediately turn on each other, which eventually leads to them being murdered one by one.
I must say I'm surprised to think this movie is a shot on video film because this feels a lot more like an old TV movie with a hell of a lot more violence. The movie has lingering references to The Hills Have Eyes (1977) and Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), along with an opening identical to Pieces (1984). The twists to the story are actually pretty good to catch a viewer off guard, along with the gruesome murders that have enough blood to impress a Fulci fan. The acting is pretty fair, it's no award winner but certainly not bad as the abysmal Sledgehammer (1983). Some of the characters are pretty likable, such as the heroine psychiatrist, the bipolar lesbian, the middle aged alcoholic, the young haptephobic, and especially the blonde nymphomaniac. The other two characters were made to seem harsh or at least made to seem like red herring. The entire plot line is pretty original when compared to the usual 'the-killer-is-the-brother' twist. The movie overall is quite nice and deserves a good look or two.
The movie starts with a little girl playing with a jack-in-the-box. Her alcoholic father comes into the room and starts verbally abusing her. She inches away from him when he starts getting angrier. Conveniently, she stumbles upon a sharp garden tool which she uses to gouge out her father's throat. We are then introduced to a psychiatrist Dr. Barbara Shelley (Wendy McDonald) and some of her mental patients. Her patients don't really seem crazy, just a little out of it such as a blonde nymphomaniac named Cassie (Lisa Savage), a middle aged alcoholic named Crawford (John Clark), a jumpy Vietnam veteran named Rick (Tony Montero), an asshole of a repressed homosexual named Dave (Hank Garrett), a young haptephobic girl named Jean (Monica Silveria), and a bipolar lesbian named Dory (Lisa Loring). Dr. Shelley and her group of wackos are going off into the middle of the desert for absolute seclusion because it would be a good place for 'confrontational therapy.' The group of patients immediately turn on each other, which eventually leads to them being murdered one by one.
I must say I'm surprised to think this movie is a shot on video film because this feels a lot more like an old TV movie with a hell of a lot more violence. The movie has lingering references to The Hills Have Eyes (1977) and Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), along with an opening identical to Pieces (1984). The twists to the story are actually pretty good to catch a viewer off guard, along with the gruesome murders that have enough blood to impress a Fulci fan. The acting is pretty fair, it's no award winner but certainly not bad as the abysmal Sledgehammer (1983). Some of the characters are pretty likable, such as the heroine psychiatrist, the bipolar lesbian, the middle aged alcoholic, the young haptephobic, and especially the blonde nymphomaniac. The other two characters were made to seem harsh or at least made to seem like red herring. The entire plot line is pretty original when compared to the usual 'the-killer-is-the-brother' twist. The movie overall is quite nice and deserves a good look or two.
A slasher that was directed by a notorious porn icon?
LuisitoJoaquinGonzalez18 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
It still amazes me to this day the effect that Halloween had on cinema. Almost thirty years after its initial release, the impersonations still keep coming and no other movie in the history of film-making has achieved the feat of being imitated over 500 times. During the eighties young directors that were looking to make a mark in the movies found an easy path through the slasher genre, due to the fact that production costs are relatively small and the films almost always make a considerable return on their budget. Although it's understandable that a young director would want to follow in the footsteps of the much celebrated John Carpenter, Hal Freeman's choice to create a category entry is slightly more interesting.
Freeman had been a relatively successful porn director that had shot to fame in America for single-handedly beating the regulation that quashed the production of erotic films. 'The people vs. Freeman' was an interesting case in the history of US law and its conclusion changed the adult entertainment market forever. Up until that point, it had been a crime to film persons performing sex acts, even if the filmmakers could produce hand-written documents of consent from the participating models and conviction carried a three-year prison sentence without the possibility of parole.
Most movies before then had been shot in secret locations to avoid prosecution under the 'pandering' laws of the state. However when caught and convicted, Freeman's team of attorneys argued that the First Amendment prohibited the application of pandering laws to the creation of adult materials and ultimately he won the case. The victory opened a whole new avenue of possibilities for the industry and it has since become a high-grossing entertainment medium.
The fact that Freeman now had the freedom to indulge in his chosen market and make a considerable profit without the added worries of Police intervention made his decision to swap genres and direct a slasher movie profoundly intriguing.
An eccentric psychiatrist decides to take six of her patients away to the Mohave Desert for confrontational therapy. The pick of the gang of emotionally delicate travellers includes Rick (Tony Montero), a Vietnam vet who is suffering from that age-old Hollywood chestnut of stereotypical post-war flashback syndrome. Also worth mentioning is Dory (Lisa Loring), a highly-charged lesbian with a deep-rooted hated of masculinity and a desire to seek confrontation in almost every situation.
Almost soon as the group arrive, their RV is ransacked by an unseen someone and they find themselves stranded with dwindling supplies of food and water. Their rations of luck diminish even further when a gloved and unseen maniac begins slaughtering the group one by one. Every character has a motive for murder, but who is the real assassin?
Despite containing all the correct ingredients that made most eighties slashers popular with enthusiasts, Blood Frenzy has become notoriously rare and at the time of writing there is no plan for a DVD release. Freeman's slasher is somewhat undeserving of its obscure status and boasts some extreme gore and a fairly ambitious plot. The film starts in traditional territory with a pre-teen murder sequence that is extremely similar to the opening of Juan Piquer's 'Mil Gritos tiene la Noche'. The throat slicing effect here is satisfyingly gruesome and the mood is set early on for the gore-filled plot line to follow.
For a first time horror director, Freeman does a good enough job and he attempts adequately to give the film a creepy aura of the macabre. In the opening, the homicidal adolescent is seen playing with a blood-soaked musical box after committing a violent act of slaughter, which acts along the common horror thread of mixing the serenity of childhood innocence with the depravity of cold-blooded murder. Attempts at suspense are continual, albeit rarely successful, but the director does well to create at least one credible jump-scare. Despite Freeman's well-documented links to pornography, Blood Frenzy isn't the fornication marathon that you'd expect and there's no extreme nudity on display. Although sexual references are strong, the film concentrates mainly on horror and the plot rarely seeks gratuitous shock tactics in any other avenue. The script is brilliantly hilarious in places, with some comical profanity and technically the film looks a treat.
Each character has enough of a motive to be the maniacal assassin and the plot offers significant development to allow the viewer to pick his choice for the hooded assassin. To be fair, the revelation of the killer's identity is quite a surprise and the mystery is handled efficiently. The film lacks enough competent tension to truly create an intriguing puzzle and the lack of any really credible suspense subtracts from the ambitious conclusion.
The biggest problems with Blood Frenzy are the horrendous performances from the haggardly cobbled-together ensemble. Despite being by far the most experienced cast-member, Lisa Loring is laughable as the obnoxious Dory and a creative synopsis was ruined by poor dramatisation. It looks as if the cast and crew had an excellent time on set and the actors seem to have bonded extremely well. Unfortunately, this is evident in the finished print and you can't help but feel that many scenes were shot purely for laughs, which is unforgivable for a film of this genre.
Blood Frenzy is an extremely gory (the opening murder is a prime example), competently handled slasher that suffers from a lack of professionalism. But with that said, it's a damn site better than many of the more recognised entries from this period. Hal Freeman never returned to the horror genre and instead continued his career in porn. Fans of slasher movies however will be pleased that he had the ambition to try, because Blood Frenzy is well worth a look.
Freeman had been a relatively successful porn director that had shot to fame in America for single-handedly beating the regulation that quashed the production of erotic films. 'The people vs. Freeman' was an interesting case in the history of US law and its conclusion changed the adult entertainment market forever. Up until that point, it had been a crime to film persons performing sex acts, even if the filmmakers could produce hand-written documents of consent from the participating models and conviction carried a three-year prison sentence without the possibility of parole.
Most movies before then had been shot in secret locations to avoid prosecution under the 'pandering' laws of the state. However when caught and convicted, Freeman's team of attorneys argued that the First Amendment prohibited the application of pandering laws to the creation of adult materials and ultimately he won the case. The victory opened a whole new avenue of possibilities for the industry and it has since become a high-grossing entertainment medium.
The fact that Freeman now had the freedom to indulge in his chosen market and make a considerable profit without the added worries of Police intervention made his decision to swap genres and direct a slasher movie profoundly intriguing.
An eccentric psychiatrist decides to take six of her patients away to the Mohave Desert for confrontational therapy. The pick of the gang of emotionally delicate travellers includes Rick (Tony Montero), a Vietnam vet who is suffering from that age-old Hollywood chestnut of stereotypical post-war flashback syndrome. Also worth mentioning is Dory (Lisa Loring), a highly-charged lesbian with a deep-rooted hated of masculinity and a desire to seek confrontation in almost every situation.
Almost soon as the group arrive, their RV is ransacked by an unseen someone and they find themselves stranded with dwindling supplies of food and water. Their rations of luck diminish even further when a gloved and unseen maniac begins slaughtering the group one by one. Every character has a motive for murder, but who is the real assassin?
Despite containing all the correct ingredients that made most eighties slashers popular with enthusiasts, Blood Frenzy has become notoriously rare and at the time of writing there is no plan for a DVD release. Freeman's slasher is somewhat undeserving of its obscure status and boasts some extreme gore and a fairly ambitious plot. The film starts in traditional territory with a pre-teen murder sequence that is extremely similar to the opening of Juan Piquer's 'Mil Gritos tiene la Noche'. The throat slicing effect here is satisfyingly gruesome and the mood is set early on for the gore-filled plot line to follow.
For a first time horror director, Freeman does a good enough job and he attempts adequately to give the film a creepy aura of the macabre. In the opening, the homicidal adolescent is seen playing with a blood-soaked musical box after committing a violent act of slaughter, which acts along the common horror thread of mixing the serenity of childhood innocence with the depravity of cold-blooded murder. Attempts at suspense are continual, albeit rarely successful, but the director does well to create at least one credible jump-scare. Despite Freeman's well-documented links to pornography, Blood Frenzy isn't the fornication marathon that you'd expect and there's no extreme nudity on display. Although sexual references are strong, the film concentrates mainly on horror and the plot rarely seeks gratuitous shock tactics in any other avenue. The script is brilliantly hilarious in places, with some comical profanity and technically the film looks a treat.
Each character has enough of a motive to be the maniacal assassin and the plot offers significant development to allow the viewer to pick his choice for the hooded assassin. To be fair, the revelation of the killer's identity is quite a surprise and the mystery is handled efficiently. The film lacks enough competent tension to truly create an intriguing puzzle and the lack of any really credible suspense subtracts from the ambitious conclusion.
The biggest problems with Blood Frenzy are the horrendous performances from the haggardly cobbled-together ensemble. Despite being by far the most experienced cast-member, Lisa Loring is laughable as the obnoxious Dory and a creative synopsis was ruined by poor dramatisation. It looks as if the cast and crew had an excellent time on set and the actors seem to have bonded extremely well. Unfortunately, this is evident in the finished print and you can't help but feel that many scenes were shot purely for laughs, which is unforgivable for a film of this genre.
Blood Frenzy is an extremely gory (the opening murder is a prime example), competently handled slasher that suffers from a lack of professionalism. But with that said, it's a damn site better than many of the more recognised entries from this period. Hal Freeman never returned to the horror genre and instead continued his career in porn. Fans of slasher movies however will be pleased that he had the ambition to try, because Blood Frenzy is well worth a look.
This unseen mystery/horror flick is actually really good.
Cowman7 October 2002
This movie was not in the least what I expected. With a typical brainless horror title like "Blood Frenzy", I assumed it would just be another one of those countless formulaic slasher films out there. In fact, the only reason I rented this tape was because the video box proudly displayed the distributor's logo in large, conspicuous type: HOLLYWOOD FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT. I thought it was absolutely hilarious that a company whose name implies that their movies are good, clean, wholesome fun for the entire family would have a title like "Blood Frenzy" in their catalog. Upon seeing this, I grabbed the tape and headed to the front of the store, not caring whether the film would be good or not. I just had to see it now.
Blood Frenzy is actually more of a mystery film than a true horror movie, although it does manage to blend the two genres quite nicely. The plot concerns a doctor who takes her six patients, each with serious psychological problems, on a trip to an old, secluded cottage in the Mojave desert. Her intent is to enact daily sessions of confrontational therapy with her patients, free from the usual distractions of the rest of the world. A couple of days later, however, we find that their RV is broken down, the food and water supply has suddenly become exhausted, and the people are being killed off one by one. Who is committing these murders, and how will be able they contact anybody for help?
This movie will really keep you guessing, and I think it's safe to say that even if you are able to correctly guess the identity of the killer, you'll still be satisfied with the ending. It really wraps the story up nicely.
If you ever get the chance to see Blood Frenzy, I hope you decide to take advantage of it. Though it's not particularly scary, it does have a great story, nice special effects, and a cast of believable, well-acted characters. I look forward to seeing more titles from HOLLYWOOD FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT!
Blood Frenzy is actually more of a mystery film than a true horror movie, although it does manage to blend the two genres quite nicely. The plot concerns a doctor who takes her six patients, each with serious psychological problems, on a trip to an old, secluded cottage in the Mojave desert. Her intent is to enact daily sessions of confrontational therapy with her patients, free from the usual distractions of the rest of the world. A couple of days later, however, we find that their RV is broken down, the food and water supply has suddenly become exhausted, and the people are being killed off one by one. Who is committing these murders, and how will be able they contact anybody for help?
This movie will really keep you guessing, and I think it's safe to say that even if you are able to correctly guess the identity of the killer, you'll still be satisfied with the ending. It really wraps the story up nicely.
If you ever get the chance to see Blood Frenzy, I hope you decide to take advantage of it. Though it's not particularly scary, it does have a great story, nice special effects, and a cast of believable, well-acted characters. I look forward to seeing more titles from HOLLYWOOD FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT!
The Hills Have Eyes Again : the unofficial second 80's sequel
Vomitron_G27 May 2011
There's two ways of looking at "Blood Frenzy": A very standard, run-of-the-mill slasher flick that tries to cash in on the success of the first two "The Hills Have Eyes" films, simply by using the same desert setting and a similar stack & slash routine. Or: A modest, unrighteously overlooked 80's slasher gem that sticks to the point and uses the at the time not-done-to-death-yet setting of a desolate desert to its advantage. Since it also specializes in nasty throat & stomach slicings, uses very distinguishable characters and even contains a very basic, but to-the-point twist at the end... I'm in the second camp. All-in-all, not a bad slasher movie from the 80's, although it's an obscure one and you first must have seen a lot of those to be able to acknowledge this.
Gruesome and bloody desert slasher.
HumanoidOfFlesh20 October 2009
The opening flashback of "Blood Frenzy" is very gruesome.A young boy gorily hacks up his drunken father with a garden tool.A psychologist takes her neurotic patients to the Mojave desert for some confrontational therapy.There's a troubled Vietnam vet,a resentful lesbian,a pretty blond nympho,a chronic alcoholic and various other stereotypical characters.Nasty and misogynistic slasher with several truly bloody throat-slashings.The gore effects are pretty graphic and the desert setting provides plenty of atmosphere.The idea of childhood trauma is unoriginal and worn out,but Hal Freeman directs with a sure hand.If you enjoyed Bill Crain's desert slasher "Mirage" you can't miss "Blood Frenzy".8 out of 10.
Slasher in the desert
acidburn-1014 February 2010
The Mojave desert is the backdrop for this late 80's slasher where a psychiatrist Dr Barbara Shelly (Wendy MacDonald) takes a group of patients for a spot of confrontational therapy. Unfortunately for them, they don't realise that this will be taken literally by one of the group and the party really begins.
The movie begins well with a child murdering they're father with a garden tool and the conversing with the patients and the doctor was great to watch especially when the murders starts and they find themselves trapped in the middle of nowhere, although nothing fresh or inventive about this movie, well it was the late 80's and the ideas had well worn thin by then. The film lives up to its name – at least in the uncut version – with some splashy and quite graphic special fx. It also has a rabble-rousing, over-the-top showdown between the killer and remaining victims-to-be. And some of the acting wasn't perfect but oh well.
There were some standouts here like Lisa Loring as grumpy Dory and Cassie (Lisa Savage) was hot and sexy as the nympo who sleeps with half the cast.
The movie begins well with a child murdering they're father with a garden tool and the conversing with the patients and the doctor was great to watch especially when the murders starts and they find themselves trapped in the middle of nowhere, although nothing fresh or inventive about this movie, well it was the late 80's and the ideas had well worn thin by then. The film lives up to its name – at least in the uncut version – with some splashy and quite graphic special fx. It also has a rabble-rousing, over-the-top showdown between the killer and remaining victims-to-be. And some of the acting wasn't perfect but oh well.
There were some standouts here like Lisa Loring as grumpy Dory and Cassie (Lisa Savage) was hot and sexy as the nympo who sleeps with half the cast.
For the hardcore fans of the genre only!
markovd1117 November 2023
Nowadays it's hard to come by this movie. The copy I found is very bad, audio and footage were damaged (and I even think it was a fandub?) and it's all in all a trouble to find this movie and then additional trouble to watch it and more than 90% of people won't endure such trouble to watch this movie. But those who do (and I'm assuming those brave few will be hardcore fans of the horror genre) will find a nice little slasher that obviously had effort put into it. Characters are interesting enough to make the watching of a movie entertaining and the whole thing has a certain kind of atmosphere and charm. It's not scary or creepy, so don't go in expecting a hidden gem, but it's still entertaining if you can appreciate the effort. It's also worth noting that the director of the movie is Hal Freeman, and he was a porn director, so it's no wonder female characters are dressed in a bit revealing fashion, which serves as nice bit of eye candy. All in all, just for the chemistry between the characters and the obvious effort put into the movie, I give it 6/10, but I recommend it only to hardcore genre fans, because everybody else won't finding anything here that's worth their time and can safely regard the rating as it currently is, a 4/10...
Beware the Jack-in-the-Box! Criminally neglected 80's slasher!
Coventry20 November 2007
This sadly obscure 80's slasher/trash gem already earned half of its positive rating based on the exhilarating pre-credits opening sequence. It's one of the greatest and most promising intros I've ever seen in a horror film and I'm pretty sure every fan of the genre will concur. The first three minutes of "Blood Frenzy" are scarier, more atmospheric and most importantly gorier than the vast majority of 80's flicks are throughout their entire running times. And it even gets better and gooier after the intro, with an inventive premise, a morbid isolated desert setting, morbid scenery (the Jack-in-the-Box) and surprisingly professional art-direction and competent acting performances. A female psychiatrist develops the brilliant idea to take her six most complex patients out on a therapeutic excursion into the desert. They form a fine alliance of stereotypical social outcasts, including a sleazy alcoholic, a sexist macho, a traumatized Vietnam veteran, a female nymphomaniac, an embittered & cynical woman and a lady with a phobia for physical contact. After just one night, one of the patients is found with his throat brutally slit from ear to ear, the RV is sabotaged and the water supply is drained. Someone obviously doesn't want the group to leave the desert alive
Or maybe one of them has another psychopathic problem he/she hasn't shared with the group yet? With its concept of loonies in the desert (stalked by a maniacal killer), "Blood Frenzy" offers a nice variation on the usual premise of horny teenagers camping in the woods (and stalked by a maniacal killer) and it's a lot more suspenseful, too. The heated desert is an ideally hopeless and terrifying setting and there's the uniquely reoccurring use of a jack-in-the-box with its creepy tune to scare the pants off of you. The murders are rather low in number, but they are exceptionally gruesome. The killer has a fetish for slit throats and the camera literally zooms in as the blood sputters out of the victims' neck. The ingenuity of the plot weakens a bit near the end and the pacing understandably slows down a little, but the climax is suitably demented again, with a sublime twists. With all the crap 80's movies getting fancy DVD-releases lately, I honestly don't understand that "Blood Frenzy" hasn't received its very own special edition yet? It's a tremendously entertaining and blood-soaked little treasure, ripe for (re)discovery.
Inane Late Night Film That Could've Been Better
horror77776 July 2001
Warning: Spoilers
BLOOD FRENZY is a film that takes itself too seriously. That's too bad because it could have been great fun. The film never knows what it wants to be. You have Cassie. She loves sex and cracks a lot of funny one liners as well as Crawford the drunk. But the film never acts like a comedy because every time you want to laugh, there is always some gruesome death that makes you think that they're trying to make it a horror. And then you have all the characters screaming at each other in a whodunit fashion. So, is this a comedy? A horror? A mystery? It tries to be all three, but that's very difficult to do, and instead of getting a well blended mixture of all three, you get a muddled uneven and uncomfortable mixture of all three. BLOOD FRENZY varies in an inconsistant fashion from an F to an A. The positives include:
1) Truly, creating a film like this was a great idea. The box gives a description of every character and what they're all about. It kind of made me expect for so much more that what I got.
2) The gore effects were pretty good. I feel safe to say that this film had some sort of budget!
3) The acting was pretty good. Most of the actors had fun with their roles and that's something that you like to see.
4) The climax was the biggest gore machine. Gut renching gore that was actually pretty cool.
5) There was also a plot twist here and there which is always enjoyable.
And the negatives include (*mild spoilers*):
1) Too many unintentionally funny scenes. There were just two many incredibly stupid parts and flaws in the script for me too take some "supposedly" serious scenes seriously.
2) At some points, the script just kept plodding along and even the actors looked a little bored with their material.
3) Also, the first four or five people were murdered the same way, which as the cover says "WITH A THROAT SLIT FROM EAR TO EAR". We definitely needed a little more variety there.
4) The film claims that it is "FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY", but it is really worthy of an R-Rating. This might be Hal Freeman's only non-adult film, but every sex scene is toned down to make sure there is not one single BIT of nudity.
With all that said, BLOOD FRENZY is a crazy late night horror film that has its share of flaws and definitely could have been better. Most hardcore horror fans, including myself, should at least find something interesting about this film. **1/2out of****A decent time waster that COULD'VE AND SHOULD'VE been more.
1) Truly, creating a film like this was a great idea. The box gives a description of every character and what they're all about. It kind of made me expect for so much more that what I got.
2) The gore effects were pretty good. I feel safe to say that this film had some sort of budget!
3) The acting was pretty good. Most of the actors had fun with their roles and that's something that you like to see.
4) The climax was the biggest gore machine. Gut renching gore that was actually pretty cool.
5) There was also a plot twist here and there which is always enjoyable.
And the negatives include (*mild spoilers*):
1) Too many unintentionally funny scenes. There were just two many incredibly stupid parts and flaws in the script for me too take some "supposedly" serious scenes seriously.
2) At some points, the script just kept plodding along and even the actors looked a little bored with their material.
3) Also, the first four or five people were murdered the same way, which as the cover says "WITH A THROAT SLIT FROM EAR TO EAR". We definitely needed a little more variety there.
4) The film claims that it is "FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY", but it is really worthy of an R-Rating. This might be Hal Freeman's only non-adult film, but every sex scene is toned down to make sure there is not one single BIT of nudity.
With all that said, BLOOD FRENZY is a crazy late night horror film that has its share of flaws and definitely could have been better. Most hardcore horror fans, including myself, should at least find something interesting about this film. **1/2out of****A decent time waster that COULD'VE AND SHOULD'VE been more.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
