ada the leading man is my tpye

Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

HumanoidOfFlesh Joel M.Reed's "Blood Bath" features four weird and darkly amusing horror stories:the first one is about luckless hit man,the second one is about one guy who wishes he was fighting in Napoleonic wars and his wish is granted by magical coin,the third one is about greedy businessman who is locked in his own safe and haunted by a ghost and finally the fourth and the weirdest one is about martial arts fighter."Blood Bath" is very weird horror anthology that doesn't make a lot of sense.The film is low on gore but high on weirdness.It's extremely tame in comparison to Joel M.Reed infamous exploitation classic "Bloodsucking Freaks".There's hardly any gore in "Blood Bath",but if you like strange and twisted horror comedies give this one a chance.7 candlelit dinners out of 10.

trashgang What can I tell about this flick. It's from the director of Bloodsucking Freaks with the same kind of score. The movie itself is boring and bloodless. It contains four story's that are predictable and boring. The first one is maybe the best but you can see the plot coming from the beginning. Storyline two is a lot of bla bla and nothing really happens, you should be scared to see the ending, well you ain't. Storyline three about some coins, boring as hell and there's some gore in it, well , not scary at all. The last storyline is, as you can guess boring. And after the four story lines there's a plot to the whole movie, again predictable. The acting is beyond zero, Oh I can go on for ages, it's one you will see but forget immediately. This should have been a tales from the crypt but failed, a shame, Bloodsucking Freaks was better.

HEFILM Well okay, there isn't really much blood in this movie, so get over it. This is a tame film, especially compared to Director Reeds deservedly notorious, and I think somewhat misunderstood, Bloodsucking Freaks. Blood Bath isn't a shock fest but knowing this and knowing the extremely limited resources they had to make the film it's pretty entertaining and has some good performances from actors who were/are in real movies.It moves along well,each story features some good humor and good twists,and even all these years later it retains a spark of originality to it. The worst aspect is the low budget or no budget production design and photography, but it's all in focus and pretty much cuts together under Victor Kanefsky's editing--who went on to edit Bloodsucking Freaks for Reed as well. There are also some clever shots here and there when time allowed. There are however a few scenes that play against nothing but blackness--they couldn't even afford a wall. Main genre element I suppose deals with the sort of cruel irony/comedy of getting what you think you want, or thinking you got away with evil deeds and having them come back to trip you up.Recent DVD release features a longish,not very creative, but still interesting, featurette that itself should have been better photographed but does dig up several of the performers and lets behind the scene people tell it like it was to make the film. This was not a hack work production, it was a quickly that they all did the best they could with and it's entertaining.Those who hate low budget movies feel free to watch some large slick empty thing instead, but this is diverting stuff for those in the right frame of mind.

priest.21 this nauseating tale of gore and torture wins my vote as the best b-movie horror for 1976. brilliant costume, intelligent plot, and terrific special effects make this a must see. not only that, but i threw up T W I C E while viewing this exceptional work of art; once when i saw blood and again when i witnessed a monstrous act of torture only the devil himself could conceptualize. this movie is wicked...if you like "blood sucking freaks" or the situational comedy series "the golden girls", you will love this obnoxious little piece!