fwdixon This may well be the worst picture ever made.For those of you who don't know, the plot involves a loony Egyptian caterer who must prepare the titular Blood Feast for the goddess Ishtar.Unfortunately for the nubile young women who live in the area, the "Feast" consists of their body parts.He's an enterprising psycho and goes about the town killing, butchering and dismembering the young women.There is not one aspect of this film that is not atrocious (maybe with the exception of the cinematography which is barely adequate.) The script is inane and the actors are the worst I have ever seen.Director Herschell Gordon Lewis makes Ed Wood seem like Cecil B. DeMille in comparison.This film isn't one of the so-bad-it's-good bad films.No, it's just bad, bad, bad.

jlthornb51 Director HG Lewis broke new and important cinematic ground with this incredibly terrifying and horrific film. The imagery in this motion picture is still haunting even 50 years after its release. Lewis' film remains one of the most powerful horror movies ever made and is a touchstone in screen history. The graphic detail of slaughter and bloody mayhem was without precedent at the time and opened the door for all that was to come, all that we enjoy so immensely today. It was not a creative leap for producers to follow the path from Blood Feast to the torture porn packing theaters at this very hour. It is indeed a courageous, innovative, and farsighted accomplishment by a true auteur.

Red-Barracuda Well whether you like it or not Blood Feast will always be a landmark movie. This is truly the year zero when it comes to depictions of graphic cinematic violence. Sure it wasn't the first movie to show scenes of gore but it took the concept to an unheard of level, basing the entire movie around the idea. Director H. G. Lewis is nothing if not fearless in his presentation of blood and guts. While the gore scenes are hardly realistic, they are often somewhat nasty. Lewis's subsequent gore movies follow this specific template, where they are simultaneously funny and mean-spirited. A crazy combination that simply should be a disaster but in the case of Blood Feast, the sheer audacity of it is jaw-dropping. It's a film that sure has its flaws. Production values are extremely low and the acting is often mind-boggling. Lewis's camera work is at best, uneven. But, frankly, the scenes of carnage are so in your face, and do not disappoint. The film remains far more violent than most horror films today and it's difficult to imagine what audiences of the early 60's would have made of the atrocities that spooled before their eyes. I expect it must've been a mixture of appalled outrage and morbid glee.Mal Arnold is pretty unforgettable as the murderous caretaker. His delivery of lines is just nuts; it often looks like he is reading off a board just off-screen. He's a lot of fun. Connie Mason provides the eye-candy and she is hardly an actress, but her stiff line-delivery fits into this trash-opus perfectly. Lewis himself is of course hugely unpretentious and straightforward as a film director, so he basically points the camera at the action and films, there is no artistry in Blood Feast. But this is very much a part of the fun, as this is pure exploitation with no apologies. In my opinion this remains Lewis's best feature. I realise it has many, many faults but I just find the whole thing a very entertaining trash-fest. And one of the most important exploitation films in history too.

GrislyBloodfeast I initially saw this movie because I have been a HUGE fan of The Misfits since I was 14 and immediately sought out every movie they had based a song upon if I had yet to see it. I feel the need to preface this by saying I actually do like Mr. Gordon Lewis and quite a few of his films. I got to meet him once at a horror punk show where he did an odd little Q&A with the audience and was quite funny. However, this movie is LAUGHABLY bad. The lyric in the 'fits song goes "and that blood is so real, cause you just can't fake it"; which I'm convinced Glenn thought was hilarious since the 'blood' in the film ( and others) is ACTUAL red paint. It's a sub-standard and pretty awful z grade film, but this movie alone isn't what earned him the moniker of the godfather of gore; and you have to understand that no one back in those days even attempted to show anything that represented guts. I suggest you see some of his other works before judging the man on this film alone. And listen to the Misfits song if you haven't already. Mr. Lewis - I salute you.