An Exercise In Nonsense

Admirable film.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

The third collaboration between director Herschell Gordon Lewis and the 'sultan of sleaze', producer Dave Friedman, is a ramshackle and shoddy affair not worthy of the infamous status it has attained over the years. This instantly forgettable movie is scuppered from the start by the amateurish production levels, from the inaudible sound (in which the character's dialogue is drowned by the sound of crashing waves) to the static camera and the wooden acting on display. Sadly there isn't even the benefit of many gruesome gore scenes for horror fans to enjoy, as this is a very small-scale film there are only two or three deaths on view.The only incidental pleasures come from viewing the film in the frame of mind that you are watching a "so-bad-it's-good" type of film, and from this viewpoint there is some fun to be had. The first is the acting of Gordon Oas-Heim (or so the credits say) as the deranged artist; his "acting" consists of periods of quiet brooding followed by some extreme overacting. He's pretty poor, yes, but he shows more emotion than the rest of the wooden cast put together. Halfway through the eighty-minute production a quartet of obnoxious teenagers arrive on the scene to participate in a beach party, and the film seems to chart their endless amusements. It has to be said that the sight of these overgrown actors and actresses parading around in red swimming costumes and joking together is pretty funny, although they quickly outstay their welcome! The occasional line of dialogue is hilarious, like when one of them discovers a buried corpse on the beach : "Holy Bananas! It's a girl's leg!".The first of the few gore scenes comes when Adam Sorg - the artist - decides to do in his girlfriend by driving a sharp implement into the side of her face (we're later treated to a lovely closeup of her gory countenance as it is devoured by insects). Later on, he attacks a man in his speedboat, impaling him with a spear before driving over his body! A female is chained up in a back room, and Sorg arrives to squeeze blood from her intestine in a scene which disturbingly resembles a man milking a cow! Sadly, other than the villain's own bloody demise, this is as much gore as the film has to offer.The ending unforgivably lets the partying teens survive for another day, but still offers some amusement to be had from the confrontation between madman and teenage boy, who eventually shoots the psycho in the head with his own gun, conveniently left lying around! The loose plot is cribbed from Corman's A BUCKET OF BLOOD, so the it doesn't even have the saving grace of being original either. My advice is to pick up one of the duo's other, better films such as BLOOD FEAST, and give this boring amateurish obscurity a miss at all costs!

Color Me Blood Red (1965)** 1/2 (out of 4) The third film in director Herschell Gordon Lewis' "blood trilogy," this one here centers on a crazed painter (Goron Oas-Heim) who finally reaches his breakthrough when he realizes that human blood is the perfect red for his paintings. This here is pretty much a re-working of the Roger Corman classic A BUCKET OF BLOOD with the biggest difference being that this here is in bright color, which perfectly shows off the various bloody scenes. Look, if you're wanting some sort of masterpiece or brilliant filmmaking then this here certainly isn't going to be for you. With that said, film history has all sorts of items that remain important and there's no doubt that Lewis' blood trilogy is one such thing. The movie contains some awful acting, a silly script, lame dialogue and there are countless other things that you could pick on but in the end the picture is at least fun. While I'm sure all the shots of blood were shocking back in 1965, when viewed today they're more campy fun than anything else. The movie managers to move at a very good pace, which is certainly important as there's nothing worse than one of these films that just drag along. Another important thing is that the lead actor at least keeps you entertained in everything. Yes, the performance isn't great or even good. It's over-the-top and rather campy but this here is actually very entertaining. The supporting players don't come off as well but I'm sure director Lewis wasn't too worried about performances. As for the red stuff, it's cleverly done and especially the "big" sequence early on when a woman is tied up and the painter has to use one of her organs to fill up his paint cup. COLOR ME BLOOD RED doesn't come close to the same level as BLOOD FEAST or TWO THOUSAND MANIACS but it's still a nice entry in the series.

Director Herschell Gordon Lewis's concluding film in his "Blood Trilogy" (and final film with producer David F. Friedman) unfortunately just isn't as enjoyable as its predecessors. It's not as delightfully nutty as "Blood Feast" or as much fun as "Two Thousand Maniacs!". In fact, it's downright tedious at times. That's not to say that there aren't good moments - there just aren't enough of them.Gordon Oas-Heim, definitely one of the better actors to be found in an HGL gore epic, plays the highly unlikable, mentally unstable painter Adam Sorg, who's impatient waiting for inspiration to strike. It finally comes when he realizes that human blood provides the perfect shade of crimson for his works of art. He realizes that using his own blood is a very wearying process, so he has to obtain blood from other unwilling donors.Overall "Color Me Blood Red" is fairly amusing cheesy nonsense with the gleefully squishy splatter and inept acting that we come to expect from HGL's films. It has its delightful parts whenever Sorg is busy doing his thing. It doesn't help him that "hip", goofy young folk keep hanging around his beachfront property. It's also cool to see Scott H. Hall, the police captain from "Blood Feast", here playing Farnsworth the art gallery owner. The young gals are all nice looking even if their acting chops aren't up to snuff. The beautiful beach scenery is another plus. And the movie does end on a very funny note with its final line.If you're new to the works of HGL and want to do the completist thing, then "Color Me Blood Red" is definitely worth seeing. Just don't expect the same level of entertainment if you've already seen and enjoyed "Blood Feast" and "Two Thousand Maniacs!".Six out of 10.

I am sure that when this movie debuted, people were shocked at its violence and blood, though by today's standards it's awfully tame--especially since the blood is obviously not the correct color (looking more like crimson paint) and the "guts" don't really look like internal organs at all. Frankly, for a "gore picture", this is one you can probably let the kids watch...unless your kid is likely to imitate the actions of Adam Sorg! The film is a super-low budget picture--the sort of trashy film that Hershell Gordon Lewis was known for making. There is no attempt to use competent actors, have good production values or make anything other than 100% schlock. So, considering that he INTENDED on making such a craptacular film, you really can't be too hard on the final product. It's bad--but I don't think the film makers intended anything else. Now Lewis made LOTS of rotten films, but some of them managed to be entertaining despite their many, many shortcomings. This and TWO THOUSAND MANIACS! happen to have enough going for them that they are enjoyable in a kitschy sort of way. Not all Hershell Gordon Lewis films are alike, though, as many are not just bad but pretty much unwatchable, such as his MONSTER A GO-GO and THE Gruesome TWOSOME.The film is basically a rip-off of Roger Corman's BUCKET OF BLOOD (which, despite the title, is a very good film). Unlike BUCKET OF BLOOD, the acting in COLOR ME BLOOD RED is really bad--really, really bad. And, while Corman made a lot of bad films, his style was usually excellent. COLOR ME BLOOD RED is just pure cheese. Like the previous film, this one concerns a crazy artist who manages to impress the critics when he kills people to make his art. In BUCKET OF BLOOD, the crazed artist covers dead people in clay and in COLOR ME BLOOD RED the nut-job is looking for that 'perfect' red for his paintings and happens upon blood!! The film begins with Sorg having his first one-man art show. However, he's infuriated when an art critic savages his use of color. Later, Sorg's lady friend cuts herself and bleeds on a canvas accidentally--at which point he is inspired to use blood! The problem is that he needs a lot, so he takes to killing. Why he didn't just try animal blood or talk to a blood bank or get groups of people to donate blood for his cause, I don't know! I guess this wouldn't have made an interesting film.By the way, it's a tad off topic, but get a load of the first lady Sorg kills. Throughout the movie, this lady ALWAYS runs around in leotards like a dancer. She drives that way, goes to art shows that way and goes to the beach that way. It seems that this was such a low budget film that they couldn't even afford clothes for this lady! Back to Sorg. Now his art is loved by this snobby critic and he is in great demand. However, he suddenly refuses to sell these bloody paintings (I thought a couple of them were pretty cool)! And, because it's like eating potato chips, he can't stop with killing only one person. However, this is no bloodbath film--he only kills three during the course of the film. It all comes to an end when he's about to kill victim #4--when her goofy boyfriend and her even goofier friends come to the rescue.Overall, despite being a terrible film in every way (acting, direction, a stolen plot, dialog, etc.), the pieces all seem to fit together to make a reasonably watchable exploitation film. It's bad, but fun in its quirky way. I'd give it a 1 or 2 for technical merit but a 5 for watchability. Overall, a 3 seems about right.It was interesting to me to note that this film was made in Sarasota, Florida--just a few miles down the road from my house. Sadly, however, I have visited Sarasota's famous Ringling Museum of Art and have never seen any of Adam Sorg's paintings in the gallery!! Nor, for that matter, has the film been shown at the prestigious Sarasota Film Festival. Go figure!