Greetings And Salutations, and welcome to my review of Blood Theatre; here's the breakdown of my ratings: Story: 0.25 Direction: 0.50 Pace: 0.00 Acting: 0.50 Enjoyment: 0.50 TOTAL: 1.75 out of 10.00 The only thing that drew me to this title was the synopsis. It offered such possibilities, of which none emerged. And the blame lays at the feet of one man - Rick Sloane. Being a one-man band, both writer and director, you have no one else to blame for the movie's outcome. The synopsis basically places a slasher in an abandoned theatre. After a cinema multiplex chain buys the building and refurbishes the property, the slasher picks up where they left off. Blood Theatre should have been a literal Bloody Theatre. However, there's very little blood flowing. And there's even less story disclosed, either. Most blank space is left blank: People wander about aimlessly and say nothing in particular. And that leads to some of the worst and most mindless dialogue in a script. It's horrendous. Sloane should've hired the proverbial typing monkeys. At least then, the story might've possessed an ounce of interest for the audience. But it does have some lure; the opening sequence leading up to the theatre's closure isn't too terrible. Even the characters are more believable and credible than the ones who follow. The guys and galls in the opening section are nearly two-dimensional. And forget about the comedy element. Sloane can't write a semi-decent character or situation: so how's he to fare with humour? Crassly, immaturely, and unfunnily, that's how. Sloane then gets worse behind the camera. And like the story, the opening sequence is his best efforts on display. But it all drops off a cliff into a neverending hole after that. The camerawork goes to simple point and shoot, and they shoot everything. The movie could have done with some serious editing work to remove all the dead air and superfluous moments - of which there are way too many. These overly long segments make the picture's tempo too languid and help the audience hit their boredom wall quickly. And since his timing is way out for the entirety of the non-funny scenes, how could he hope to add his humourous ones successfully? Simply: He couldn't. At least there was a glimmer of light in the cast, for it contained Mary Woronov and David Millbern. These two performers add a smidgen of immersion for the viewers. Sadly, they are not on the screen too long, and the poor sods have to cope with the dire script and discourse. There's a pleasant performance from the actress in the theatre booth at the movie's beginning - and it's a shame she didn't get a part in the main body of the film, as I'm sure she could have breathed life into one of the walking dead principal actresses roles. Blood Theatre is a picture you never need to see because no good will come from it. I watched this movie, so you don't have to - please don't let my torment be in vain. Now you have your ticket for the main show, please take your seat and peruse my IMDb list - Killer Thriller Chillers to see where I ranked Blood Theatre. Better yet, you can find something much more entertaining to tickle your enjoyment senses. Take Care & Stay Well.

There's just bad, bad, and there's deliciously bad, and this is so magically deliciously bad that I could eat it all up like a bowl of cereal. The acting outside of cult movie queen Mary Woronov is negligible as far as being called acting, and she is obviously enjoying chewing the scenery around all these amateurs. She's the assistant to the new owner of a series of second-rate movie theaters in the San Fernando Valley, one of which was the scene of a horrific murder by Its former owner. When similar crimes begin to take place at the new theaters, they are extremely bizarre and tastelessly funny, including one of a theater employee being soaked up in hot buttered popcorn while others have the boring predictable old deaths of simply being stabbed. With horror movies, I tend to give it about half an hour, and in many cases, don't make it much past that. This is so delightfully bad that I watch every waking moment of is 75 minutes, and while I wasn't laughing out loud at the hideousness or the tasteless humor, I was smirking enough to realize that I was actually having a good time. But having a good time and watching a good movie are two different things, and while the film isn't really gory, it's fun to watch for the way people are dispatched in it. There's one particular female employee of the new theater owner, showing up for work in tight final pants, that is without a doubt one of the worst actresses ever, and she's fun to laugh at even though she certainly is not deserving of any sympathy for what happens to her. The sound recording reminds me of a hideously bad adult film, so tinny in tone with its characters speaking with a grin in their voice as if aware they were speaking the type of dialogue they'd never see the likes of again. I give this an extra star just for its audacity. Without that, I would have skipped out a lot sooner.

This movie basically followed a similar flow as a couple of other horror films I have seen and when I saw Rick Sloan's name, I figured it was going to be super bad. He made the infamous Hobgoblins; however, while not good he also made this film which was more enjoyable to watch. If he had did a bit more with the soundtrack, shown some more nudity and spiced up a couple of the kills I could see this being almost good. He certainly had way more attractive girls in this one and I think I also know that Rick Sloan has a colorful tights * as two of the girls in this film were wearing them as was the one girl in Hobgoblins. The story has a theater reopening yet again, despite the fact that apparently every time it opens someone dies. Well, the flashback pretty much showed a lot of people dying. Well, we flash ahead to a different theater that has two super cute, but horrible employees and three that I guess are okay as the theater manager tasks them with reopening the theater where people die every time it opens. Is the place haunted, cursed or is it just really unlucky? The actors and actresses are about what you would expect from a film like this. The lead girl is alright, but the two naughty girls are hot. The film has quite a few people to kill, but a problem with the film is that Sloan never ramps up the tension, as the kills are quick and done with, while he will focus on the actors simply sitting on a couch for an extended duration. Rick Sloan just does not seem to get it, but he did pick a good place to kill; however, the theater has been a much better setting in other films. He just did not have enough to really get this one into good territory. So, while I was expecting this to be super horrible it was not. The best thing I can say about this film is that it held my attention and did not bore me so there is that. I have seen far worse things out there that not only were bad, but bored me to tears so this film with its randomness at least entertains in a way. Basically, a film so bad, but in a way that makes it enjoyable. So in that regard bravo Rick Sloan, as this was certainly better than your Gremlins rip off Hobgoblins.

Rick Sloan gets a bad rap. As a debut feature, this film is more fun that it is scary, and I'd wager that this was the director's intent. The film has the same unique weirdness as Sloane's other films; albeit with more shots fixated on Mary Woronov's legs than parking scenes, but it's 100% Mr Sloane. If you go into this looking for amusement instead of horror, you won't leave disappointed.

"Blood Theatre" follows a cinema chain who acquires a new location-an abandoned theater that was the site of a massacre years prior. As the building is prepared for the reopening, staff start dropping like flies. I'm not going to pretend that "Blood Theatre" is high art, or even good; the truth is that it's really not. But I'll be damned if it's not one of the most charming quasi-slasher flicks I've seen. The film was directed by a then-21-year-old Rick Sloane, who went on to make a career out of notoriously corny, low-budget B-movies. The film inexplicably blends supernatural elements into the slasher plot with no real explanation, so these moments feel utterly goofy, but again, they add to the weird charm. Save the lush abandoned theater location (the now-demolished Beverly Hills Warner Theater), the majority of the proceedings occur in the cinema chain's main location, which appears to be an office building dressed to look like a cinema. The production design here is obviously low-grade, nearly "high school play"-level, but it gets the job done. Visual references to "The Phantom of the Opera" abound, and there are a few confrontations with the killer that are decently-handled, and while the film does lack substantial gore, what it does have is either passable or ridiculous looking. The characters are largely disposable, and the acting is mostly horrid, supplanted with outrageous lines. Mary Woronov spends the majority of the film indignantly answering the office phone and smoking cigarettes, but her presence is welcome irrespective of this. In the end, "Blood Theatre" is going to alienate most people, and the truth is that most people wouldn't sit through it, but for fans of bad movies, it's not quite as bad as some reviews may lead one to believe. There are moments of creativity here, albeit many more misfires and instances of pure nonsense. But, in the spirit of good fun, "Blood Theatre" is a fun bad movie. Worthwhile for a select few. 6/10.

Rick Sloane the genius-director-extraordinaire who brought us "Hobgoblins" summoned up all his incompetence with an even worse movie. Enter: BLOOD THEATRE! If by any chance you guessed BLOOD THEATRE is a horror film (of sorts) you're on the right track, but it's also a movie that's not scary or funny (though it tries to be both), is visually hideous in more ways than one with a bland and/or ugly B-list cast of nobodies all sporting outlandishly dated clothes/costumes and to top things off the movie has an insanely lame and repetitive Casio keyboard type-a-soundtrack. Yep, this is a movie that's truly worthy of your hatred and scorn and you should consider yourself truly lucky if you never see it. But if you have seen it (as I have) I'd say it's your civic duty to warn others about bad this movie really is. It's a total waste of time. Period. Briefly on the plot of this abortion of a movie, which revolves around the premise of a haunted movie theater (any one else getting Scooby-Doo vibes after hearing that) and the hauntings/murders that happen therein. Basically it looks like an untalented and perhaps inexperienced film crew and director attempted to recreate the success of Poltergeist (1982), but with Blood Theatre instead of the trappings of a modest suburban home, the movie takes place almost entirely lamely meandering around the corridors of an old "haunted" movie palace. And did they succeed? Hell No. This movie is pure garbage...and not even in a fun way, which also means that Rick Sloane directed a movie that's worse than Hobgoblins...this is below even that. Sad. But I must say after seeing this repugnantly terrible movie it does seem to be the cast that's most at fault, as to why Blood Theater is such a dismal-dismal-dismal experience. It's almost as if they (the cast) were too stupid to realize they were being haunted. Message to the casting agent: "YOU'LL NEVER WORK IN THIS TOWN AGAIN!!!". But sadly they probably did work again, which probably resulted in more bad casting in future productions. What a sad, sad movie. With that being said I have seen worse movies, but Blood Theatre still isn't excused.

The acting is mostly horrid, the plot is pretty lame, and the ending is pathetic. Yet...it does have a certain charm about it, it's almost so bad that it's kinda good. It's at times more of a comedy than a horror movie, just listen to some of the lines and sound effects. It reminded me a lot at times of the comedy/horror spoof movie "Student Bodies". I like the early electronica music that runs throughout the film, it's repetitive but effective, I would compare it as very similar to the music from the first "Slumber Party Massacre" film. I think if the killings would have been a little more realistic and unique, and that if the ending would have been a lot better and explained things this could have been a more highly regarded film. It would have also helped if the movie was about 10 minutes longer in length, 75 minutes did seem quite short watching it...

Three young movie theater employees are given the task of re-opening a long closed old-time theater at which many years before a shocking series of grisly murders took place. It seems many more murders have occurred since then but all of this remains unknown to these three young upstart employees hoping to finally make it big on their own. As they approach the grand re-opening night, things keep getting stranger and more unsettling with items suddenly starting to move around by themselves without any seen aid and a terrifying old man seemingly haunting the premises. Oh, this is truly horrible. In fact, if it wasn't for Mary Woronov's secretary character being such a fiercely independent outspoken empowered young woman who steals practically every scene in which she appears and the incredibly hot chick who played the unbelievably sleazy yet totally sexy Selina, this would be a total loss. The only other good thing I have to say about this film is some of the movie theater murders are done in truly inventive, albeit not overly gory (a preference for me but not necessarily for others), fashion. The rest just wallows in constant sleaze (so extreme the rare few may actually find humor in it) and runs through the predictable slasher kills annoying characters off one after the other routine.

The best of the worst. This movie is so bad it's good. Not scary, kind of funny, lots of great screaming, person killed in a popcorn machine, clown whores of Hollywood inexplicably exposing their breasts - what's not to love. "Where blood isn't the only thing dripping on the popcorn." "The next time you scream in a movie theater, it may be for your life." Now, the movie is part of something called Blood-o-Rama. It also was once called "Movie House Massacre." Interestingly, the DVD cover says that the movie is "Unrated/Color/Naked Girls & Bloodshed." Star Mary Waronov told co-star, Jenny Cunningham, that Director Rick Sloane's mother made her costumes.

The most hardcore bad film buff will be surprised by the overall ineptness of this grade-z "film". Mary Woronov, a clever actress best known for her roles as Mary Bland in Eating Raoul and Miss Togar in Rock 'N' Roll High School, is by far the best thing about this tripe. This film is almost too bad even for MST3K - honestly!