Brotherhood Of Blood Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
Claustrophobic thriller about a team of vampire hunters who infiltrate a nest of undead to rescue one of their own.
| Victoria Pratt | Carrie Rieger |
| Sid Haig | Pashek |
| Ken Foree | Stanis |
| Jason Connery | Keaton |
| William Snow | Thomas |
| Wes Ramsey | Fork |
| Jeremy James Kissner | Derek |
| Rachel Grant | Jill |
| Jack Donner | Paul Cramer |
| Bill Doyle | Sid |
| Maxwell Fasen | Extra |
| Jonathan Fraser | Grant |
| Ryan Izay | James Christin |
| Darrin James | Chris |
| Boris Kievsky | Stregoi |
| Michael Roesch |
5.50 out of 10 (1316 votes)
Visitor Reviews
I gotta get that bastard!
posted on 10 Aug 2009I tend to be attracted to any movie featuring Sid Haig (The Devil's Rejects, House of 1000 Corpses). Add vampire to the theme and you have me hooked.This isn't a traditional vampire tale, but more a film noir thriller where a group of vampire hunters is seeking the brother of a rich CEO (William Snow). The brother was bitten in Romania. Meanwhile, the vampires themselves are hunting the same brother to prevent the resurrection of "Vlad Bossei" a super-vampire who lived in the 12th century.There film is definitely nonlinear as we jump from today, where Carrie (Pratt) is a captive of Pashek (Haig) and Fork (Wes Ramsey); to yesterday, where they are trying to get information out of Stanis (Ken Foree - Rob Zombie's Halloween, The Devil's Rejects); to last week to get the full story.Victoria Pratt ("Mutant X", Kraken: Tentacles of the Deep) is the leader of the vampire hunters, and does a very good job in this film. I also enjoyed Wes Ramsey's performance.The twist at the end screams sequel.
slow and deathly dull
posted on 01 Jul 2009I must admit upfront that seeing that sometime cohorts of Uwe Boll (Micheal Roesch & Peter Scheerer) wrote and directed this film did fill me with some dread, but I also resigned myself to watching all of the films in the "Ghost House Underground" set, so with great reluctance & extremely low expectations I popped it into the DVD player. It turns out that lowering my expectations was the right move on my part as the film was dreadfully bad and I started to even feel sorry for Sid Haig and Ken Foree, two horror film icons who truly deserve better. More of a character piece than a vampire tale, but all the characters are bland and lifeless (no pun intended) Maybe it's time someone put a stake in the vampire sub-genre as it's done.My Grade: DDVD Extras: a short 5 minute behind the scenes featurette; interviews with actors Victoria Pratt, Sid Haig, & Ken Foree; storyboard to screen comparison; trailer for this movie; and trailers for "Dance of the Dead", "No Man's Land: The Rise of Reeker", "the Substitute", "Dark Floors", "Trackman" "Room 205", & "the last House in the Woods"
brotherhood of stupidity
posted on 27 Jun 2009Well well, again written by those who wrote Bloodrayne and Blade and Alone in the Dark. Do I need to say more, all those didn't do well at the box office except Blade. This one features Ken Foree and Sid Haig. Why I ask myself did they agree to be involved in this peace of a turkey. The vampire teeth are to say the least not frightening. I met Ken twice and Sid once; Sid was a bit of a shy person not easy to talk with, Ken by the other hand was very polite. At the convention there were a lot of problems concerning shoots with the stars, Ken was on of those who staid hours with the fans after wards long after closing time. But here he delivers a stupid role, even Sid who can do a lot better I ask myself why. The storyline never convinced me, and as the blood flows frequently it is also never frightening. My God, this really is a waist of time. But the real horror happens at the end, it's an open ending, aaaaaaaargh don't deliver us part 2!!
Not the usual vampire movie
posted on 13 Jun 2009I will not give away ANY plot details in this review. If you get even the inkling of what happens in the plot, it tends to make you "wait" through the entire movie for that particular twist or turn to happen. It is so much better to watch the movie all the way through the first time, plot unknown, to watch how it unfolds. That's what makes the film noir movies so great for watching and re watching. The first time you see it, you are caught up in how the mystery elements are linked together and unraveled. In subsequent watchings, you know what the end game is, and you now enjoy all the clues and hints that are laid out for you along the way. Where most movies can get boring after a viewing or two, I've seen many of my film noir movies quite a large number of times.The beauty of Brotherhood Of Blood is the cast involved - Every one of these actors does a god job. There are so many quotes, so many specific lines of dialog, so many tiny eye movements and looks that just bring incredible depth to this story. Again, I don't want to give away the details of the plot for you to "watch for". Once you've seen the movie, there will undoubtedly be moments that stand out for you. You realize the context of the situation. It is a multi-layered adventure and each time you take a look, something else unfolds for you.
A few good ideas, but overall pretentious and dull...
posted on 05 Jun 2009The horror genre's extreme boost in popularity since the year 2000 has resulted in quite a couple of annoying trends. There's the numerous amount of pointless remakes, naturally, but also a nearly immeasurable increase in straight-to-video and intolerably cheap & cheesy B-movies released by brand new and supposedly specialized production companies. These days literally everyone thinks they can put together a horror movie, regardless of how inexperienced or untalented they are, and that's the reason why nowadays the lowest shelves in video stores are full of crap nobody ever heard of. "Brotherhood of Blood" seemed to fit into this description perfectly well and at first I wasn't even planning on ever checking it out. The writers/directors duo Michael Roesch and Peter Scheerer previously just did some random jobs on films directed by Uwe Boll - not the best reference to mention on your curriculum vitae to begin with - and then promptly came up with their own scenario. Also, vampire movies have been a dried out source for years. But since the first reviews I encountered were hugely positive and since I'm still a big fan of former horror icons Sid Haig and Ken Foree, I decided to give the rental copy a chance anyway. "Brotherhood of Blood" is definitely better than first anticipated but, in the end, nonetheless remains a disappointing and unmemorable film. The script is definitely better written and more original than most nowadays B-movies, but the main problem actually becomes that it is too ambitious (on the verge of pretentious, actually) and wannabe convoluted for its own good.There are certainly some ingenious elements to find here. Carrie Rieger works for a professional agency of vampire hunters and, at the moment, she's occupied with the protection of a wealthy businessman named Thomas, whose brother is likely to become the reincarnation of the most feared vampire of all times; Vlad Kossei. Even the local vampire syndicate – led by Sid Haig – is after Thomas, as Vlad Kossei is feared by the other vampires as well as by humans. For whatever reason, the duo of directors opted for a rather confusing narrative structure. The action continuously jumps back and forth between the events that happened three weeks earlier, last night and today. Three weeks ago, Thomas' brother got infected with Vlad's blood in Romania, last night Carrie and her team were torturing a random vampire (Ken Foree) in order to obtain information and today they're all trapped and imprisoned in the vampires' underground lair. The muddled narration adds very little value to the film and actually raises incoherence and a pretentious atmosphere. A lot more surprising, especially considering the bloody stills on the back of the DVD, is the relatively large amount of boring parts and pointless moments. Multiple scenes just show Victoria Pratt prowling through dark catacombs or trying to get out of chains. Then when you finally expect the film to really break loose, it ends with the biggest cliffhanger I've seen in years. They better make a sequel now, or else … The acting performances are above average, but still I feel those acclaimed names could do better. I wonder if father Sean watches all that junk his son Jason Connery appears in.
The direction destroyed this film
posted on 24 May 2009On my constant search of occult joys (like for example,Subject Two) in the world of low-budget horror cinema,I find very frequently very bad movies (like Dark Corners and Five Across the Eyes);unfortunately,I am very accustomed to that.But I think the most painful thing is to find a movie with great potential which was destroyed by some element of its production;it can be on a narrative,technical or creative level.Brotherhood of Blood is one of that movies which could have been much better if it was not for a fatal weakness : the disastrous direction.The main concept from the screenplay is good and pretty original.But,that good potential is completely destroyed because of Michael Roesch's and Peter Scheerer's extremely bad direction.As screenwriters,they showed some ingenious things on the screenplay which would have made of this an interesting movie.But their work as directors completely ruins this film making it very mediocre when it could have been good.Their directing is bad because of the badly illuminated cinematography,horribly structured scenes,uncomfortable close-ups and specially,because of the horrendous edition with continuity problems and with sudden changes of rhythm and tone.That lack of a global vision and of a correct structure of scenes and the weakness of keeping the flow of the narrative totally destroy this film,making bad what could have been a good film with a better directing.By the way,during the final credits of the movie,the first person listed on the section "special thanks" is "director" Uwe Boll.Speechless...I suppose that even the slight influence of this pathetic director has the power of ruining other movies like this one.The bad directing is also seen on the performances,which result very amateur,in spite of having some veterans of fantastic cinema.I do not wanna attack the actors...they have made solid works on other occasions (for example,Sid Haig,Victoria Pratt and Ken Foree).I think the fault is from Roesch and Scheerer,who clearly need a lesson on how to direct a movie.The only positive elements are on the screenplay,specially on the main concept,which is very good.But the pathetic direction ruins that good potential.Brotherhood of Blood is one of that movies which make me angry,because they represent wasted potential.I think that with another director/s,the result would have been a solid film.But,like this,I do not recommend Brotherhood of Blood because it is a very mediocre horror film.I think this movie will be useful to show film students how NOT to direct a movie.
Brotherhood of Blood is a good example of counter-cinematic art.
posted on 30 Apr 2009Counter-cinema in its simplest definition is cinema that through its own cinematic practices, questions and subverts existing cinematic codes and conventions. Counter-cinema usually lies in independent film-making and often attempts to combine genres of film that would, on the surface seem to not go together. In "Brotherhood of Blood" the directors cleverly combines the 'vampire' genre and the 'mystery thrillers' sub-genre in an art-house context. Both genres are embodied by a certain mysticism. The curious thing about "Brotherhood of Blood" is that this film is the most realistic and human vampire film that I have seen. I suspect that this is because the film focuses on both worlds; that of the hunters and that of the vampires. Both worlds seem to offer something that the other wants, though humanity (not being human) seems to be the ultimate goal. What follows in the film are continual contrasts between both worlds, the one whose people live at night, and the other whose people live during the day. But there are strong parallels drawn between both groups. We see that they have more in common than they would admit. We must remember that each one of these vampires was at one point a human being. The film seems to be implying that even in the most extreme of transitions (from human to vampire), one cannot completely leave behind the rites that you previously cherished so deeply.
GOOD - Not great - though unpredictable to the very end.
posted on 31 Mar 2009The movie has a slow beginning but then gets better and better and has for this kind of low budget movie even some moving moments. Greatly crafted story, full of twists and turns. The acting is good. The look is low budget of course, but has some very interesting moments. Especially the scenes with Sid looks great. It's a serious movie, but its so well made it's actually fun to watch. The way the movie unfolded and ended was enough to keep me interested throughout. The ending is a classic, even if you guess it a little before you are expected. Besides its plot, Brotherhood has good performances to keep you entertained and some great dialogs. Definitely not the usual low budget stuff.
Brotherhood of memorable performances
posted on 23 Feb 2009The acting is very good. The primary and secondary actors performed their roles really good. Everybody is believable - not usual for a vampire movie. The editing and sets were not great, but the story is what draws you in. The plot is fascinating, a multi-layered story. The film alternates between scenes from the present and about one week prior. Some may find that unnerving, but it is very well written.I recommend this film for anyone who likes mysteries or intelligent horror stories. I give it 7 stars and not 8 or 9 cause you see that it is very low budget and the first 10 minutes or so is slow and you really don't know what is happening. But when it picks up - it pulls you through with a big bang!
Sid and Ken's worst film period!!! -
posted on 19 Feb 2009First of all don't be fooled by the Foree or sid Haig being in this movie as they must have just wanted some paychecks real bad. Its the worst vampire film I've ever seen besides frost and I can't believe Ghost House chose to endorse this piece of garbage. The acting is terrible and the way its shot is like a soap opera right up in peoples faces. Barely any gore and no scares what so ever. I don't know if it was the writer, the director, or producer but it ended up coming together as a second rate attempt at a Vampire film. I wish it was as decent as the cover!!!Hopefully the other Ghost house releases aren't as bad as this junk but I'm not all that hopeful as only half of them are in English and it seems like they're going for the quick buck.
My Review
posted on 18 Jan 2009There is a war raging in the world of the undead. Vampires Pashek (Sid Haig) and Stanis (Ken Foree) know that the ultimate evil is about to be reborn. The last time they stopped this evil, they forged an unlikely alliance with the humans.This time, however, the humans are less agreeable, especially vampire hunter Carrie (Victoria Pratt), whose boyfriend was turned into a vampire. She must unite with the vampires to stop this ultimate evil, before its too late.The greatest thing about this film is the reunion between Haig and Foree, two of horror movie's most fantastic talents. Other than that, the movie his highly lacking. It feels like you're watching the middle half of a trilogy, with no real beginning or ending. If they do another film, I think it would improve my impression on it, but I don't see it happening.
Things aren't always what they seem
posted on 12 Oct 2008Sometimes a movie really surprises you, really blows you away for some reason. I saw "Brotherhood of Blood" not really expecting anything interesting. Well, I was wrong. Instead I got to see an exciting movie featuring outstanding acting and a plot twist that caught me by surprise.Typically movies of this kind rely upon blood, gore or left-field plot twists to get the job done. "Brotherhood of Blood" relies on an excellent script, good direction and wonderful acting from people who might not necessarily be household names. Look at this cast- Sid Haig, Kenn Foree, Victoria Pratt, Jason Connery. This is some serious acting talent to behold. They all are great, but in particular Victoria Pratt and Sid Haig deliver exceptional performances. There's a constant internal struggle for the hero, who does all she can to keep the difference between herself and the vampires, and the difference between what is right and what has to be done.
Pleasantly surprising
posted on 24 Sep 2008While most mysteries try to shock you too often with twists and even more twists, it turns out to be overkill. This film encompassed such ideas with flair, originality an an intelligent script.That being said, there were parts of it that were pleasantly surprising. I was happy to see Victoria Pratt in this movie, because I think the is a good, if not merely decent, actress with actual emotion behind her lines, which is lacking in a lot of horror. Also, I felt that there was a decent amount of chemistry between her and the young vampire. Maybe not enough for an Emmy, but for a horror movie it was pleasantly surprising.
Rough edges but very promising
posted on 20 Sep 2008Unlike most suspense thrillers,'brotherhood of blood' remains interesting even after multiple viewings. Its charm is not dependent on suspense alone.Its true force comes from the acting by the main leads and the narrative technique. Just when one story thread appears to be in the danger of going limp, there emerges another much tauter. The screenplay is such a deviously contrived maze that almost every character appears to be lost at one point or another.Some people may complain about the contrived ending. But why ending alone? The whole plot is a contrivance. More important than the plausibility element, I think it's the entertainment angle that's really taken care of. And it's pretty cerebral at that.One of the pleasures of this move is that it makes you care about some of the main characters. You don't see many low budget movies these days that make you feel that way.
too complex for comfort
posted on 21 Aug 2008granted, this movie has a very clever ending. yet the other 90% of it simply left me scratching my head. not that i can never think while watching a movie, but a movie this convoluted needs a map or something. The unnecessary complexities in the plot are mostly red herrings designed merely to confuse. But the casting I like. There's at least some good actors who can pull it off. Well, at least the young directors showed precocious talent: *brotherhood of blood* cost a mere $100,000 to make but looks like it cost 5-times that figure. It's nice to see directors make the most of meager resources.
Why Oh Why
posted on 12 Jul 2008Why oh why a couple of recent films that I watched sucked badly? It's one bad film after another. Just now I watched this film, & I think my bad luck isn't going to go away anytime soon. Bad films seems to be on to me like nightmares.This film has all the ingredients for an Oscar for the 'Worst Film of the Year Award', not that Oscar has such award though, just trying to make a point. Like, d'uh.The film starred unknown actors & actresses, and even though Victoria Pratt acted convincingly, the others failed miserably. Their acting was unconvincing, unbelievable and didn't project the characters they were trying to portray.A score of 2, for Pratt's sake, for her acting that salvaged some pride to this abominable film.
Possibly a cast/crew of 300+ ?
posted on 21 May 2008The only way that this film could possibly rank an 8 with 300+ votes would be if the crew and cast consisted of that many or more people and they cast their votes. The film had several flaws 1. It was put into production 2. Someone whom was just fresh from the 8th grade wrote the script. 3. Someone had leverage over Haige,(Gambling debts ?)as he has made some blah films in the past but this one would be considered a career ender....if you had a legitimate career to begin with 4. It tried it's best to gather the worse group of actors for any film to date. 5. This movie made Disaster Movie seem Oscar materialIt's just that the overall feel,performance level and cinematography of this film was so below par that I cannot find any "good" thing about this film. I love B movies, old B's,new B's, and this movie would have to be one of the very few D movies I have ever heard of or seen.If you truly wish to appreciate other terrible movies,watch this one.
A better cast that the movie deserves...
posted on 15 May 2008I first heard about this movie upon seeing a cast and crew panel promoting it at a Fangoria Weekend of Horror convention. With a cast including the likes of horror vets Foree, Haig, Bond-son and bangin' hard body Pratt, I so wanted to like this movie yet honestly, I fell asleep three times in the first hour and I started watching it at 8 in the evening. It's still surprising it was able to garner such a genre friendly cast despite it's "shot-on-a-camcorder" look and the sometimes white washed out and shadowy blackened lighting and what's with all of those amateurish close up shots. No complaints about seeing Pratt up close but I can't really tolerate full facial framed shots of some of the older actors (no offense) plus the storyline was confusingly dull during the expository sequences which made up way too much of the film. Sorry to say but not one of the better flicks released by Raimi's Ghost House Underground.
Low budget but interesting
posted on 25 Apr 2008Subtlety is a very important thing in any good horror movie. Not only does subtlety reduce the ridiculous amount of "in-your-face-quality" that today's horror movies seem to love, which effectively makes then just plain old action movies, subtlety shows that a film has respect for its audience. It doesn't feel like it has to explain everything at every step of the way since it knows that an interested audience will be on the lookout for hints as to what is going on. That's what makes films like this enjoyable. In fact, that what makes any film enjoyable. It isn't just a barrage of images, but rather an engaging sequence of them. This sequence can be unchronologically organized or in any number of ways obscured to create suspense, but as long as it is engaging, the audience will be happy. There are numerous hints as to what is really going on and the final climatic twist is really a good one.
- 1
- 2
Small but fine movie
posted on 26 Aug 2009One of the most amazing things in the movie is the manipulation of time. The story is not so much told chronologically but jumps back and forth without getting lost, but to tighten up the story. What really happens becomes more and more clear until the very nice climax at the end. The acting is very good. Ken Forrey as captured and tortured vampire delivers a really funny performance. Sid Haig as old Vampire leader looks really cool with all his wrinkles. So if you expect a lot of blood and gore in this movie you will be disappointed but if you are looking for an unusual movie maybe you should take a look.