Touches You

Highly Overrated But Still Good

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

The acting in this movie is really good.

"Bloodlust! (1961)" is loose remake of "The Most Dangerous Game (1932)" and it's not a bad film. "Bloodlust!" is not nearly as good as the original film but the movie is still good - worth viewing if you liked the original film and do not mind loose remakes.I was entertained by this film - it's not exactly the same as the original so it does have a few thrills of it's own to offer a first time viewer.I would recommend watching "The Most Dangerous Game (1932)" and then watching "Bloodlust! (1961)" - not to compare the two films necessarily but to watch a different group of people being hunted down by a similar type of maniac in a similar story for a double feature.6/10

Two teen couples get stranded on an island presided over by a guy with strange hunting habits.Decent drive-in version of the Most Dangerous Game (1932). Comparing the two, however, is like comparing Pepsi with blended whiskey. This flick was intended for the teen crowd, so judging it by elevated standards is unfair. Instead, it should be compared with its drive-in peers. After all, who goes to see a film titled Bloodlust besides teens of the time. By those lesser standards, it's not bad. I like the nerdy couple (Lora and Persson), a twosome I can identify with. Set decoration too is pretty good at creating atmosphere, while Graff makes an imperiously dislikable villain. What strikes me, however, is hunky Johnny's (Reed) skintight sweater. Usually in these epics, it's the girl who flaunts her body in revealing ways. Not here, instead Betty (Kenny) stays demurely dressed the whole time. Too bad. Anyway, fans expecting a laughably bad movie may be disappointed, because, the results manage a fairly effective drive-in gore-fest.

I have to say firstly that I enjoyed this economical, drive-in version of "The Most Dangerous Game", with future Mike Brady (Reed) starring as one of four youths who become stranded on an island with wealthy madman (Graff) whose favourite sport is hunting humans on his otherwise uninhabited and unforgiving jungle island.Gene Persson, June Kenney and Joan Lora co-star as Reed's concerned companions, while Walter Brooke has a minor supporting role as one of Graff's unfortunate specimens, kept in toe for his chess playing abilities until he's caught philandering with Graff's attractive and neglected wife (Chauvin). Reed isn't bad, although his tonal inflexions are 'father knows best' like even eight years early of "The Brady Bunch". While not such a good actress, I was quite captivated by Joan Lora whose character had little depth, but plenty of appeal.Sometimes amateurish and puerile, at other times quite macabre with some relatively graphic horror for its vintage (check out the acid tank scenes), "Bloodlust" is taut and compelling and surprisingly entertaining in spite of its lack of sophistication and originality. At barely 70 minutes, it's also quite compact, efficient viewing.

Taking its cues from the short story "The Most Dangerous Game", "Bloodlust" centers around a group of teenagers who land on a desolate island inhabited only by a mysterious, homicidal eccentric millionaire who likes to hunt and has surrounded himself with cronies. But wait. What's so weird about that? Oh, nothing, except that his species of choice is no other than...human beings. So of course, he gives the teenagers an inconsequential head start and then proceeds to attempt to hunt them down so he can add them to his 'collection'. Aside from the eccentric millionaire, the characters are relatively flat, static caricatures; you've got the pretty brunette, the take-charge Ken doll boyfriend, the archetypical nerd, and the smart blonde. One thing I did like about this movie is that, unlike most horror movies of the era, the women don't just sit there and scream for help, but actually are resourceful and intelligent enough to fight back at what is attacking them. Its one of the early "teen-scream" movies that were popularized through the early-mid 1960's--basically the slightly edgier equivalent of the Annette Funicello beach bunny movies. While most of the movies in the "teen-scream" subset of the horror genre are pretty lame, this one's actually alright. It lacks the cinematic brilliance of say, a Hitchcock film, but it was entertaining enough to be worthwhile.