Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Psychological thriller, art film and well acted with a strong American Indian theme, amid stunning cinematography (though obviously NOT the Arizona desert) - this flick is a rescued treasure and would be a gem in its own right, even had beloved River lived to complete the very few missing scenes. Dark Blood's message: 'Humanity is poisoning the earth and early colonizers were no worse than modern European Americans and other trespassers. Disrespectful to the land, as to its rightful stewards. You know nothing about this land and nothing about us. Just go. Could learning respect have been an option? Sure. Right up until the point where you killed EVERYTHING.' Wow. *and then the parallel stories with the nuclear fallout and real-life actions* This is a very strong message the writer and director are passing on, while educating us about Anasazi ruins and the struggle of a mixed blood off the reservation in a multitude of ways. Viewing the ruins first as tourists, Harry and Buffy read about the ancient peaceful people who use to live here. They return to the site later as refugees; at this point,Harry passes a sign that says WHITE MAN, THIS LAND IS POISONED BY YOU. CURSED BY US.Buffy passes a sign that says DEATH DO NOT ENTER HEREI loved the soundtrack, but it was a big miss to not include Robbie Robertson's "Ghost Dance" in it. A future edit should obviously include that song and Jonathan Pryce dubbing over George Suizer's narration, slightly edited, so the script of it sounds like one of the actors, merely adding in his own thoughts.Suizer and Jim Barton make a direct point to the audience (clearly one Phoenix approved). These writers probably knew something you don't: how many tribes exist in North America today? Don't know that? I recommend starting with The American Indians, by Edward H. Spicer. It is good to know about the past of the land we are living on, as well as the present. I am impressed with the current generation Germans wishing to understand and pay atonement for a genocide they personally had nothing to do with - makes me forgive them, as a Jew. I pray that, one day, my fellow Americans will be as humble, and learn more about American Indians, past and present.

Scenes are well made, the desert looks great, characters peer at the horizon well in the tradition of westerns, there are set designer extravaganzas. The story doesn't suffer from missing scenes; that speeds it up. What the story does suffer from is a disconnect of its elements. Buffy and Harry are a splendidly unlikeable squabbling city couple, actors to boot, stranded in the desert, which sets them up for a story in which they are humbled in the presence of some grounding element (the way Katharine Hepburn succumbs to Humphrey Bogart). That should be the solitary personage designated simply, condescendingly "Boy." But the couple doesn't let go into Boy's world. They fail to see that Boy's life and his environment have been damaged irreparably by nuclear testing; they fail to be grateful for Boy's kindness. In other words, they fail to see what a complex and powerful character River Phoenix is playing. If the viewer does, Buffy and Harry should, or they are hopelessly, tragically disconnected. Boy, look out for the culture these people come from, who aren't being shown much of your culture.

George Sluizer's salvaged 1993 desert thriller Dark Blood is an uneasy but captivating watch. More than anything its a tantalising final glimpse into the talent of star River Phoenix, surly one of the most promising actors the world has ever seen. Rivers tragic and sudden death in the winter of 93 halted production and left the film missing many of its most crucial and inmate scenes. To overcome this director Sluizer can be heard reading the script amongst a mixture of stills and short clips. This method, whilst effective, is quite jarring and ultimately strange mainly due to Sluizers heavily accented, matter of fact voice which clash with the very intimate words and actions he is trying to get across. However we do get long periods where the film plays uninterrupted, its in these moments we get a sense of what a great movie this may have been. At times a classic Hollywood thriller and others a disturbing art house flick.Pryce and Judy Davis are pretty much note perfect as the bickering Hollywood couple. Pryce plays his character so well I would not be surprised if the role was written with him in mind.Its no secret that Judy Davis was a very difficult actress to work with not only for the director but also the actors. River in particular was targeted with many friends reporting he would call them in tears due to her hostile treatment towards him. Such was his misery that he personally asked Sluizer to delay the most intimate scenes between them till the last days of shooting (they were never completed). It is to both actors immense credit that this difficult working relationship never comes across on screen, the scenes between them burn with desire and feeling.Its impossible to talk about this film without really talking about River, even as you are watching the film, the tragedy that was to come is always there, playing on your mind. At only 23 River Phoenix was an Oscar nominated actor of incredible talent, grace and beauty. With the character of "Boy" he was able to display a side of him we had never seen before. He is terrifying, disturbing and dangerous but even in the throes of this madness that trademark sensitivity of Rivers shines through. He was a very special and incredibly gifted actor, and this film like all his prior performances have done before it, bear tribute to that.

I've been crazy about movies ever since i was eleven (this was in 1985) and at the time of his death really liked Phoenix as an actor in The Mosquito Coast, Running on Empty and (especially) Stand by me. I remember thinking it such a loss when i heard he had died and being really curious about this film. Not only his last film but also made by a fellow Dutchman. A director responsible for making one of the only classics in Dutch cinema (Spoorloos a.k.a The vanishing). So, cut to the present, i was extremely curious to see this unfinished film and very happy to get the chance to attend the premiere. The fact that there were (crucial) scene's missing didn't bother me. I can still love a film for it's great parts (like a lot of Brian DePalma's movies). So i was hoping for a few memorable moments either in acting, writing, plot or in the use of visuals. But, unfortunately, those moments never came! I was bored from the first frame to the last. It never is a badly made film but it also never becomes anything special or interesting. If this film had been finished to completion before River's death, it would (i my estimation) have been forgotten about by now. I never cared about River's last films ("even cowgirls get the blues, the thing called love, silent tongue") and this film, sadly, doesn't change that...