SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Good start, but then it gets ruined

If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

This film is hard to find. It was directed by John Stanley who was the horror, science fiction, and fantasy critic for the San Francisco Chronicle for three decades. He also hosted Creature Features TV show in the SF Bay Area. He's the author of THE CREATURE FEATURE MOVIE GUIDE and I WAS A TV HORROR HOST. The film is tongue-in-cheek horror film about a famous horror actor, noted for playing vampires, coming to a Horror Convention in San Francisco, and turning out to be an actual vampire. There are a lot of in-jokes for horror fans. It's fun. It was an independent film shot on a low budget and it sometime shows. If you a horror fan you will probably get a kick out of it.

A group of oddball horror buffs involved in organizing a horror convention discover that eccentric and enigmatic guest Malakai (robustly played with plummy eye-rolling aplomb by Jerry Walter) is a real-life vampire.Director John Stanley displays a winningly sincere affection for classic old fright fare (there are loving references to everything from Bela Lugosi to "The Thing from Another World"), keeps the clever and entertaining story moving along at a steady pace, presents a colorful and interesting depiction of the 1970's California horror scene, and delivers several cool bits of gore. Moreover, the witty script by Stanley and Kenn Davis not only offers a crafty and novel spin on the standard vampire premise (for example, the Van Helsing figure in this movie turns out to be a Jewish Nazi hunter known as the Avenger), but also possesses a knowing self-aware sensibility that prefigures "Scream" by twenty years. Granted, the acting by the bulk of the cast shows more raw enthusiasm than actual ability, but the quirky characters are nonetheless still likable -- flaky comic book aficionado Gary in particular is an absolute hoot throughout! -- and have a fierce camaraderie with each other that one can't help but admire. Kerwin Matthews has a small part as a swashbuckler at the very start of the picture while unsung hambone thespian Hy Pyke attacks his juicy role as creepy lackey Harris with his customary delightfully theatrical panache. An extremely fun fright flick.

Horror genre icon John Stanley of 'Creature Features' fame does a nice job with this very knowing, fairly tongue in cheek homage to the genre. Its central conceit is a solid one, and prefigures "Shadow of the Vampire" by 23 years. It also proved to be very prophetic in its portrayal of a horror convention, long before these things would be very big business worldwide. The people behind this convention, including Professor Seabrook (Dan Caldwell), Cindy (Barrie Youngfellow), Scotty (John Cochran), and comic book expert Gary form a team as they slowly come to the realization that their star attraction, veteran horror film actor Malakai (Jerry Walter), is not just a pretend vampire but the real deal. Moreover, he utilizes the services of B.B. (Ray K. Goman) and Harris (Hy Pyke), who are in reality the legendary graverobbers Burke and Hare whom Malakai has kept alive for centuries using alchemy. Our intrepid team unites behind Nazi hunter turned vampire hunter The Avenger (Mark Anger), who's vowed to destroy this evil. Now, "Nightmare in Blood" is not for all genre fans, as it's low budget enough that it's often more talk than action. Some people may grow impatient with its deliberate pace and its minimal amount of gore. Still, it's impossible to dislike this film. It's ingratiating and irresistible, and it's always nice to see a film meant for genre fans made BY a genre fan. The dialogue is often very amusing, and often quite self-referential, with names such as Lee, Price, Atwill, Lugosi, and Karloff dropped. There is brief footage of a film within the film, as fantasy film star Kerwin Mathews appears alongside Walter. His appearance is fleeting enough that his admirers will likely be sorely disappointed. Still, Stanley does give this little film some atmosphere and gets a delightfully theatrical performance out of Walter, who looks like he's having a hell of a time. Most of the acting is very much of the amateur variety, but the performers are quite engaging nonetheless; the man playing Gary in particular is a hoot what with his deadpan delivery. And Justin Bishop is a riot as anti-horror crusader Dr. Unworth; his acting is atrocious but his facial expressions just priceless. The scenes with Seabrook, Unworth, and Malakai on the TV horror show have to rank as the best in the film. It's likewise great to see our heroes think on their feet when faced with the prospect of killing foes that are seemingly immortal. While admittedly "Nightmare in Blood" is going to strike some people as being merely dull, others will surely find it fascinating, even if one couldn't consider it a "good" film. It's still an entertaining one, though. Seven out of 10.

This is a quaint cultural artifact of the early '70s. It's an independent film, made by people who loved horror films but weren't able to actually make a scary or terribly involving movie. There are endless references to horror film icons and fandom which are nice but unless you have fond memories of Count Yorga, this movie is bound to disappoint... Because it's on about that level.The San Francisco locations (A murder at Lincoln Park golf course, with the Golden Gate Bridge in the BG - The Kerwin Mathews film-within-a-film was shot at a WWII gun emplacement in the Presidio - The theater where most of the action occurs was actually in Oakland)are nice and I have happy memories of Bob Wilkins, the San Francisco TV horror host on whom a character in the film is based. Beyond that, the film is slow, the characters are thin and the plot is weak.The protagonists, who are involved in putting on a Horror Convention at a San Francisco movie palace, include a horror novelist, a Sherlock Holmes buff and a mystical hippie comic-book guru (No, really, he wears a Jesus robe and goes on about the "comic ethos".) The villains are a horror film star named Makakai, who plays vampires and "lives" his role off-screen, and his pair of PR men, who are actually Burke and Hare, the 19th century body-snatchers. Oh, and Malakai is a real vampire - Not much of a spoiler there.The acting is good and, while it looks pretty dark on my TV, the film is technically well done... But, the writing is weak and despite a bit of gore, it never manages to be remotely scary.