Forums Horror Movie Reviews
Uwe Boll's BLOODRAYNE Trilogy


Hey! Surprise, surprise! "BloodRayne" is waaaay better than I expected. Of course, it's far from being a good movie but compared to other Boll-crap (Alone In The Dark, House Of The Dead), it's relatively decent.

The cast is amazing. Never seen so many familiar faces in a genre-film - though only half of their performances are neat: Kristanna "Terminatrix" Loken (quite ok), Michael Madsen (meh), Michelle Rodriguez (great), Ben Kingsley (surpringly horrible), Billy Zane (fun), Meat Loaf (hilarious), Udo Kier (mediocre), Geraldine Chaplin (ok), Will Sanderson (lame).

The movie itself looks for the greater part pretty great due to some cool setting and great camera work. There's also a whole load of really entertaining gore, a neat soundtrack and the gorgeous tits from Ms. Loken.

Yet, for the rest, it's Boll at its 'best': It's weakly directed, sloppily written and badly paced; It's full of incredibly tedious and boring scenes, lots of stupid and imbecile dialogue and cheap-looking CGI effects. Furthermore, Ben Kingsley's wig is one of the most ridiculous thing I've seen in a long time and the sex scene between Loken and Matthew Davis is one of the worst and most unerotic fucks in movie history.

There are huge amounts of vampire flicks out there that are faaaar better than "BloodRayne" - yet, if you're in the mood for something trashy, you should really check it out.



Not that my expectations were high, but I thought that this could be at least about as entertaining as the 1st part - boy, was I wrong! "Bloodrayne 2" is as horrible, unnecessary and superfluous as milar low-budget sequel-disasters like "2001 Maniacs: Fields Of Screams" or "30 Days Of Night: Dark Days".

Nothing about this garbage is any fun. Nothing. Kristanna Loken got replaced with the attractive but pretty untalented Natasa Malthe. The rest of the cast is also extremely bad (especially the laughable Zack Ward and the horrendously annoying Chris Coppola). The camera man seems to be either drunk or high on some bad drugs, the soundtrack is lame and the western-town settings look just bland. The plot sucks, the script is one helluva tedious mess and the editing is mostly lame. Worst of all: it's extremely boring, it's packed with every sngle western cliché you can imagine and there's hardly any gore in here

It can't get any worse than this piece of lowest-grade Boll-shit. Avoid!



Just when you thought that Boll has totally lost it, he suddenly comes up with this amung third part which is IMO not only a major improvement over the awful 2nd part, it's also the most entertaining part of the BloodRayne franchise AND the best Boll flick I've seen so far. Sure, it's still pretty mediocre (hey, it's Boll...), but to my surprise, it entertained me pretty well throughout the whole runtime, which btw is only about 70 minutes - a major advantage over the first two parts which are both over 100 minutes long.

What's good: Natasa Malthe's acting is a bit better in here and her outfit (latex costume, black hair, red streaks) suits her more than the awful western-outfit from Part 2, plus: we get to see her naked (Hot!!) in a marvellous softcore lesbo scene (Hot!!!!). Other nice performances: Clint Howard as insane Nazi doctor and Michael Paré as vampire commandant. We also get to see some nice abandoned factory settings, some gorgeous gore, a couple of neat fight scenes and a hilarious dream sequence with a bloodsucking Fuehrer (see below).

What's bad: Same as usual - a stupid story, a flawed script, bad pacing, lame dialogue, cheap-looking CGI, weak camera work., and another really bad hetero sex scene (Rayne fucking with a stupid restance fighter on an ugly nazi truck).

Verdict: Boll, of course, wasn't able to create something on a par with "Inglourious Basterds", but at least he managed to create a quite entertaining Nazisploitation flick. The open ending leaves hope for some kinda "BloodRayne: The Fourth Reich". Bring it on, Uwe!

maynardmorrissey Sunday 7/17/2011 at 05:25 AM | 78824