[Blood Creek]
Plot:In 1936, the Wollners, a German family living in Town Creek, West Virginia, are contacted by the Third Reich to host a visiting scholar. In need of money, they accept Professor Richard Wirth into their home, unaware of the Third Reich's practices in the occult and Wirth's real mission that will keep the family bound for decades to come. After 71 years, in 2007, Evan Marshall's life has stalled at 25 years old when he is left without answers after his older brother Victor's disappearance from a camping trip near Town Creek. When Victor returns one night, very much alive, and having escaped his captors, Evan asks no questions. At his brother's request, he loads their rifles, packs their boat and follows Victor back to Town Creek on a mission of revenge that will test them in every possible way.

Cast:Dominic Purcell, Jessie Metcalfe, Michael Fassbender, Emma Booth, Shea Whigham.

My Thoughts:Dark film with a dark finale.

Review:Nazi zombies have been getting a lot of play as of late. Mostly because of "Dead Snow", which has gained cult status behind the momentum of horror fans. But "Blood Creek", formerly known as "Creek", and then "Town Creek"..."Blood Creek" follows a nazi occult researcher, who was sent to stay with a German family in West Virginia in 1936. The nazi's offered the family $150 bucks to host who they called, a scholar. An occult scholar of course, but unbeknownst to the family, who really didn't do too much digging because after all, $150 bucks back in those days was a wealth of money.

However, the hosting soon turns to a hostage situation as the nazi agent Wirth, soon gains powerful supernatural abilities, and holds the family in his charge. Against their will. 71 years later, a 25 year old mans brother (Purcell) vanishes near Town Creek, snatched up by the family. But he manages to escape, and return to his younger brother. He then informs him of what's happened, and the two head off to seek revenge on their aggressors. But, upon arriving there...they discover that not everything is what it seems.

"Blood Creek" does a lot of things right. For starters, it presents a very dark and yet, very rich story. Not dabbling into the usual, predictable vampire stuff where there's guns, kung-fu, explosions, and edgy soundtrack music. The film keeps things more grounded, more original, and more story interwoven. The nazi-vampire also makes for a good villain for two reasons, he's a nazi, and a vampire. But then there's the third reason, which is a big one. And it is that his ultimate goal is very dasterdly and very scary on a few levels.

So we're given a very evil and dark villain to work with, which is a breath of fresh air from the usual vampire villains that are either romanticized or spout one-liners like they're going out of style. The movie really pushes the villain into the forefront of the story once the two brothers arrive at the house where the older brother was held hostage. And they find out that everything is different, changed, and they've for the most part, kind of walked into a trap of sorts.

So the movies story has a lot of underlying, clever story layers which keep the story from becoming stale too quickly, and avoiding the deadly poison pen of predictability, which so many modern day horror movies have fallen victim to these days. There's not a ton of blood in this movie, which is outside the norm for a vampire movie, but the amount of blood present works within the context of the film, and is just about right for the story the director and writer wanted to tell. The make up effects are also extremely well done on the nazi-vampire Wirth, giving him a grotesque, yet also fearsome overall look.

The story also does not make the mistake of unfolding too quickly. It teases parts at first, and then rolls out the twists and turns little by little. Without telegraphing too much, and letting the viewer get too far ahead of what may or may not happen next. Gore fans won't be pleased with the tame amount of violence in the movie. There is blood, gore, and violence, but this isn't on the level of say..."John Carpenter's:Vampires", when it comes to gore and brutality.

Instead, it focuses more on telling a story, and using the villain as a human monster, who has become a supernatural and no-longer-human monster. In turn, the film focuses more on the man/monster, and his monstrous goals. Instead of delving into vampire mythology, or any Vlad the impaler, crosses, garlic, etc. sort of stuff. "Blood Creek" is hampered in a very big way though, despite it's talents. And that is mostly due to the acting. It's not praiseworthy, or great in any form. Most of the performances range from average to quite poor.

Although the cast is made up of indie well knowns like Dominic Purcell, and Shea Whigham, the movies acting and performances still suffer somewhat mostly because the dialogue and enthusiasm amongst the characters isn't very sharp or strong. But that can mostly be explained because the story is so dark, depressing, and downerish. So having characters bring too much enthusiasm to the screen would not fit very well. The films ending is quite a downer also, but also leaves question marks and some unsettled story points as well.

"Blood Creek" is definitely worth seeing once, if you're looking for some new "blood"...so to speak, when it comes to the vampire-related horror film genre.

Positives:Very dark and serious story, great makeup effects on Nosferatu-esque-vampire Wirth, and some nice twists and turns.

Negatives:Not great acting or performances.

Overall:Two and a half stars out of four.





( Talk about it in the Forums!)



( Back to the main page)