Search - Clive Barker's Book of Blood [Blu-ray] on Blu-ray

Clive Barker's Book of Blood [Blu-ray]
Clive Barker's Book of Blood
Actors: Simon Bamford, Clive Russell, Sophie Ward, Jonas Armstrong, Paul Blair
Director: John Harrison
R     2009     1hr 40min

No description available for this title. — Item Type: BLU-RAY DVD Movie — Item Rating: R — Street Date: 09/22/09 — Wide Screen: yes — Director Cut: no — Special Edition: no — Language: ENGLISH — Foreign Film: noSubtitles: no — Dubb...  more »


Larger Image

Movie Details

Actors: Simon Bamford, Clive Russell, Sophie Ward, Jonas Armstrong, Paul Blair
Director: John Harrison
Studio: Lions Gate
Format: Blu-ray - Color,Widescreen - Subtitled
DVD Release Date: 09/22/2009
Original Release Date: 01/01/2008
Theatrical Release Date: 01/01/2008
Release Year: 2009
Run Time: 1hr 40min
Screens: Color,Widescreen
Number of Discs: 1
SwapaDVD Credits: 2
Total Copies: 0
Members Wishing: 1
MPAA Rating: R (Restricted)
Languages: English
Subtitles: English, Spanish
See Also:

Similar Movies

The Midnight Meat Train
Director: Ryűhei Kitamura
   UR   2009   1hr 40min
Clive Barker's The Plague
Director: Hal Masonberg
   R   2006   1hr 28min
The Hills Run Red
Director: Dave Parker
   R   2009   1hr 21min

Similarly Requested DVDs

Director: Matt Reeves
   PG-13   2008   1hr 25min
Death Race
Director: Paul W.S. Anderson
   UR   2008   1hr 51min
Eastern Promises
Widescreen Edition
Director: David Cronenberg
   R   2007   1hr 41min
There Will Be Blood
Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
   R   2008   2hr 38min
Lost Boys The Tribe
Uncut Version
Director: P.J. Pesce
   UR   2008   1hr 32min
Special Edition
   PG   2007   1hr 46min
The Zombie Diaries
Directors: Kevin Gates, Michael Bartlett
   R   2008   1hr 25min
Director: Josh Trank
   PG-13   2012   1hr 24min
Rocky Balboa
   PG   2007   1hr 42min
   R   2008   1hr 32min

Movie Reviews

Wow...Truly Disappointed
FBRobertson | SC United States | 09/24/2009
(2 out of 5 stars)

"I have to admit that I am truly disappointed with this film, especially coming not too behind "The Midnight Meat Train." I had high hopes with this movie, though I knew, from the stories themselves, that the development of the film would be tricky. The actors play their parts, and they do a good job at what they were shown to do by the script. The special effects were all right, they were, as they should be, more creepy than out and out blood-bath violent. The scenes themselves were wonderful. The house was well designed, the cryptic nature of the house, the shadows and the light, worked well together. The wariness and the weariness of the actors due to the supernatural presence at the back of their minds was also interesting to see in the evolution of the story line.

Here are the problems:
1) the constant repeating of how the dead have highways...I think this quote was said at least five times during the film. Alright. I get it. I understand that we are talking about more than just a simple haunting, we are talking about a nexus along the paths the dead travel upon. You do not have to repeat this quote again and again. Once or twice is good enough...

2) the second problem is that the story lulls, there is a time when you are feeling bored out of your mind. Yes the characters need to be developed, no question about that, but to allow such a spacing between events, that is what brought my tension down to boredom. Again, I don't want a blood bath a minute, but I want to see tightness in the plot.

3) this point is no fault of anyone in particular, but in the original story, there was a hint that something far, far more dreadful happened at the house then what was shown in the first part of the movie. That would be nice to explore, see the characters, for their own means, their own intentions, exploring the past in order to focus on their desires in the present.

4) due to the pacing, as mentioned above, when a good ten minutes could have been chopped away (no pun intended) in order to tighten the plot, by the time the culmination of the events at the house start to happen, really, really happen, I'm left with more of a "finally" feeling inside instead of the frightful euphoria we're supposed to have when events come to culmination.

I really, really wanted to like this film. Maybe I went into this film with too much expectation. I love Clive Barker's work, from his short stories to his novels. I have enjoyed many of the Clive Barker movies in the past, and I had high expectations for this one. I feel like I was let down. I feel like the powers that be wanted to just get this story over with so the premise of the stories from the book of blood could really begin (as we'll see with "Dread"). This isn't a film I'm going to throw away or sell. I'm keeping it simply because I adore Mr. Barker's works. Still, unlike, say, Candyman and Lord of Illusions, this isn't a film I'm going to be watching more than once in a blue moon. If you are like me and you love Mr. Barker's work, get it, watch it, keep it. Just don't think that it is going to be as powerful as many of Mr. Barker's other works on film."
Not bad, but nothing special either
N. Durham | Philadelphia, PA | 09/21/2009
(3 out of 5 stars)

"Clive Barker adaptations are usually even more hit and miss than Stephen King ones. The last one we had was the surprisingly good (and dreadfully underrated) Midnight Meat Train, and now here we are Book of Blood. The story of this film revolves around a college student named Simon (Jonas Armstrong) able to channel the dead, who is brought to a supposed haunted house by his professor (Sophie Ward). This whole story is told by Simon to a demented man (Clive Russell) who has been hired to collect Simon's scarred up skin. As far as Barker adaptations go, Book of Blood isn't all bad, as it does provide some genuine scares and well-done gore effects. Where it falters however is the fact that the film as a whole is poorly paced, and the twist ending really doesn't come as too much of a surprise either if you think about it. Still, Book of Blood isn't all bad, and if you're a Clive Barker fan, you could do a whole lot worse. Look for Doug "Pinhead" Bradley in a blink-and-you-miss-him cameo."
Slow, deliberate and disturbing
Gregory Holmes | 10/07/2009
(5 out of 5 stars)

"This isn't a remake or a sequel. Instead it is a good movie. Sticking quite faithfully to the original short story by Clive Barker, this is a well made and often disturbing film. Great performances by the cast, an excellent script, a haunting score and some moody photography all work together to make this one of the better adaptations of a Barker story. The Bluray, while not exactly eye candy, is a faithful reproduction of the directors intentions and all the scenes are sharp and decent looking. Not much in the way of extra features but the included documentary is fairly thorough if a bit short. All in all a great film and an excellent transfer."
The dead have stories to tell...
C. Sawin | TX | 09/24/2009
(3 out of 5 stars)

"I'm a fairly big fan of Clive Barker's work. I've loved the books and stories (Books of Blood Vol. 1-3, Mister B. Gone, The Hellbound Heart) of his that I've read and several of his films (Hellraiser, Midnight Meat Train) are some of the best the horror genre has to offer. Midnight Meat Train was probably the best horror film to come out of last year, so my expectations were high when I heard about this film and saw the trailer. This was one of my most anticipated horror films of the year even though it seemed to get the short end of the stick with its release much like what happened with Midnight Meat Train. I can tell you that Book of Blood is a good watch, but it may not be what you're expecting.

Book of Blood has its bloody moments, but it's not an all out gorefest. It's actually more of a supernatural thriller. The director, John Harrison, described the film as being more along the lines of films like The Others and The Orphanage. It relies more on mood and atmosphere rather than blood and guts splattering all over your face, which isn't a bad thing at all if done correctly. Book of Blood almost pulls that aspect of the film flawlessly. I say, "almost," because certain lines of dialogue ("I promise we will listen and I will tell your stories to the world.") and a few of the things that happened in the final act of the film (steel'll make sense when you see it) seem a bit cheesy, but may sit better with me on repeat viewings.

The film actually reminded me of Hellraiser quite a bit throughout the film. Other than Doug Bradley's brief cameo (if you blink, you'll probably miss him), the opening scene of when Reg and Mary go into the room where everything happened just reminds me of Frank staying in the attic in Hellraiser. Hellraiser is one of my favorite horror films, so the brief nod to the film (whether intentional or not) was very welcome to me.

My main concern with Book of Blood was how they were going to turn a short story that was originally just an introduction to the actual Books of Blood by Clive Barker into a full length film. The concern wound up being for nothing as Book of Blood met nearly all of my expectations and was extremely faithful to the original material while bringing in elements from another one of his stories called, "On Jerusalem Street." The story fleshes out nicely and the acting is good, for the most part. I think the perfectionist in me kept me from rating this any higher, but I'd definitely recommend it as it's a worthy addition to any avid horror movie enthusiast's collection."