Search - Hemoglobin on DVD

3.5 OUT OF 5 - A BIZARRE TWISTED MOVIE THAT FALLS SHORT.

Darth J | Somewhere In Time | 03/13/2008

(4 out of 5 stars)

"'Bleeders' is a 1997 film loosely based on Lovecraft's 'The Lurking Fear'. It was directed by Peter Svatek and stars Roy Dupuis, Kristin Lehman(John and Kathleen Straus), Rudger Hauer(Dr.Marlowe),The rest of the cast are virtually unknowns.
The movie has a quick intro piece, then moves on with the main story. The intro piece starts off in 17th century Holland, with a narration about the King outlawing inter-marriage between members of the royal family due to observable health problems throughout the family(incest was common in some royal families to keep the bloodline 'pure'). However one family memeber, Eva Van Dam, who had a carnal relationship with her twin brother, decided to live in exile rather than part with her brother. She, her brother, nieces and nephews packed up and established a mansion in the 'new world'. As the years went on, The Van Dams became more and more secluded, eventually disapering altogether.
Flash Forward: John and Kathleen Strauss are traveling to an isolated island of the east coast of Canada in search of a possible family link to John. John suffers from an undiagnosed blood disorder that is slowly killing him, and they are traveling for a genetic answer. What they find, by way of the island doctor(Hauer), is a very disturbing revelation involving incest, mutations, and cannibalism.

What can I say, this is a 'sick chick flick'. I've watched this a few times now trying to figure it out. It definetly has a few bad points, but there is a good movie in it, you just gotta look at it like a 'dark drama' and not nesassarily a 'horror' movie.

The Plot is based on 'The Lurking Fear' and is very disturbing, but is questionable in it's execution. It runs 95 minutes and drags a little in the first half, but picks up alot during the second half. Again, the formula seems to be more about 'dark drama'(with a good portion of gore) than horror or suspence. The movie holds your attention, but after viewing you might think of some things a little silly. Although based on the mentioned story, I was constantly reminded of V.C. Andrews('Flowers in the Attic').

The acting and dialoge are a mixed bag. The main characters are very well acted and dialoge convincing, but most of the supporting cast acts as if they were pulled off the street and payed $50 bucks. John's wardrobe is an issue for me. I know that sounds weird, but he has a blood disorder that makes him look pale and meek, and the way he dresses, along with his pale look, makes him look like a throwback to the early 80's synth-pop trend('Flock of Seagulls' anyone?)

The editing is good, but if I had it my way, I would have re-cut the film to create a little more mystery and suspence. Everything you need to know is in the first 20 min. of the movie, the rest of the first half is waiting for the gore of the second half. There is a very passionate sex scene between Dupuis and Lehman that is tastefully cut, and kinda 'hot'.

The effects are good, but again, questionable execution. The 'Van Dam' family look really good, but in many shots they are in full-screen and full light, this takes away the 'scary' element. Again, I would have used them sparingly, and in the dark until the latter part of the movie, and still would have been shot in a dark enviroment. The other gore aspects of this movie are solid.

I'm still on the fence with this one, I have found a good movie in this, but I had to look. It had ssssoooo much potential to have come out average. This isn't going to win any awards, but it is a weird, disturbing, and original movie. This is one that I think the 'sick' girls out there in horrorland would like, so if your lady is into horror, this might be worth the time and money. 3.5 out of 5
***ATTENTION***
There is an unrated version of this called 'Hemoglobin' that features an uncut version of the sex scene(with nudity), and another featuring John eating something he shouldn't be eating(SICK!!!)"

This film is a classic old fashion B movie

Darth J | 12/03/1998

(2 out of 5 stars)

"This film contains most of the elements of a wonderfully old fashion horror movie: the beautiful, tragic young couple facing an incurable illness; the mad old woman in the ruined old castle; the family skeleton in the closet; the drunken doctor; wonderfully fake monsters; a remote island setting; the delightfully dishonest innkeeper: so where did it go wrong? The editing was haphazard. There were glaring inconsistancies in the storyline. Sometimes there were hints that led nowhere. Other times things happened that made you sure you had miss an important part of the movie. There are flashbacks but they occur so quickly the only way I was able to tell they contained actual pictures and aren't just blurs representing the confusion and weakness of John's illness was to watch them in slow motion. Roy Dupuis and Kristin Lehman made the viewer care about what happened to John and Kathy Strauss. During their search for the secret of John's past they meet a number of interesting residents of the island. Sadly most of these characters never develop. Rutgar Hauer as the doctor is actually a more minor character than his billing lead me to expect. This film is not the movie it could have been, still I enjoyed it well enough to rewatch it and try of figure out the parts where I had been left with the feeling I'd missed something."

It's not a horror its a comedy!

Katy | Erie, Pa | 11/19/2002

(5 out of 5 stars)

"My friends and I were bored one night so we went to rent a video. We couldn't agree on anything so we used the old randomly-grab-a-horror-movie move and well we grabbed this. Upon watching we started off hunched togeter with the lights off expecting a scare any moment. As soon as we saw the monsters we just busted out laughing! The monsters are so stupid and fake looking, and the plot is so not possible that it is hysterical! There is one scene with the monsters and a paranoid old lady in a whelechair that is a classic! If your looking for some great laughs get this movie!"

SORRY MOVIE FANS, THIS FILM SUCKS!!!

Billy Mullen | Kentucky | 03/30/1999

(1 out of 5 stars)

"Rutger Hauer is the only reason to see this movie if you do at all. If you are one of his fans, this may turn you against him. Do yourself a favor and stay away from this abomination, it's boring, pointless, and the plot is kind of stupid. The box cover cost more than the film, that should say it all..."