A person can agree with horror master Stephen King on the worst horror movie ever or they can hold their own opinion because to be fair, he’s just another person. But the point is, he’s an award-winning writer that’s been around long enough and has written enough horror stories to know what makes a great horror story and what is just a bunch of dialogue. bloody and horrible slaps together to produce a vomiting experience. Thinking that he would give voice to any dissatisfaction about a movie like Blood Feast, a 1960s schlockfest that revolves around gore and barely has a plot line, isn’t difficult at all, since the idea that a lot of horror movies mean something to them, it’s kinda hard to say without laughing. But this one, in particular, is bad enough since it involves an Egyptian trader dicing women for a ritual sacrifice. In other words, it’s a blood and guts movie that was made for the sheer effect it has on people, and not much more.
It seems a bit elitist to throw in another movie for sure because, as I keep saying, every story has validity until it doesn’t. This is one of those cases where it might not be as valid since Blood Feast was little more than a shock value since it turned out to be a way to elicit a reaction from the public. He managed to do it, and obviously some people thought it was worth it because he didn’t completely go away. But the facts that remain are that storytellers such as King, myself, and many others might agree that the elements necessary for a story are just not present in this film because it is quite selfish and does not add to the cinematic experience it all. Some might want to argue and disagree, and they are right to do so because free thought and expression is needed to help some stories survive.
There is no doubt that there are quite a few people who might agree with King just because of who he is and what he does, but the point is that a story needs more than that. ‘poorly scripted dialogue and a lot of gore and gore to come as anything other than an amateur attempt to grab attention. You don’t really have to hit him any further, but justifying King’s position on this issue is something one can’t help but take as an admission that he might be right. Someone who has spent a large part of their life writing horror and even teaching it to others is what you would call an expert on the subject and the point here is that they know quite a bit about it. thing. Those who enjoyed the movie or didn’t think it was that bad, well, that’s a matter of personal taste, and some actually enjoy the splash, gore, and guts that come with such movies. There’s nothing wrong with the gore, but there comes a point where it gets overkill and is no longer useful, but rather tends to overwhelm the movie in a big way.
Good dialogue can intrigue can make a huge difference and even things, but since this movie has neither, it sort of crumbles to the bloodied ground with no hope of redemption. King is entitled to his opinions as much as the next person, and it’s fair to think that someone will think Blood Feast is actually worth noting, but he won’t gain much more recognition at this point since the horror has moved on a large scale, and while the gory and courageous style that some people love is still there, the idea of creating a horror story that does not depend on the visceral reaction gained by the butchery of which some movies that pride themselves on happens to be one of the best ways to scare people off because the violence implied can be even more terrifying. Where visceral horror shocks and amazes people and can undoubtedly traumatize them, brain horror is much more insidious and harder to avoid as it may seem like it goes away, but will eventually reappear with the right trigger.
King and many other horror writers should be given at least moderate respect when it comes to their opinions on horror movies, as they’ve been in the business long enough to understand what scares people and what doesn’t work. only a few minutes. , Tops. The blood and guts that some people like to see in the movies aren’t necessarily the wrong way to go, but when used so gratuitously, it kind of negates any chance of taking it seriously.