I gave this move a rating of 6. I (maybe) would have went 7 but that fake blood was awful. It really ruined the whole thing from an effects standpoint at least. Surely they could have come up with something better.
shareRed paint.
CG GORE IS THE WORST THING THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED TO THE HORROR GENRE!
It seems most fake blood in movies made before the '80s looked like bright red poster paint. I hate the look myself, but I've become accustomed to seeing it in films this old.
If this is a consular ship, where is the ambassador?
Yes the props were terrible yet the stories were superb. Whereas now the props are immaculate but I detest the storyline.
shareI read in some book about film that older horror films deliberately used bright red fake blood first to get past the censors because they wouldn't let out a film that was too realistic...and then when the censors relaxed and they tried to use more real looking blood viewers complained it looked fake because they were used to the bright red blood.
I have absolutely no idea if that's true or not, people can write anything in a book afterall LOL
~ I hardly looked at his face. His knees were what I wished to see. ~
It was known as "kensington gore" and was a special recipe originally for theatre. I think it looks fantastic, it enhances the story and add that cinematic, theatrical quality. Far more symbolic and emotional then what they use today.. if they bother to use blood effects as most of it is cgi.
Hammer were most famous for using Kensington gore.
The blood is undeniably fake yet somehow adds to the charm of the film. Of course, it helps that the stories are very strong.
shareAs someone else said, with many movies made before the early '80s the blood often looked like red paint. Unless of course the movie was black and white because then you couldn't tell the difference. I can see why it would bother someone who doesn't watch many older movies but I'm used to that era so it doesn't faze me.
share