Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Movies » Reviews » BloodRayne » User review

Worst of the Worst: #48, Bloodrayne

  • Oct 24, 2009
  • by

The next step in my quest to watch all 100 of Rotten Tomatoes' Worst of the Worst movies of the decade:

German director Uwe Boll is famous for two things: 1) making movies based on video games and 2) making some of the worst movies of all time. Coincedence? Doing some research, I found that according to Metacritic, the best reviewed movie based on a video game is Mortal Kombat. To repeat, Mortal Kombat is the best ever movie based on a video game. One of those movies, not directed by Boll, is #1 on Rotten Tomatoes' list of the worst movies of this decade, but Boll does show up four times, including with Bloodrayne, the 48th worst movie of the decade and the seventh movie on the list that I have seen.

I've hated all of the movies I've seen on the list, although I've actually seen The Adventures of Pluto Nash twice because I had to believe how incredibly bad it is. The movies have spanned from boring to inane to, as you may remember from last week, downright infuriating. But... Get ready.

Are you ready?

You have to see Bloodrayne. Have to! Don't spend any money on it, Lord no, but you can catch it on Watch Instantly on Netflix. It's horrendous, but some parts are so bad that they are must-see. I'll get into some more detail, but I wanted to lay that groundwork up front. Bloodrayne is, thankfully, the first of these movies that I enjoyed watching.

The film is about Transylvania in the 1700s, a Transylvania where everyone speaks English, but in different accents (we'll get to that in a bit). The vampire king is terrorizing the land and can only be stopped by his daughter Rayne, a half-human/half-vampire, and only if she can obtain two talismans to help her. A band of humans, also out to kill vampires, meets up with Rayne and they join together to slaughter lots and lots of bad guys and stop the king. Pretty simple plot. At the end -- and I'm so sorry to spoil it -- Rayne kills her father and, with every other character in the movie dead around her, ascends to the throne. And when she sits in it, there is a montage of what happened throughout the movie! An actual montage, showing the bloodiest scenes and some that weren't shown earlier, and then it comes right back to her on the throne and the movie ends after the camera leaves the castle and focuses on some random hillside for what seems like thirty seconds.

Those bloody scenes are what make this movie worth watching. Peter Jackson's zombie film Dead Alive is the gold standard for cartoonish gore. Zombies get chopped in half, run over by a lawnmower, beheaded, and so on, as the blood spurts as powerfully as possible. Jackson clearly means it as a joke -- and it informs a lot of the humor in Shaun of the Dead -- even using pink and green blood by the end of the movie. In Bloodrayne, Boll uses the same sort of gore, but in a serious manner. So when there's dramatic music playing and the characters are fighting for their lives, you have people's top halves sliding off of their bottom halves or their bodies being split lengthwise. According to this movie, people's guts just look like a bunch of chunks or something or other and everyone has at least 500 pints of blood that must spurt as violently as possible.

Some of the other scenes are puzzling. Rayne says that the king raped and killed her mother, followed by a flashback to what happened. No rape, just killing. Later, there is a huge setup between two characters and their ability to fight each other with swords. How do they fight? Entirely underwater. They wrestle underwater for a couple of seconds until one of them comes to the surface and the other climbs out and immediately kills them. Exciting and easy to follow. Even the one sex scene in the movie is shot weird and almost hard to follow.

Kristanna Loken (the robot in T3) stars. Other prominent actors include Michael Madsen, Michelle Rodriguez, Meat Loaf, Billy Zane, and Ben Kingsley. Wait, isn't this the second of the four movies I've watched since I started this quest that included Kingsley (A Sound of Thunder being the other one)? Madsen is one of my least favorite actors of all time -- note that my two favorite Tarantino films are ones he isn't in -- but at least he's never in anything. His IMDB page lists him as appearing in 38 things in 2009 alone! Zane -- who is credited as making a "special appearance" -- has lines that make no sense and he delivers them in the most unbelievable way possible. His presence in the film is completely superfluous. And Meat Loaf? He plays a vampire that hangs out with a harem of naked women, so try to get that image out of your head.

The acting isn't just bad because the director does such a poor job of making any sort of coherent film at all. No, they attempt to put on British accents because this takes place in Europe. Well, some of them do. Madsen just talks in his normal New York accent because it's obvious that he put no effort into this movie whatsoever. That might have been best though, because I do not exaggerate when I say that Michelle Rodriguez in this film does the worst British accent I have ever heard in a movie. You have to watch the movie just to hear it.

Something that really stands out, but often doesn't in movies, is the hairstyling. The hairstyling? Well, since this takes place in 1700s Transylvania, everyone has to have long hair. There are a variety of hilarious wigs -- every male character has to have some sort of ponytail at the very least -- but none funnier than Michael Madsen's mullet. It's the first thing you see in the movie and it's the gift that keeps on giving.

Want a reason to watch Bloodrayne? Feast your eyes on the photo!

The Majestic Madsen Mullet

What did you think of this review?

Fun to Read
Post a Comment
October 24, 2009
Nice review. I too, disliked this movie although truth be told I had fun with its mediocre sequel because of Natasha Malthe. This movie was indeed a mess and almost as bad as "The Haunting of Molly Hartley". As for the best video game movie, MK was fun but I thought SILENT HILL was better.
More BloodRayne reviews
review by . November 12, 2006
Pros: None; okay the sex was pretty good; Loken's not bad to look at.     Cons: Everthing; okay the sex was pretty good.     Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie''s plot. I didn’t have high hopes when I turned on this movie and I was not disappointed, or rather I was disappointed, because I hoped I was wrong. BloodRayne (yet another movie about Vampires) was adapted from a video game by director Uwe Boll, the latest in a long …
review by . September 03, 2006
posted in Movie Hype
I've never played the game before but I knew of it and told myself I had to see this movie, especially because of the great cast. I had no idea what I was getting into and I wish I could get my money back for renting this DVD. One major blowup about this flick is that the fight sequences are way too sloppy and slow. You would think that nobody in this movie had training because everybody's out of shape and off on the fight choreography. There's no good soundtrack and the music they do play is boring. …
review by . May 31, 2006
I was fairly excited to see this movie. It has many decent actors and actresses that I like in other films, and it's a vampire movie, a plus in my book. Then I watched it and was left feeling abused. Not only was I robbed of 99 minutes of my life I will never recover, but my intelligence was insulted by a worthless plot and bad script. I can't help but feel violated I spent money to watch this.     The plot is pretty standard. The child of some big bad evil creature uses their …
review by . May 30, 2006
posted in Movie Hype
"Bloodrayne" has received nothing but poor publicity from the moment it hit the big screen. It's been written off for everything from bad acting, horrible action, and darn-near porn sequences. However, after watching this flick, I don't really see what all the fuss is about. Sure, the acting is really bad at times, but I've seen worse in many other flicks. The action looks pretty good in my opinion, though the blood and gore is actually silly at times. As far as the porn goes, there's a bunch of …
review by . January 11, 2006
Pros: Some good action.     Cons: Stiff acting, thin plot.     The Bottom Line: If you are a fan of the genre, there are far worse films you could see.     Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie''s plot. Turning a video game into a feature film is often a daunting task. With a large built in audience, gamers tend to be very picky over film adaptations and agitate very easily over even the slightest deviation from …
About the reviewer
Random Babbles ()
Ranked #412
Blogging daily about pop culture and other crap.
Consider the Source

Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.

Your ratings:
rate more to improve this
About this movie



Director: Uwe Boll
Genre: Action, Adventure, Horror
Release Date: January 6, 2006
MPAA Rating: R
Screen Writer: Guinevere Turner
Runtime: 1hr 35min
Polls with this movie
Alone in the Dark

Movies based on Video Games


First to Review
© 2014 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since