You want me to do what to her? Oh, major uncool, dude.
We noticed that Blood Bath (1966) benefited greatly from long commercial breaks. Why? To recover from the incomprehensibilities of this effort.
So who do we have here?
Three artists who are in gullible awe of a fourth artist using a paintgun to create his art. My Arts Editor was soon clutching her head over this fairly wretched portrayal of artists.
Yet another artist, Sordi, the latest in a long line of artists. At one point, he describes an ancestor as being better than Rembrandt and Titian. His ancestor’s fate? Burned at the stake for stealing the souls of his subjects for his paintings. Sordi seems to be romancing a young lady, but later we discover he seems to have a haunted canvas.
Bad art. That is, the paintings. But take it how you will.
And then there’s this weirdo vampire running around. He might be an alternative personality of Sordi, but we’re not sure. And he likes to dip his victims in hot wax. Sadly he’s also a trifle deficient in special powers, as he appears to hoof it everywhere he goes – including the mad chase to catch him which ends on the supports of a bridge, where he just SO cannot fly.
And a bunch of convenient young girls, suitable for gorging on and then, well, turning into execrable art.
OK, so remember what Mom told you? What can we say here?
My Arts Editor did cite the cinematography as being effective. This is a B&W effort, and the shadows are used to good effect.
The climactic scene is not without its creepiness, even if it’s still an unexplained finale, as we have no idea why the wax-encased victims suddenly spring back to life, overwhelm a flaccid artist/vampire, and toss him into the wax. What was the trick there?
And that’s the problem. Things happen, people die, weird illusions occur, but there’s nothing here for the attentive audience member to really hook into, unless said member is a male, ages 15-30, given one lass running about in various bikins. And maybe that’s all this, a hormone-exploitation story.
Bah, humbug.
Looking over the Wikipedia entry is interesting, as Blood Bath has quite the production history to it. I particularly liked this dry quote:
In 1966, [Producer Roger] Corman made another attempt to create a workable film. He hired another director, Stephanie Rothman, to change the story as she saw fit. While retaining much of [Jack] Hill’s footage, she changed the plot from a story about a deranged, murderous artist to a story about a deranged, murderous artist who is also a vampire.
