Battle Of Blood Island

Browse by  Genre | Director | Actor
  OpenFlix > Battle of Blood Island


Battle of Blood Island


English   Country: USA   Year: 1960

Battle of Blood Island


Joel M. Rapp


Richard Devon; Ron Kennedy




A Jewish and a Christian soldier must overcome their prejudices to survive. Black & White.


[User Reviews]  [Summary]  [Marketplace]

User Reviews


(Average=1.33 out of 5; Total Number=3)

It Stinks (rating=1)

This movie is the worst. I bought it to add to my WWII collection, but am still considering throwing it in the trash. I can't imagine why anyone would even make a movie this bad. The plot is not bad but the acting and expecially the props (uniforms, helmets, guns, etc.) are humorous at best. The shooting is so fake even my five year old grandson was laughing. The actors use non-firing guns and shake them to imitate firing with uncoordinated sound effects added. ONE STAR IS AN INFLATED RATING FOR THIS LOSER.

You Call THAT A Battle???? (rating=2)

The previous reviewer was spot on regarding the merits of the movie as such. It is a kind of poor man's "Heaven Knows Mr. Alison" substituting the sick nun with a badly wounded fellow G.I. What little action there is is pretty woeful. Here's the part that wasn't mentioned before: The Alpha DVD is not the worst quality I've seen, but it certainly isn't what dvd is all about. The picture is a bit murky and it could have been a heck of a lot sharper. Otherwise, it is quite watchable, but expect second rate VHS quality. Again, you get what you pay for....this time, maybe a little less. The great cover art and title has precious little to do with the film.

Pretty Bad....... (rating=1)

If you are a big war film addict, as I am, and feel that you need to see every war film ever made, as I do, then you should probably see Battle of Blood Island. But anyone else dont bother, I could recommend 50-100 better war movies. It is not completely without merit. The story isn't terrible..... but the director failed to make even the slightest effort at making the battle scenes look anything but ridiculous. Would blanks for the rifles have pushed the film so far over budget that they would not have been worth while? Instead the shooters of the rifles (the Japanese, mostly) merely point the rifle and jerk their body to make the appearance that it was fired, but it is very obviously not fired at all. I have seen most of the war films out there and I've never seen this "technique" before. Most people would consider this film a joke, but if you are interested in the genre, and the history of the WWII film genre itself, you might find this vaguely interesting. Its cheap and its short, so you wouldn't be investing much.......but be aware, you get what you pay for.