Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

TinsHeadline Touches You

Executscan Expected more

Kimball Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Luisito Joaquin Gonzalez (LuisitoJoaquinGonzalez) So we've had most possibilities by now, haven't we? We've had killer priests, clowns and soldiers. There have been maniac cops, medicine men and miners. Every single date on the holiday calendar has been well and truly terrorised and most possible massacre locations have been stalked. We've had a couple of baseball themed killers, a wrestlemaniac and even a psycho Greenskeeper. Are you really ready for a maniacal fisherman? Released in 1986, Blood Hook manages to make the most of its low budget and pull itself away from the rabble to achieve something that was becoming almost impossible during the late eighties. It's a hard to come by genre entry that offers a slightly different pace and an alternative to the humdrum mediocrity that littered the category at this point in the cycle.Wisconsin is preparing for its most important event in recent history. The annual fishing competition sees the town filled with tonnes of ambitious anglers from all over the country trying to get their hands on the $5000 prize for the biggest muskie. Unbeknownst to the revellers, they are about to participate in something far more interesting. Hunters will become hunted as an unseen maniac with an inconceivably strong spool of line is casting in to the lake for human trophies. In such a close knit community, who could be behind the fishy goings-on?Blood hook is a movie that has sat on my shelf gathering dust since I picked it up in a bargain bucket in the mid-nineties. I was put off by the fact that it was a Troma release and that it had been billed as a horror comedy. Now we all know what a horrific combination that usually turns out to be. Luckily, Hook is nowhere near as bad as I'd expected and offers the right blend of the two opposing styles and doesn't only focus on cheap laughs. Director Mallon would find success later with his Mystery Science project and this is a healthy debut that proves that he has a dark sense of humour. At first, Jim Mallon probably looked like the wrong choice for this splatter fest as he was always a much bigger fan of comedy than he was of horror. Even his first high-school feature - a parody of Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom, which aired on Public Access – was more in-line with the director's ambitions than Blood Hook would ever be. He turned out to be the right choice for this cheesball though as it's clear that he had researched the genre and enjoyed poking fun at its platitudes. His opus doesn't only mock the psycho slashers of the time but also has a pop at the eighties in general and some of the dialogue about rock music, crazy fashions and popular habits proves that by '86 the decade was already showing enough self-recognition for parody. Thanks to some alluring characters and good feature pacing, the film never gets boring and there are enough red herrings to keep you guessing until the killer is revealed quite early in the runtime. Even though a set up involving a maniac catching unsuspecting victims with a treble hook sounds like it should be quite rightly awful, the director resists the temptation to fall in to the realms of stupidity and if you ignore the physical impossibilities, it's even quite creepy at times.There are a few themes running through the movie, which if further developed could have added exciting depths. The most prominent of these involved the numerous war veterans scattered amongst the story who all seem to have been affected (some more seriously than others) by their tours of duty in different wartime periods. There's a point towards the revelation of the killer's identity where things head towards a Jacob's Ladder-like conspiracy, but they are never completely developed and they fall by the wayside in favour of cheesy thrills. It's almost like there was enough here to build a decent and intriguing slasher film (much like Delirium, which had a similar structure but failed with development), but the director's natural instinct led him more to towards the comedic slant. This is most evident in the final battle with the maniac (two anglers aiming rods at each other no less) and I love the classic line, "You wanna take him like he took the rest? You wanna take him with a treble hook at night, don't ya?" Paul Drake's campiness was brilliant throughout. I wouldn't really say that Blood Hook was a gore film, but there are some interesting effects on display towards the conclusion. The corpses floating in the water were quite effective and a mix of efficient acting and good directing made the victims actually look like they were suffering during the murder sequences. The performances are OK for this level, I quite liked the campiness of the actors and they all had moments to shine. Some of the cinematography from Marsha Kahm was lush and the movie's competently directed. There must've been a fairly decent budget for the filmmakers to work with and so I wonder why they accepted distribution by Troma? The film was initially titled Muskie Madness during production, which is perhaps a better suit than Blood Hook, but part of the agreement was the name change and I guess that they thought more of the Troma branding and global network. Obviously a sense of humour is needed for this one. A killer with a rod and reel strong enough to catch screaming teens is nothing but tongue in cheek, but it's actually a quirky little slasher with something different to offer. You won't hate yourself after watching like I did with its cousin Blood Lake. Just make sure that you have the right frame of mind!

Paul Andrews Blood Hook starts as a young boy named Peter van Clease (Ryan Franke) watches on as his Grandfather (Donald Franke) does a spot of fishing on the lake near his house, unexpectedly Peter's grandfather is dragged into the lake by unknown means & never resurfaces... Jump forward 'Seventeen Years Later' & the now grown up Peter van Clease (Mark Jacobs) arrive back in the area in time for the local 'Muskie Madness' tournament in which whoever catches the largest fish wins a five thousand dollars, along with some of his city friends Peter returns to his grandfather's cabin in the woods which bring back painful memories for him. Shortly after they arrive people start to go missing, empty boats are found floating on the lake with blood stains inside & Peter is convinced whatever killed his grandfather is back for more...Written & filmed under the title Muskie Madness it was changed to the admittedly better sounding Blood Hook after the untalented folk at Troma picked it up for release, directed by Jim Mallon this is maybe the only fishing based slasher film out there & after watching it I can see why the sub-genre didn't take off in it's wake. Unlike a lot of crap released by Troma (made by them or not) this is actually played pretty straight with no sense of irony at all, a slasher film based around fishing is just an idea I have a hard time getting to grips with. I mean who actually sits down & decides to make a horror film based around fishing? The first two thirds of Blood Hook are played as a murder mystery with the identity of the killer remaining unclear but at around the one hour the film reveals it's one & only surprise to then leave the rest of the running time to play out as expected with the teenage hero out on a mission to stop the killer & save his girlfriend. It really isn't as interesting as it sounds. At just over an hour & a half Blook Hook is very dull, the pace is alright with a steady stream of victims but nothing ever really excites or entertains in any significant way. I assume the character's were all meant to be quite quirky with a deranged Vietnam Vet, a crazy old timer, a guy with a metal plate in his head & an entire town obsessed with fishing as well as some annoying big city teens. Take away the central fishing gimmick & Blood Hook is forgettable horror thriller fare that worryingly is still better than the average piece of crap released by Troma please don't take that as any sort of recommendation since it isn't. The ending is quite funny in a silly way as Peter & the killer have a fishing duel & start casting hooks off at each other & why didn't the killer murder Ann like everyone else? Why just lock her up?While filmed in a rather flat way with little visual style at least there's no shaky hand-held camcorder crap going on. With a low budget the makers obviously couldn't afford proper special effects, there's a row of three dead decomposing bodies, a severed hand & some blood splatter but not much else. It's amazing anyone gets hooked by the killer, I mean can't these people actually see the giant treble hook coming towards them or the deranged psycho in a boat about thirty feet from them? That's how close the killer would have to be, I mean he only uses a plain old fishing rod for Christ's sake. Another highly annoying aspect of Blood Hook that I have to mention is the sound, the high pitched hissing sound of those Cicadas drove me up the wall! Add to that the use of awful pop music (no wonder the killer wanted to murder someone every time he heard it) & the actual music on the soundtrack & certain parts of Blood Hook left me with a headache. The giant fibreglass Muskie featured in Blood Hook is apparently a local landmark in Hayward in Wisconsin where the film was shot.Probably shot independently on a low budget the production values aren't too bad, at least it looks like a proper film. The acting isn't great, you can see why most of the cast have never appeared in another film.Blood Hook is an odd film about a a serial killer fisherman who goes crazy when the wrong type of music is played, I can't say I liked it that much thanks to boring kills, dull character's & a predictable plot that doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you start asking questions about it. Better than a lot of crap from Troma but they hardly set particularly high standards, do they?

Coventry Even after so many times, it always remains somewhat worrying to witness a movie opening with the logo of Troma Studios, you know the orange-type of city background with the announcement in yellow letters "Lloyd Kaufman and Michael Herz Present…" Even if they were only responsible for the distribution of this film, the two aforementioned gentlemen and their company are not exactly known for their fine and sophisticated contributions to the world of horror cinema; what with outrageous and ineptly made low-budget trash landmarks such as "The Toxic Avenger" and "Mother's Day". But maybe it's just because of the fact they weren't involved in the actual production that you don't really have to worry too much. "Blood Hook" actually is a light-headed, easily digestible but overall pretty dumb late 80's slasher effort from the same director that would, ironically enough, later gain fame as the creative genius behind "Mystery Science Theater 3000"; a TV-phenomenon mocking the allegedly worst films ever made. The story of "Blood Hook" revolves on a twenty- something dork and four of his even less interesting friends spending a little holiday in the fisherman's town where he witnessed his grandfather suffering from a severe heart attack and drowning in the lake all these years ago. Synchronously with their arrival in town, there's the bizarre occurrence of a series of blood fish-hook inflicted murders. "Blood Hook" is one of those movies that desperately attempt to make one or even multiple characters look exaggeratedly suspicious, although – if you've seen a lot of slasher movies already – you just know it's a weak and ineffective red herring. I mean, they can't seriously expect us to believe that the stereotypical crazed Vietnam veteran is the culprit. Actually, "Blood Hook" is a film that takes itself surprisingly serious in spite just being an 80's slasher in which people are getting impaled by an over-sized and ludicrous looking fishing hook! You don't really expect to find ambitious character trauma analysis or slowly developing love stories in a flick like this, right? At least I don't. There are a handful of delightful gory highlights, like when the maniac literally fillets one of his victims after already having shoved a pole through his throat and chin! There's also ear-amputation, grueling disembowelment and strangulation for us, sick puppies, to enjoy. The identity of the killer, as well as his main motivation, is of minor importance, but I'm already happy to announce that we're dealing with a totally demented lunatic who goes around using inventive methods and stores the bodies underneath a pier. The acting performances are decent enough (far better than you would expect at least), the make-up art is okay as well and there even are a few attempts to build up suspense. It's really too bad about some boring overlong sequences and the inexplicable lack of nudity, otherwise this would even be one of the better late 80's slasher efforts. There's space left widely open for a sequel that never came. With all the other and far more inferior trash that I've watched already, I wouldn't have minded a sequel actually.

knick666 this movie kicks so much ass. i saw it in theh theater a few years ago and loved it. then my girlfriend one it in a contest and gave it to me as a gift. boy , was i happy. i have probally watched this movie about 15 times not, and it doesnt get old. i love the actors, and the directing style. if you like horror, BUY THIS FILM!