Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Sharkflei Your blood may run cold, but you now find yourself pinioned to the story.

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Joris This is the last film with River Phoenix. Meaning: as Phoenix died in 1993 and Dark Blood was only 80% shot, it took almost 19 years to get the material edited into the final cut. All scenes that haven't been shot are read as a voice-over by director George Sluizer over paused images. While that creates a distinct kind of movie experience, it doesn't seem to be something I'm very fond of. Of course, Dark Blood is a film that's all about Phoenix. Just like James Dean in 1955, Phoenix generated a cult following because of his untimely death. Mostly remembered for his roles in Stand by Me, Running on Empty, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade and My Own Private Idaho, Phoenix never really had the chance to become the actor he could've been. That doesn't mean everything he did was pure genius though... In Dark Blood I'm just not feeling the Phoenix-vibe. Above all, it's quite a dull movie. Only recommended for those who want to see Phoenix shine one last time.

Steve Pulaski George Sluizer's Dark Blood is one of the many oddities in the film world. Shot about eighty percent of the way in 1993, but put in an abandonment because of the death of its lead actor River Phoenix at age twenty-three, Dark Blood managed to be edited, reworked, and released at several film festivals in 2012, marking an end in the saga to one of the curious wonders of cinema. In 1999, the film was almost burned by the insurance company, who was sick of storing it in a vault without a plan for years on end, and would've been gone for good had Sluizer not taken action and stolen the film back in a period of forty-eight hours.River Phoenix died as a result of mixed drugs entering his system at Johnny Depp's club The Viper Room in 1993, closing the book on a young, ambitious life so early and abruptly after doing a handful of acclaimed picture. Watching Dark Blood in 2014, when Phoenix has sadly escaped the minds of many, one could see that the talent he possessed and the emotions he managed to convey were natural and believable. It's too bad that even with Dark Blood managing to get some sort of release, it will still be desperately short of attracting an audience it deserves.The film focuses on an older couple named Harry (Jonathan Pryce) and Buffy (Judy Davis), who are traveling through the desert on a second honeymoon, hoping to pick up the pieces to their crumbling marriage. When their car breaks down in the middle of the desert, they meet a young widower who calls himself "Boy" (River Phoenix), who lives on his own, with his loyal mutt, following his wife's death from radiation. The radiation was caused by nuclear tests conducted close in proximity to Boy's ramshackle home in the middle of the desert. Now, the only thing he anticipates is the apocalypse (and the occasional passersby).Initially, Boy seems gentle and grateful for the company, but Harry discovers long before Buffy does that he wants some sort of a romantic relationship with his wife. Boy longs for female companionship due to the loneliness and isolation that exists in the desert, and throughout the film, we see Boy's anger and hostility escalate, which eventually leads to him kidnapping Harry and Buffy and keeping them in his confines.Being that only about four-fifths of the film is complete, director George Sluizer tacks on narration during the scenes that were never completed (some of which being very significant chunks of the film), describing the scene and reciting the dialog. Even before the film is a minute-long narration about how after Phoenix died, it left everyone shell-shocked to the point where no one really wanted to complete the film without his participation. Sluizer states that upon become very ill he wanted to edit and compile the clips of the film into something before it was too late.Being that Sluizer managed to complete a project that many felt would never see the light of day, and that he has done such a great job on many different aspects, it seems harsh to critique it any way. Saying the film is fragmentary, and sometimes a bit choppy, is a pretty demeaning and stupid point of criticism seeing there was little Sluizer could do to prevent that in post-production. Rather than nitpicking elements that probably unsatisfied Sluizer in addition, let's focus on what the film really excels at, which is giving its lead actor a sendoff and bearing some great scenes of tension and excitement.Consider the scene where Harry manages to momentarily break free from Boy's clutches, or when both head for the hills in their pickup truck. Scenes like this are given unexpected leverage thanks not only do the performances, but Sluizer's editing work, which still works to give old footage fresh vibes of suspense. Had Sluizer not taken the film seriously in terms of continuity and story, all seriousness and respect for the project would've dwindled to nothing, but thanks to the competent work orchestrated, Dark Blood manages to easily win more than just cinephiles over.Starring: River Phoenix, Jonathan Pryce, and Judy Davis. Directed by: George Sluizer.

kosmasp ... still very compelling. And a showcase of why River Phoenix was considered one the best amongst his peers. I hadn't read or heard too much about the troubled production of the movie. But I did talk to a few people and the magazine of the Berlin International Festival did have a few things to say about it too. But at the beginning of the movie you will get an introduction from the director explaining the situation and telling you, what you are about to see. And the fact, that there will be quite some amount of voice over.While the voice over (telling us what would happen if the scenes were shot) is good, it never can fully compensate the impact moving pictures would have had. And it still is compelling, which all boils down to the performances of the actors involved. It's great they actually finished the movie and showed it. While not a masterpiece (couldn't be expected), it is there for people to see and enjoy.

Tryavna American film history is littered with compromised films by major directors. Von Stroheim's "Greed," Welles' "Magnificent Ambersons," Huston's "Red Badge of Courage," and Peckinpah's "Major Dundee" spring immediately to mind. I'm not sure that George Sluizer belongs among that exalted company -- though his original version of "The Vanishing" is definitely a masterpiece of some kind -- but "Dark Blood" is similar to those other films in that its beauty and emotional power still shine through despite its being compromised by external factors. In this case, instead of facing studio interference, "Dark Blood" was struck by the death of one its three principles, River Phoenix. According to Sluizer, who attended its U.S. premiere at the Miami Film Festival, all location shooting had been completed, and roughly 70-75% of the script had been filmed. Nevertheless, as Sluizer puts it in his opening narration, "Dark Blood" remains a three-legged chair: able to stand upright on its own, but obviously incomplete. I don't want to give too much of the plot away. As anyone who has experienced the original "Vanishing" knows, the less you know about a Sluizer film going in, the better off you are. However, it is clear that Phoenix's sudden death left gaping holes in the narrative. Sluizer has attempted to fill these holes with voice-over narration, and it works surprisingly well. As Sluizer put it in the Q&A following the screening, however, there is still a slight imbalance in the relationships among the three leads. In my opinion, this imbalance is most notable in the relationship between Boy (Phoenix) and Buffy (Judy Davis). Crucially, Buffy and, by extension, the audience is meant to be simultaneously unsettled and attracted by Boy's strangeness. Unfortunately, several key scenes between these two characters were left incomplete, so Boy's vulnerability does not come through as clearly as it should. To my mind, he doesn't always come across as sympathetically as he should.The three lead performances are all very strong, and I found the ending particularly powerful. Sluizer wisely avoids making the ending either pat or pointlessly ironic; it emerges logically from what comes before. Of course, it's possible that some the ending's power comes by way of hindsight. Like the other compromised films I mentioned above, "Dark Blood" is practically impossible to evaluate purely on its own terms. Viewers will probably always be aware of its complicated and tragic history. Still, the film rests on the three main characters and their interactions with one another, and at this level, "Dark Blood" is always tense and human. That's why the ending pays off so much for me.So by all means, seek this film out if you get the chance. Its recent "completion" by Sluizer was obviously a labor of love. "Dark Blood" probably won't replace "The Vanishing" in anyone's mind as the most important part of Sluizer's legacy, but it's a worthy addition to his filmography -- as well as to River Phoenix's. I just hope that whatever is preventing this film from being more widely released can be resolved. "Dark Blood" deserves to be seen.