Odelecol Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.

Rainey Dawn I really see no different from this film and other horror films starring the great Peter Cushing. Nor do I see a difference in shape-shifting to a (were)wolf or a moth or a bat - it's still horror and this one is done tastefully as I would expect from a Peter Cushing film of this time era.Beautiful Gothic imagery, a good suspenseful inspector/detective story blended in quite well with the horror we see on screen. I love some of the music in this film as well - works quite well - eerie sounding. The acting is good - it's as if the actors really believe they are the characters and this really is happening - just the way it is suppose to be, very convincing.Good late night film - I quite enjoyed this one.8.5/10

Nigel P This film is flatly directed by veteran Vernon Sewell, and involves a mysterious creature stalking the British countryside relieving local youths of their blood.Robert Flemyng plays entomology professor Dr. Carl Mallinger in a role originally designed for Basil Rathbone, who sadly died before shooting began. His daughter Claire is persuasively played by Wanda Ventham. Peter Cushing stars as the perpetually chewing Detective Inspector Quennell with a subtle edginess compared to his usual genial performances. As the undertaker, Roy Hudd appears in the kind of role Miles Malleson might have essayed ten years earlier, endlessly making puns about corpses etc. Vanessa Howard plays Meg, Quennell's daughter; in one of those bizarre decisions typical of films made at this time, her voice is dubbed, very badly, by an artiste who sounds a great deal younger than the character. This practice has always baffled me – why take the time to hire an actor only to rob them of one of their most important hallmarks, their voice? Glynn Edwards, most famous for his role in television's 'Minder' is Sgt Allan (one of this film's highlights is the occasional banter between Allan and Quennell, apparently suggested by Cushing) while veteran Kevin Stoney plays Mallinger's scarred retainer Granger.The cast are capable, but the film plods and seems to last longer than its 88 minutes - there are various reports that both Flemyng and Cushing were not happy throughout. In the opening scene, which the film didn't need to show as events are recounted later anyway, Africa is represented by a muddy English river and forest with ill-matching stock footage of wildlife inserted (including a Central American Macaw!). There is an initially amusing amateur dramatics play performed that serves no real purpose, but seems to drag, for example, and far too much time is spent with minutiae at a time when the story could really do with building up some sort of tension.The Blood Beast responsible for the film's alleged Terror is a human sized death's head moth, Claire's alter ego. Impractically, to commit the various murders, Claire would have to transform from fully clothed and exquisitely made-up into the creature, and back again, from one scene to the next. The creature's eventual destruction is very badly conveyed, but at least it brings proceedings to an end, dispelling a growing feeling that the film was going to last forever.

James Hitchcock Horror films were a major feature of the British cinema in the sixties and seventies, largely because such matter could not be seen on television, the broadcasting companies regarding it as being unfit for family viewing. Even a novelty song as innocuous as Bobby Pickett's "Monster Mash" was blacklisted by the BBC for more than a decade because of its allegedly "morbid" subject-matter. (When the ban was finally lifted in 1973 the song went to No. 3 in the charts, providing Pickett with an unexpected British hit).The best-known British horror film studio was, of course, Hammer Film Productions. Tigon British Film Productions were less-known than their rivals but did make two of the most notable British horror films of the sixties, "The Sorcerers" and "Witchfinder General", both directed by Michael Reeves. "The Blood Beast Terror", however, is not a film in the same class.The film starts out as a Sherlock Holmes-type murder mystery. It stars Peter Cushing, who had played Holmes himself in the 1959 version of "The Hound of the Baskervilles" and in a BBC television series. The setting is somewhere in England, some time in the late Victorian period. Inspector Quennell, a Scotland Yard detective, is sent to investigate a series of grisly murders in the English countryside. All the victims are young men, and all have had their throats torn open and their blood drained.Quennell begins to suspect that the killer may be some sort of creature rather than a human being, and his investigations centre upon a country mansion named Clare House, the home of a renowned entomologist named Dr Carl Mallinger. Eventually the bizarre truth emerges. Mallinger, it transpires, has been conducting a series of experiments to breed a gigantic carnivorous moth, which has been killing the victims to feed on their blood. The moth also has the strange property (and I am not making this up) of being able to transform itself into an attractive young woman, whom Mallinger passes off as his daughter, Clare.During the 1950s the science-fiction and horror genres gained an unenviable reputation for bad acting, nonsensical plots and cheap and unconvincing special effects. At this period it was America that was responsible for most of the worst offenders, Ed Wood's "Plan 9 from Outer Space" being the most widely cited example, although there were many others. The British film industry was a slow starter in this regard, but by the sixties it was catching up and we Brits could soon proudly boast that we could make horror films every bit as bad as those produced by our transatlantic cousins."The Blood Beast Terror" must surely be Britain's strongest gold medal contender in the Official Rubbish Horror Film Olympics. Cushing counted it as the worst of the many films he appeared in (and, let's face it, he appeared in some shockers). This one ticks all the requirements of the genre. Stupid plot- tick. No rational explanation is ever given as to why Mallinger should want to breed gigantic bloodsucking moths; the only explanation needed is that he is a scientist and scientists in this type of movie are, by definition, mad. Wooden acting- tick. Wanda Ventham as Clare is particularly deficient in this respect. Inane dialogue- tick. And (most important of all) bad special effects- tick, tick, tick. We only get to see brief glimpses of Clare in her moth form, but what we do see is enough to convince us that Mallinger has not only created a monster, he has created one of the most ludicrously unconvincing monsters of all time. The special effects budget must have run to about half-a-crown at the most. All these achievements suggest that "The Blood Beast Terror" has a strong claim to be regarded as the worst-ever British horror film- indeed, as the worst-ever British film, full stop. It is only the second film in more than 500 I have reviewed that I have awarded the minimum mark. 1/10.

dbborroughs Is this the worst film Peter Cushing ever made (he seemed to think so) Anything is possible, But I'd have to see the rest of what he's made to see what beats BLOOD BEAST TERROR a not so nifty movie about a giant killer moth.Yes, a giant killer moth. I can't make this stuff up...I wish I could but I wasn't old enough to be taking the drugs required to make this in 1967.I picked this up as a USED DVD, I stress USED, or barely used, since I don't know if anyone watched this more than once. Its almost that dull that hospitals will use it instead of gas. Its not entirely bad, but it is dull...The main problem, and there are many others, is that the makeup is laughable. To say this is a dumb monster is rating it too highly. Think the original Wasp Woman, only worse. Its bad. I was wondering why this wasn't better known until I saw the monster and knew, that was the reason the movie is in the forgotten pile.Even if the monster was decent there is the problem of the film plodding along at an okay rate for about two thirds of it and then getting stupider, things happen to reach an end not because they would. But what else is new as things happen at the start of a scene and then shift in mid-scene, for example the villain is performing a complicated experiment at one point and is interrupted by a knock...Peter Cushing arrives and hero and villain simply go off with all this equipment running as if nothing was being done...A mess, a real mess.