Blood Creek
Blood Creek
R | 09 October 2009 (USA)
Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream thousands of hit movies and TV shows

Start 30-day Free Trial
Blood Creek Trailers View All

A man and his brother on a mission of revenge become trapped in a harrowing occult experiment dating back to the Third Reich.

Reviews
CheerupSilver

Very Cool!!!

ChicDragon

It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

View More
Lidia Draper

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

View More
Kamila Bell

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

View More
NateWatchesCoolMovies

A Joel Schumacher helmed horror flick starring Michael Fassbender as a deranged, occult obsessed Nazi zombie vampire, hunted by Lincoln Burrows from Prison Break. Sounds like a flick from an alternate dimension that doesn't exist, right? Well it's out there, tough to find as it was somehow buried around it's 2009 release, and relegated to a relic before it was even a decade old. Shame, because it's a ton of warped, bloody fun. Officially titled 'Blood Creek' on iTunes, it can also be found as 'Town Creek' or simply 'Runes' elsewhere, but like they say, a rose by any other name. Fassbender is all kinds of scary in a black and white prologue as a Nazi occult agent who shows up at a rural American farm to study ancient Nordic runes which may hold the key to resurrection of the dead. His chilling work initially is nothing compared to the balls-out, gory makeup covered incarnation he gets to prance around in later though. In present day, two brothers race into the foggy backwaters to stamp out this evil, and they're played by an intense Dominic Purcell, as well as Superman himself, Henry Cavill. Not a whole lot of time is spent on character development for all involved, the film choosing instead to jump headlong into a notably gory free for all, banding together with the poor German family who has had to deal with this psycho for almost a generation on their farm. At a crisp ninety minutes, there ain't much time for anything but action and gore, with a few scarcely scattered, breathless moments of exposition that were already made clear in that prologue, the one interlude of the film that isn't soaked in adrenaline. Hats off to Fassbender under all that chatty, gooey makeup, his physicality is really menacing, and who else gets to play a Nazi vampire zombie who pounds a metal stake into his own forehead to make room for an emerging third eye? Truly a villain for the ages, had the film been allowed to gain any notoriety. And what other film can boast a sequence in which Purcell eagerly blasts zombified, rabid horses with a shotgun, chunks flying all over the barn? Such are the levels of disturbed imagination on parade. Poor Schumacher though, really. This would've been his first good film in awhile back then, and the studio goes in for the kill on every single marketing front, not even giving it decent room to breathe on DVD. At least it's still floating about on iTunes, where any horror fan would be rewarded with a rental.

View More
Bene Cumb

Old symbols, slaughter, eternal life, occultism, indivisible power, abominable freaks, resurrection, blazing fires are just a few elements/topics frequently shown in horror movies - but preferably in limited volumes and not packed into a relatively short creation as it the case with Blood Creek. In addition to all above, the Nazi link was brought in - with the purpose to provide more "real" angle? The cast - apart from Michael Fassbender as Richard Wirth - is not catchy, and the latter's monster outfit resembles too much another famous vicious guy... Both Joel Schumacher and Fassbender have contributed to much stronger creations, the movie in question could have been a good start for a career, but not a work of already established filmmakers. On the other hand, it is no flop or yawning experience.

View More
siderite

This is a horror movie about a Nazi necromancer, that means he can raise dead things to do his bidding. The actor interpreting the Nazi is Michael Fassbender. The director is Joel Schumacher. Now, with a premise like that, I expected a great movie, especially since I've read a review describing it in very positive words. Instead, I get a slight twist of a typical zombie/monster movie. I was disappointed.What was amazing was how the movie started. Fassbender coming from Germany to the US, doing his nice guy voice (but with a German accent) explaining to a little girl how he can raise the dead, now that he had found a runic stone. Then a lot of detailed action and scenes explaining the story of the paramedic brother of a soldier lost in Iraq. Then suddenly the brother returns, all rags and long hair, asking for help to get guns and shoot people.Then the film turns into the typical "group trapped with a monster and they have to kill him before it kills them" thing. The dichotomy between to two parts of the movie was shocking, like someone did two different films and then spliced them together, and therefore I can't really recommend the movie, except as a well done monster flick. Go in with low expectations and you might enjoy it fully.

View More
Sean Jump

Who knew Joel Schumacher had a horror movie in him? Let alone a good one? Blood Creek takes the Nazi fascination with the occult and uses it as the springboard to an exciting, suspenseful scarefest. The absolutely brilliant cast--including Michael Fassbender, Dominic Purcell, and Henry Cavill--does a stalwart job all round, and where some other directors and their performers would have allowed a picture like Blood Creek to succumb to low camp, everyone involved with the film plays it razor straight. The atmosphere is dark and malevolent, and the limited setting--primarily an isolated farm somewhere in West Virginia--used to great effect. This is a gory film, and while some of the on screen mayhem should have probably been left to the imagination, the copious bloodletting is realistic and certainly holds viewer attention. The only reason this isn't a minor classic is because of the numerous plot holes--lots of things happen that even within the context of the very bizarre plot don't make a lot of sense, and other plot threads are left frustratingly unexplained. Otherwise, if you can take the graphic carnage in stride, this is a superior horror film that would see several of its stars go on to bigger and better things.

View More