Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Borserie it is finally so absorbing because it plays like a lyrical road odyssey that’s also a detective story.

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Michael_Elliott Five Bloody Graves (1970) * 1/2 (out of 4)Drive-in flick about lone gunman Ben Thompson (Robert Dix) who loses his wife and sets out on his own. He ends up battling evil Apaches and eventually comes across a wide range of characters and tries to protect them from the Indians who are looking for scalps. If you want a quality Western then it would be best to skip this thing and check out some John Ford films. This movie here is pretty bad on one hand but when you compare it to other films by director Adamson then you might realize that the man certainly did much worse. I think this film here is a tad bit better than some of the director's other work simply because he pretty much throws everything into this movie. We got the crazy gunfighter, countless crazed Indians, traveling prostitutes, a preacher (played by John Carradine) and countless other characters. None of the actors give what you would call a good performance but at the same time they all fit their roles nicely and are at least entertaining to watch. I thought Dix was mildly interesting in the role of the gunfighter and Scott Brady adds some fun as a rival. John "Bud" Carlos plays the main Indian and while he doesn't look the part he at least makes the role fun. Carradine was obviously picking up a paycheck but he's always fun to watch and especially if you're a fan of his work. No matter what trash a filmmaker would give him to read he'd at least give it his all and that's certainly true here. Adamson really doesn't know how to say no as we get just about everything you'd expect to see in a film like this. We get several knife fights that end in deaths. We get countless gunfights that end in deaths. We have a couple horse chases, a few naughty women, a voice-over from Death himself and of course we got the before mentioned Carradine so what else would you want? As with most Adamson films the major downfall is the horrid pacing, which grows old very quickly and at 90-minutes the thing is simply too long to really be enjoyed.

skullislandsurferdotcom A more suitable title for this exploitation-Western would be DEATH VALLEY, or VALLEY OF DEATH, as a ragtag group consisting of cowboys, hookers and a preacher get picked off by Indians who appear from the rocks whenever the dialog runs its course.Add to this a jazzy game-show score and Death as the narrator, philosophizing why each character must die, sometimes even giving it away but that's alright, because in this doomed situation: death is the main character.A campy yet brilliant low budget Western with some terrific actors like Scott Brady (who dies gallantly), Jim Davis as a scumbag backstabber, and John Carradine as a pistol-wielding preacher, but none work too hard except John Bud Cardos in duo-roles as a friendly Indian and a bad one, the latter battling star (and writer) Robert Dix, firmly strident throughout, in the knife-wielding climax that begins on a cliff top and winds up in a river and down a waterfall: THE QUIET MAN be darned.

MartinHafer This is a terrible film and anyone seeing it might be inclined to think it's one of the worst films that any director could make. Well, that could be true, but not if it's Al Adamson--the jerk that directed this dull film. No, FIVE BLOODY GRAVES is practically a Merchant-Ivory production compared to such Adamson "classics" as FRANKENSTEIN VS. DRACUL A, HORROR OF THE BLOOD MONSTERS and BRAIN OF BLOOD.The film begins with some totally pointless and stupid narration by the Hollywood actor Gene Raymond. This is pretty sad, as in the 1930s, he was a top Hollywood star and the husband of Jeanette MacDonald--here, he plays "Death" with all the subtlety of Grim from "The Adventures of Billy and Mandy" thanks to a dumb script.As far as the rest of the film goes, it's mostly the "bad Indians" killing the innocent (or semi-innocent) Whites. While this plot isn't too unusual, it was unusual for 1970, as by then Westerns had mostly begun to show Indians with a bit more depth--but not here. Yep, they're mostly just blood-crazy savages. In this mix are some incompetent actors and amazingly unattractive actresses (considering they are SUPPOSED to be alluring) and subplots involving rape that seem to have been added only to "spice up the film".The music is odd, as it really doesn't sound very appropriate for the film. I suspect it was lifted from another film but only recognized one small section that was lifted from the old "Star Trek" television show.While none of this is good at all, the worst thing about the film is how gosh-darn dull the whole thing is. There just isn't much to keep your attention (other than a little bit of nudity). Not nearly as silly or stupid as Adamson's horror films--this one is just bad.

zoso68-1 I agree with the other review of Al Adamson movies (in general). I LOVED Dracula VS, Frankenstein, it is true classic of bad/yet good cinema.We all know in many cases Al Filmed things that got released a lot later or (more often) even RECUT into other films of his, which I agree puts him on the same level with Ed Wood.This was just BORING. The monotone voice over of "Death", bad old school documentaries (we all remember those) have better narration.Indians, whose numbers seem to keep going up when the characters are mentioning how many are dying. "Scalpings" that don't even come close to the head. A flaming arrow that burns a house to the ground in no less than 60 secs of film time.Even the appearance of Jim Davis (Who had the only 1/2 way interesting character, as a bad guy) couldn't save this film from it's "Illogical Boredom." It is never made clear why death is even interested in what's going on worth these guys or who he actually wants to win (One scene he says it's the hero, the next someone else.) The tag line for this film says, "Lust-Mad Men and Lawless Women in a Vicious and Sensuous Orgy of Slaughter!" I can say never saw these in this movie. Are they sure they were talking about THIS movie? I say for your money avoid this film and see Al's Dracula Vs. Frankenstein again. It has a lot of the same cast (Jim Davis and John Carradine), is is much BETTER and campier.