I never saw the original "Bloodthirst" so when I popped "Bloodthirst 2: Revenge of the Chupacabras" (2005) into my DVD player I was assuming I was getting something along the made-for-TV quality of 2005's "Chupacabra Terror" (aka "Chupacabra: Dark Seas"), but, no, "Bloodthirst 2" is so ultra-poverty-row that it makes "Chupacabra Terror" seem like a major blockbuster. To compare exact figures, "Chupacabra Terror" cost $1.2 million to make while "Bloodthirst 2" cost only $15 thousand. Needless to say, calling "Bloodthirst 2" a low-budget film gives low-budget films a bad name.The non-existent budget can be seen in everything -- poor lighting, poor acting, poor props, poor "score," poor cgi monster, etc. For example, the "score" sounds like someone plucking away at his brother's Casio keyboard in the next room and the creature will make you bust out laughing, especially when you see it walking.The story starts out extremely convoluted but gets slightly interesting if you can adjust to the no-budget format and stay with the story past the first half hour (remember, I said "slightly interesting"). There's some shady goings-on at a castle-like asylum, a kidnapped girl & her inept kidnappers, a priest helping a couple of Hispanics who think they saw the devil, a detective & others looking for the young lass, campers getting killed, an abandoned mine and a mysterious shed & cabin in the woods. All these story facets were shot outside of Sacramento, CA, including Ione and El Dorado & Placer counties.Although quality-wise "Bloodthirst 2" is on the level of "Plan 9" and even worse than "Yeti: Curse of the Snow Demon," I'm giving it 3.5/10 Stars for a handful of positives:It IS so bad it's entertaining. My wife & I had some good laughs watching it. - Megan Welch plays the kidnapped girl and she's a quality cutie; she even has a decent bikini scene at the beach. - There's a cool metal song played during the end credits, "Mortal Despair" by Dan Mumm's band (at the time) Mortal Despair. Although the production is of demo quality the song itself is actually good, that is, if you're into this type of music; the lyrics reflect a young man's grief after the death of his beloved. It's kind of moving, really. - I enjoyed the Big Valley, CA, locations. - The film is curious and makes one wonder who or why anyone would come up with such a tangled, bizarre plot and actually think it's good enough to make into a movie. And then you wonder about the "actors" and how the flick ever got a decent DVD release. It's bewildering. - There's a 10-minute "Making Of" documentary that's entertaining and helps answer some questions.The runtime is 88 minutes.FINAL SAY: I don't recommend this movie unless the positives noted above trip your trigger. Surprisingly, I'm glad I watched it and own it, but -- other than the reasons cited -- it's hard to express why, except perhaps because it's interesting to observe the work of an amateur filmmaker -- direction, sequencing, choice of locations, props, etc.GRADE: D

I asked myself why, for what seemed like the first two thirds of this movie there were no chupacabras. Then I saw possibly the cheapest CGI I have ever seen and realized why. This movie was terrible. It was totally incomprehensible, I had no idea what the characters's names were, who they were, and I'm pretty sure the plot went back in time which made no sense. Add to that mix, sterile wooden acting, a senseless plot and unlikable characters and you have a hot mess. The chupacabra was utterly laughable, looked familiar if anyone has seen the also terrible flick "Demon Island". I had at least three serious laugh out loud moments, but it did not redeem this movie for this connoisseur of ENJOYABLE movie trash. This was just... awful.

Voting for this movie is difficult as it is one of the worst filmed movies I've watched. Poor lighting. Poor Acting. Poor props. Poor continuity. It really has no quality in it what so ever. While it was one of the worst constructed movies I've seen, it is no where close to the worst/least entertaining movies I've watched (that award would go to "Ancient Warriors" or "Carnivore"). I'm actually glad I watched it and I enjoyed it over all. My enjoyment mainly did come from wanting to see what dumb thing would happen next and to see how the completely patch work story would turn out. That said the pacing was decent and boredom never occurred which is uncommon for ultra low budget movies. Either the people that made this movie were completely incompetent or they are masters of acting incompetent. I vote for the second option so I don't feel bad for enjoying watching someone completely fail. If you are used to bad movies watch it with a friend and have a good laugh.

you know those scary movies that you rent and make fun of with friends? well this was a movie we picked out for that. but when we started watching, we realized there was no need to make fun of it, it did that by itself. all 6 of us who were watching were crying, tears streaming down our eyes we were laughing so hard at it. from what i got out of it, there was a girl who was kidnapped, and is trying to be rescued while the chupacabra is running rampant around the forest. i believe this is the worst film i have ever seen in my life, but if you're looking for good chuckle with some other horror buffs, check out this movie