Apart from facial cuts and when that guy gets bled to resurrect Rasputin I don't remember seeing any blood from guns or knife wounds. It was a little distracting!
Its the American $hithead who makes tricks with bricks!
According to the trivia section:
The filmmakers decided not to make the film too bloody so as to avoid an R-rating and thought of things they could substitute for the blood. While filming the fight between Hellboy and the monster in front of the people in the subway, actor Ron Perlman suggested that Hellboy could grab a gumball machine and start beating the monster over the head with it, with the flying gumballs standing in for the blood. Instead, Hellboy rips a payphone off the wall and beats the monster over the head with the phone, with the coins that go flying out standing in for the blood.
"DIABEETUSS."-Wilford Brimley
Well it just looks silly when a bunch of security guards are being sliced and diced by razor sharp blades and there isn't streams of blood flying everywhere.
shareBudget concerns. It had a 66 million budget which was big for an April film especially in 2004. R movies wont make as much. But i'm surprised because the director's cut has more gore but still little blood
shareI think it mainly from the fact that the film didn't need the gore. The final product is a brilliant film.
shareThere was no reason for blood because Guillermo del Toro clearly wanted to share Hellboy with a wide audience. del Toro is not one to shy away from violence, so the fact that there is little blood in the Hellboy films is very intentional. He didn't want them to be like Blade.
"There are times when I look at people and I see nothing worth liking."
I know, but it's very distracting...
shareI agree to disagree. I didn't find it distracting at all.
And FURTHERMORE, this is my signature! SERIOUSLY! Did you think I was still talking about my point?
I am not saying it should have been like Kill Bill, but I think it would look better if after a lot of slicing and dicing there were some blood on the floor afterwards.
shareI understand. I just didn't find it distracting. I thought the lack of blood was somewhat more realistic than the blood fountain most films have.
And FURTHERMORE, this is my signature! SERIOUSLY! Did you think I was still talking about my point?
Every scene with the assassin guy and his blades was highly distracting to me, I am not one for buckets of blood and gore but I'd like stylized violence to be realistic enough that I can go with the flow and not think "What the hell, they aren't even cut at all!" The museum scene was bad but when Clay is killed in the sewer and stabbed repeatedly, at close contact, he falls to the ground and we see his spotless, white shirt. LOL. I get not wanting to alienate a big part of your potential audience but broadcast television gets away with all kinds of gore, they could have at least put a few drops of blood here and there.
____
"No! He is imprinted on you like a gay duckling. If you don't wean him off you slowly, he'll die."