Underworld: Blood Wars (2016)

"The next installment in the blockbuster franchise, UNDERWORLD: BLOOD WARS follows Vampire death dealer, Selene (Kate Beckinsale) as she fends off brutal attacks from both the Lycan clan and the Vampire faction that betrayed her. With her only allies, David (Theo James) and his father Thomas (Charles Dance), she must stop the eternal war between Lycans and Vampires, even if it means she has to make the ultimate sacrifice."

Considering that I've already bitched and whined as much as is humanly possible about how disappointing this entire series of "black and blue films" is overall, all I'm really doing by reviewing "Blood Wars" is repeating what I said about "Underworld: Awakening" four years ago but with a few extra names dropped in. Sadly, I've watched these movies get worse with every sequel (or prequel), and I'd almost forgotten what happened in the last one until I read my own review.

Suffice it to say that with a running time of just over an hour and 20 minutes (including 4 minutes of recaps at the start and several more minutes of flashbacks scattered throughout), there isn't a lot of anything new here. It's already obvious that it's not going to be the last of the "Underworld" series, but it's easily the weakest so far and reeks of being another half-arsed filler. "Underworld" really should have been a TV series after the first theatrical release if this is the way they are going to play it.

Obviously, Kate Beckinsale looks fantastic again. Also of note is Lara Pulver as Semira. She looks like a more perfect version of a young Sigourney Weaver from certain angles, but occasionally she has the air of Eva Green about her too.

It's almost the same deal with Theo James who reminds me of a younger Julian McMahon, Bradley James who looks like Mads Mikkelsen playing Le Chiffre in "Casino Royale", and James Faulkner who resembles Albert Finney way too much. Maybe the casting director thought they were trying to make a lookalike compendium of the latest James Bond films because that's what they've ended up with, give or take a few werewolves and vampires.

Whatever the case, the plot is weak, characters aren't given enough time to develop, and every slow scene seems to be designed as a hindrance rather than an attempt to progress the story. Consequently, if you only see the last 5 minutes, it will be enough to prepare you for the next installment, because the padded action sequences are nothing memorable either. A couple of important characters are completely wasted, but I'll say no more than that. Maybe it's an intentional contempt for the audience, or maybe it's just inept filmmaking, I'll let you decide for yourself.

Although the choreography improves later on, the majority of the action scenes are little more than a bunch of extras who no one cares about getting confusingly slaughtered in the background to the even more confusing duels between the main protagonists. There's never any sense of threat or danger involved due to none of the characters having enough screen time for you to get to know much about them.

The be all and end all of this "Underworld" movie is that it seems to only exist for completists and fans who will buy it anyway. If you haven't seen any of the others, you won't know what to make of it, who anyone is, or why anything is happening, and even with prior knowledge, "Underworld: Blood Wars" will still be very disappointing.

Already showing in Europe since the start of December, American audiences will have to wait until January for the theatrical release. For those who are wise to these things, the fact that it's a "January movie" says it all.

Nightlife (1989)

"A beautiful female vampire awakens after a hundred years of slumber to find herself in modern-day Mexico City, in this tongue-in-cheek thriller from director Daniel Taplitz."

Not to be confused with the zombie-comedy "Night Life" (with a two word title) from the same year, "Nightlife" is a made-for-TV vampire-comedy starring Maryam d'Abo, Ben Cross, and Keith Szarabajka.

As far as I know, "Nightlife" is not available on DVD, and although you will find it to watch online in all the usual places, the VHS version has become ridiculously expensive. For a low-budget TV movie which is only slightly above average, the price has obviously been driven up by VHS collectors rather than vampire movie fans. Having said that, there's still a lot to like about "Nightlife".

Dealing with the most obvious thing first, "Nightlife" has Maryam d'Abo in it only two years after her breakthrough role as a Bond-girl in "The Living Daylights". Although I don't have a "thing" for her, many people do, and she's certainly very attractive as the vampire Angelique.

"She's in better condition than my wife!"

The coincidence that there's also an Angelique (played by Lysette Anthony) in "Dark Shadows", and Ben Cross went on to play another vampire, namely Barnabas Collins, in the same 1991 TV series, won't be wasted on collectors of such trivia or vampire aficionados. As Vlad (no originality there!), Ben Cross delivers an often menacing and scenery-chewing performance, which clearly got him noticed and typecast as another vampire later.

Because "Nightlife" is a romantic-comedy at its core, Keith Szarabajka, who I've occasionally confused with a young Nick Nolte or even John Heard, plays Dr. David Zuckerman in a traditional yet occasionally comedic manner as he falls in love with his vampire patient. While not the most charismatic or heroic actor in the world (although he was great in "The Equalizer" TV series), he suits the part, and his chemistry with Maryam d'Abo mostly works.

Blurry VHS makes everyone look younger.

Having mentioned John Heard, "Nightlife" has a noticeable similarity to "Cat People" (1982), especially the relationship between Oliver Yates (John Heard) and Irena Gallier (Nastassja Kinski). Just replace Paul Gallier (Malcolm McDowell) with Ben Cross, and the "eternal triangle" is complete. I'm not saying that anyone copied anyone else here. The sexual rivalry is simply a standard element of most "rom-coms".

As a PG-13 rated vampire movie, "Nightlife" doesn't have a lot of blood, and its comedy is subdued enough to cause the drama to be slightly more serious than it should be. Glenn Shadix from "Beetlejuice" (1988) turns up as an unnamed vampire, Camille Saviola gives an over-the-top performance as Angelique's maid Rosa Mercedes, and there are a couple of witty lines, but there's nothing which will make anyone laugh out loud. I think the lack of comedy works in this movie's favour, however, and makes it a lot more palatable for those of us who don't like horror-comedies.

There's not much else to say about "Nightlife" other than it was filmed on location in Mexico City. It doesn't have many sets (and the few it does have are a bit sparse), some of the camerawork is dodgy, and the "I Put a Spell on You" song by Jay Hawkins is overused. Apart from those minor quibbles, it's fine.

With my rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia firmly in place, I'm going to rate "Nightlife' slightly higher than most people would. "Nightlife" was one of the first vampire movies which I reviewed for a magazine many years ago, and I've enjoyed it watching it again.

Byzantium (2012)

"Residents of a coastal town learn, with deathly consequences, the secret shared by the two mysterious women who have sought shelter at a local resort."

It looks as if the tiny pool of new horror movies has dried-up again for this year, so I've decided to start rewatching the older ones as and when they appear on Netflix. I have no idea why. I'm not even "into" horror movies anymore, but I keep on backsliding when I'm bored.

At least the choice of things to watch is slightly better than when I used to write my "Crap I've Watched on Netflix" posts, but I'm still not saying that the very small selection of horror movies available on Netflix is particularly great. This month's biggest new addition to Netflix is, as you must realise, Neil Jordan's "Byzantium".

As some people will be watching and reviewing "Byzantium" for the very first time, I thought that I should finally write something about it here too. It's not that I haven't reviewed it before, but my critique was only two or three sentences on another site which no longer exists. Back then, I honestly thought that I'd spent more time on my review than the movie actually deserved, and I'm sure that I'm not going to say anything more informative about "Byzantium" now either.

Although I've recently seen a certain "critic" (who I have zero respect for) write that it's impossible to "hate" a movie, I'm pretty sure that I actually do hate "Byzantium". It's not just a case of "disliking it intensely" either. I loathe nearly every pretentious frame of "Byzantium" in its overly long running time apart from the sexier bits with Gemma Arterton.

Easily the best part of "Byzantium".

Yes, there really is only one good reason to ever rent or buy this movie, and it's simply to ogle Gemma Arterton channelling Kat Slater from "Eastenders" as she plays a vampire. Gemma's sexy performance as Clara, plus her deliciously violent and bloody cheesewire decapitation of a very arrogant character early on, are the only truly memorable parts of "Byzantium" for me.

Of course, "Byzantium" might be remembered by some people for being two hours of tedious yet undeniably beautiful camerawork. Nobody sane can deny that Neil Jordon's desire to make every cinematic shot equally valid as a still picture is admirable, except when that technique is clearly overused and stifles the flow of the narrative. The same thing happened recently with "It Follows" (2014), and there have been several more "slow burn" products which have made me wonder if horror directors are intentionally trying to bore their audiences to death nowadays instead of scaring them.

"Byzantium" should, however, be even more remembered for Caleb Landry Jones mumbling his lines so unintelligibly that you have to switch the subtitles on to understand what he says. Any clues as to what accent he's meant to be doing hinge around the facts that he's a Texan in real life and his Frank character has certain health problems and "issues", but it's still no excuse for such a bizarre performance. If it's any consolation, I thought that he sounded Irish.

Once again, a very tiny minority who nobody takes seriously anymore might rave about the blatant misogyny or misandry (depending on which side of the SJW fence they sit) in "Byzantium", but I won't. Make no mistake about it though, "Byzantium" is equally full of both. It's certainly not subtext here either but right in your face!

Having said that, "Byzantium" not only summarises the most common attitudes in its historically accurate depictions of the genders in certain time periods, but give or take the fantasy elements, it contains a fairly accurate depiction of how some people act in the present day. Outside of this imaginary world of the internet where he or she who shouts loudest and most often is the one who gets noticed, there's a gritty reality which isn't pleasant, and you'd only be deluding yourself to think otherwise.

Eleanor is an even more depressed teenager than Bella.

As usual, I have no time for that pseudo-philosphical and political bullshit. I only watch movies for the storytelling. To me, "Byzantium" is just another plodding vampire story where humans are considered second-class citizens and a source of food for the immortals. It's this general misanthropy of "Byzantium" which is the point that all those "reviewers with agendas" are missing.

Similarly to "Interview with the Vampire" (1994) which was also directed by Neil Jordan, and just like in Anne Rice's other novels, to be a vampire is a reward. To be mortal is only to suffer and be used until your purpose is served. In the midst of this, at least Clara thanks the lorry driver who gives her and daughter a lift, but underneath her facade, she's still a cunning, manipulative user and a deadly predator who only does things for her own benefit and personal safety at the end of the day.

Rather than providing a counterpoint, Clara's daughter Eleanor (played by the unpronounceably named Saoirse Ronan) is a 200-year-old teenager with nothing inside her but 200 years years of teenage angst, feeling sorry for herself, a holier-than-thou attitude, and general mopiness. She's still a killer though, and no matter how she might legitimise how she selects her victims in her own mind, she doesn't have any discernable conscience about it. In fact, Eleanor truly believes that she's doing her elderly victims a favour. Roll out the pro-euthanasia bandwagon and preach that message in a movie, why don't you? Not to me, you won't, because I'm not listening.

Eleanor is not the most irritating character in "Byzantium" by any means, since that role is well and truly taken by Frank, but I wouldn't want to watch any more of her than this story allows. Eleanor's romantic subplot with Frank is not "a better love story than Twilight" no matter how it brings that meme to mind. The thought of them doing the nasty makes me cringe.

Passive-aggressively bashing Twilight will not make this movie scary.

The smaller but important supporting roles (including Jonny Lee Miller as Ruthven, Sam Riley as Darvell, and Maria Doyle Kennedy as Morag) are extremely well played and provide the gravitas for "Byzantium" which prevents it from being watched on titter alert for at least the first viewing. Noel the hotel owner is as tragically comedic as any Mike Leigh character (mainly because Daniel Mays is recognisable for playing those roles before), and there are some comical scenes—one of them possibly being intentional—even so. As much as I usually hate it when people do it, "Byzantium" can't stand up to repeat viewings without making it a necessity to ridicule every scene mercilessly.

The bottom line is that "Byzantium" is an extremely slow vampire movie, and as much as it attempts to be, it is not some "high art". Credit is due when it tries to ignore the traditional vampire movie tropes and rules (except for one), and it has a decent enough but predictable story if you like vampires. You really can't and shouldn't expect anything else. It's a hundred times more entertaining than "Only Lovers Left Alive" (2013) anyway.

My Top Ten Hallowe'en Horror Films

In previous years, I've gone through just about everything I like to watch during October, but I'm bored with doing that. Every day is Hallowe'en for me to some extent, and there's nothing special about one day compared to any other. Such is the life of a horror movie reviewer.

For the sake of making a definitive list of "must see" horror movies for Hallowe'en, however, here's my top ten. Click the pics to see what I had to say about them before.


1. The Amityville Horror (1979)

As a child of the '70s, I read all the books about Amityville in the years before the movie was made. It's a pity that none of it was true, but "The Amityville Horror" still holds up well. Margot Kidder was gorgeous back in the day.


2. Dracula (1958)

Hammer's best horror movie. Simple as that. Christopher Lee and lots of hot bloofer ladies. Ignore the rubber bats on strings, this is class!


3. The Wicker Man (1973)

You can't have Hallowe'en without recognising its pagan origin, and "The Wicker Man" is my "go to" movie for all things British and pagan. Britt Ekland topless is a bonus.


4. The Legend of Hell House (1973)

I prefer this to "The Haunting" because of Roddy McDowell. He steals the show despite a valiant effort from Pamela Franklin and horny Gayle Hunnicutt. There's a lovely black cat in it too.


5. The Haunting (1963)

A little bit dated now but still creepy. It's the definitive haunted house movie and a certified classic. I would never have known about it if it hadn't been for the late James Herbert talking about it on a Hallowe'en TV show.


6. The Changeling (1980)

This would be higher up the list if it wasn't for the mystery element. I've found that I can only watch it every couple of years because I know the ending too well.


7. The Others (2001)

The twist dooms this movie to being another that's hard to watch more than once, but it's all about Nicole Kidman as perfect eyecandy for me. As a remake of "Voices" (1973), it's a successful upgrade.


8. Lady in White (1988)

It's a supernatural murder-mystery set during Hallowe'en, and that's more than enough to justify it. It's also very well done. Easily Frank LaLoggia's best movie and full of nostalgia for those who like that sort of thing.


9. The Fog (1980)

The prologue with the old captain telling the ghost story by a campfire makes this movie a lot better than it should have been. Sexy Adrienne Barbeau in her lighthouse radio station is the other good reason to watch it. I always fast-forward through the cringeworthy bits with Tom Atkins and Jamie Lee Curtis.


10. Carnival of Souls (1962)

It's really a rip-off of "The Hitch Hiker" episode from "The Twilight Zone", but it's a little bit more adult. Eerie stuff and very accessible since it's in the Public Domain.


What are your Hallowe'en favourites?

Fright Night 2: New Blood (2013)

"By day Gerri Dandridge is a sexy professor, but by night she transforms into a real-life vampire with an unquenchable thirst for human blood. So when a group of high school students travel abroad to study in Romania, they find themselves ensnared in her chilling web of lust and terror."

Er... this new "Fright Night 2" isn't a sequel, it's another remake! Should I call it a "requel" or a "semake"? Naw, I'll just call it "another piece of straight-to-DVD crap" because that's exactly what it is.

Directed by Eduardo Rodriguez who made "Curandero" (2005), and starring a load of Brits and Romanians who nobody has heard of before, this sequel in name only isn't that bad in places, but it's still not very good overall. It's better than the the 2011 remake (which I refuse to review) and the real "Fright Night Part 2" (1988), but it's a lot less entertaining than the first "Fright Night" (1985). Having said that, I'm not a big fan of that movie either.

The new Gerri Dandridge is played by Jamie Murray, aka the hot chick from "Devil's Playground" (2010) and "Botched" (2007), but I didn't recognise her until I looked up the cast list. It's been far too long since I reviewed her previous movies, and she hasn't cropped up in anything else that I've seen until now.

The benefit of keeping a blog, of course, is being able to look up such details and make myself look like an idiot, but in my defence, even someone with an enormous brain like mine can't be expected to remember absolutely everything about the thousands of movies which have come and gone in the last three years. "Dexter" and "Warehouse 13" fans on the IMDb seem to know all about Jamie Murray for some reason, but I've never watched an episode of either TV series in my life and have no intention of doing so. She's an acceptable vampiress in "Fright Night 2", but it's due to her model looks and Kelly LeBrock accent rather than her acting.

Nice teeth!

The second major difference is that this "Fright Night 2" is full of boobs. Not just one or two boobs, but lots and lots of boobs! Combine them with some lesbian canoodling, a visit to a stripclub, bathfuls (or indoor swimming pools) of blood, and an animated comic strip, and it's got everything today's teenagers could want, right? Who cares that you've got Brits with fake American accents (that are probably looped), a load of crappy CGI, nobody you could give a damn about, and a completely unoriginal story? None of that matters. The morons will see the title on the DVD and rent or buy it anyway, won't they? That's what 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment are hoping will happen.

In its favour, "Fright Night 2: New Blood" at least attempts to put a new spin on things by taking everything to Romania. Why? Probably because it's traditional to set vampire movies in Romania, and it's a lot cheaper to film there! It also brings Countess Elizabeth Báthory into the story and gives her bat-like sonar, which I don't think I've ever seen in a vampire movie before. I mean, obviously I've seen "Countess Dracula" (1971) and other movies with that character in, but the sonar thing is a novelty.

Far less entertaining is the new Peter Vincent, played by Sean Power, who is now a "monster hunter" in some bogus reality TV show rather than a horror host or even a magician. Mercifully, he doesn't have much time on screen. In comparison, David Tennant wasn't that bad. Okay, he was still awful, but he just wasn't as bad as this drunken oaf. Sean Power (who has a great name, by the way) is only in this movie for the sake of having a Peter Vincent of some kind, and doesn't do anything important one way or another. He doesn't even kill Evil Ed!

British nerds playing American nerds.

It's not really worth mentioning the new Evil Ed except to say that the kid behaves like such a dick that I'm surprised Stephen Geoffreys' bat-sonar (i.e. gaydar) wasn't buzzing! He almost makes the new Charley Brewster look mature! Charley Brewster is still a horrible character though and his girlfriend Amy isn't any better. I couldn't care less what the names of the actors are who played them as I don't expect they'll be in anything else but British soap operas which I'll never see.

As much as I can usually find something of merit in any vampire movie, I had quite a struggle with this one. It's another sign of how creatively dead the American horror industry has become. "Fright Night 2: New Blood" is simply a pointless and unnecessary third remake disguised as a sequel to a remake which nobody wanted. Sadly, I expect there'll be a fourth one eventually too.

Phobia (2013)

"In 1885, a female doctor helping a group of people with their phobias becomes embroiled in a murder mystery surrounding a patient that may or may not be a vampire."

What the Hell did I just watch? It's not often that a movie is so soulless and ineptly made that it leaves me speechless, but this is one of those times. After "Phobia" ended, I sat staring at the blank page on my computer screen for three hours afterwards waiting for the neurons in my brain to reconnect, and then I had to go to bed for a long depression nap before I could bear thinking about it again.

Even though it's only 90 minutes long, "Phobia" feels several times longer because of how dialogue heavy and boring it is. When I say boring, I mean really boring in the way that watching an amateur dramatics production or a high school play is boring. Actually, no, this is worse than either of those; "Phobia" is seven-year-olds-performing-a-nativity-play-boring but in a foreign language which you don't understand. I was familiar with the subject matter, I knew what was intended, but I couldn't process it because it was so shit.

How any movie could be both overwritten and overacted but contain characters so underdeveloped at the same time is a mystery to me, although I'd hazard a guess that it must take some severely misplaced genius to create such a thing and a lot of luck to get it distributed. Maybe not so much luck since "Phobia" is only another one of many Gravitas Ventures VOD movies which I've written off this year, but still... I can't even... I don't know... my head is full of FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUU! Sorry for writing like a fifteen-year-old, but honestly, this movie was probably written by a teenager too. With no nudity, swearing, or anything more gory than you'd see in an episode of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer", it's definitely PG-13 all the way, and it's impossible to call it horror with a straight face.

She's dressed as a man, but he's wearing a fake beard. WTF?

If you can concentrate on anything in the first half-hour without being distracted by Erica Leerhsen's thumbsucker-mouth which stands out more because she's supposed to be disguised as a man (à la "Yentl") then you're a slightly better person than me. But if you don't wonder why she still wears a girl's wig, or notice that Sigmund Freud (played by Matt Moore) has a ridiculous fake beard, there's no hope for you as a movie critic. I know this is a low-budget B movie of sorts, but what the bloody Hell were they thinking?

Also how can anyone hire Eric Leerhsen—the only girl in "Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2" (2000) who gets naked—and not ask her to get naked again? Wouldn't a clichéd and gratuitous nude shower/bath scene being overlooked by another character make a better reveal of her gender than removing a stupid black wig which doesn't match her ginger eyebrows? It's not as if you can't see that she's a woman anyway, but... oh my God!

Bearing in mind that director Jon Keeyes is only a couple of weeks younger than me and hasn't directed anything worthwhile other than "American Nightmare" (2002), a few shorts, and a couple of horror TV shows for kids, he should still know better. Exactly what age group is "Phobia" intended for? It's too talky for kids and too tame for adults. And what's with all the badly spoken French with subtitles? It's distancing, alienating, and irritating. It certainly doesn't make the period setting more realistic.

You just have to have a bald Nosferatu guy called Guy!

Once there are no more scenes of Americans butchering the French language, things improve slightly, but just to redress the balance towards crap again, half of them now need to have fake Romanian accents which are more like Russian. Has no one ever heard a Romanian speak before? They usually sound Latin (for obvious reasons including Romanian being a Romance language) not Russian! Jesus wept! And was it really necessary to have a bald-headed Nosferatu lookalike just so that everyone knows that this is a vampire movie? Seriously?

Beautiful Tiffany Lonsdale spices the eyecandy up a bit as bald Guy's sister with claustrophobia, but the lack of any family resemblance is uncanny. She doesn't even look like anyone in the family portraits or her cousin Val Drakul! Maybe she was adopted or a lusty milkman paid her mother a visit? Casting decisions were clearly not a strong point, so it's probably better to not overthink these things.

At least everything improves considerably after the location change from Paris to California (although it's really Texas). Once Erica Leerhsen starts wearing big Victorian dresses, lets her hair out, puts on some lipstick, and looks like a woman again, she's actually quite pretty. She's still not believable as a doctor, and her relationship with Nicholas Brendon lookalike Chase Ryan Jeffery lacks chemistry, but to give credit where it's due, her performance gets much better as the story progresses. The fact that Dr. Lesley doesn't get the chance to cure her patients' phobias is relatively unimportant.

Stephanie Rhodes (the Camp Counselor in the "Friday the 13th" remake) steals the show completely in her scenes as sexy Elizabeth, the ward of agoraphobic Annabel Lee (Carolyn Wickwire), but not enough is made of her to be memorable overall. Without any eroticism or some desperately needed sex scenes, why even add a lesbian facet to Elizabeth's character? What's the point? Again, who are the target audience?

The saddest thing is that everyone in "Phobia" can act! They've all been in other things before, whether TV shows or movies, and they don't disgrace themselves once you take into account what they had to work with. The fault rests almost entirely with the script despite annoying background music which outstays its welcome, lethargic pacing, cheap-looking camerawork, and a lot of staginess which doesn't help. Whatever clever period mystery Anne Gibson may have thought she was creating, it would have been better as a pulp YA novel than a movie. To say that "Phobia" is reminiscent of Kim Newman would be an insult more than a compliment, however, since I can't stand that grinnygog or his books.

Okay, she does look a bit better in a dress.

On the plus side, the way the use of hypnotism and vampires are combined into a mystery seems to be fairly original. If my mind wasn't still numb, I'm sure that I could find better examples than "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" or "The Vampire Lovers" to prove myself wrong, but as all roads lead back to Hammer and Bram Stoker's "Dracula", I'm positive that there's nothing new here other than the way it's presented. A couple of homages to Edgar Allan Poe are harmless additions.

Before I wrap this up, I have to mention the effects. Apart from the wig and beard fiasco, the make-up is generally good and a couple of torn throats look the part. Inevitably, there are some very cheap "Buffy-esque" CGI effects near the end which place this movie in the "Syfy Original wannabe" category and will doom it to appearing in Echo Bridge or Mill Creek multipacks one day, but they do provide some horror action. I doubt that "Phobia" will ever been shown on TV unless Chiller (or Zone Horror/The Horror Channel in the UK) get it for next to nothing though.

According to the IMDb, the ensemble cast from "Phobia" is due to reappear in "The Harrowing" (2014) but with the addition of Debbie Rochon instead of Erica Leerhsen. As I'm done with being a masochist after suffering through this borefest, I think it'll be another good one to miss.

33 horror movies from 2012 which I will never watch

Speaking as someone who tries to watch every horror movie from every subgenre as they become available, there comes a point when the amount left to see is so overwhelming that harsh decisions have to be made about whether they will ever be watched or not.

Sometimes it's the subject matter, sometimes it's the uninspiring artwork and blurb on the DVD—occasionally, it's merely the name of the movie—but every case is assessed individually before I invest my time and money. Due to many years of experience, I can often tell if a movie is going to be a crappy one without even putting the DVD in the player. Mistakes still happen, and some of the slew of shit manages to slip through, but at least they're confined to rentals because I never blind buy.

You can me "narrow minded" if you like, but you'd be wrong. I'm cynical, and I usually do a lot of research before parting with my money. I don't succumb to marketing or peer pressure, so all my movie watching choices are entirely my own. The following, however, are the titles which didn't interest me enough to give them a chance.

Please note that I'm going "old school" with this post. There are no trailers, no pretty pictures, and no Amazon links. I'm just going to write a couple of sentences about each movie to give you a brief insight into how I choose what is worth watching and what isn't. I haven't actually watched even a second of any of these movies, and I never will.


1. 23 Minutes to Sunrise (2012)
Despite having Eric Roberts in it, what looks like a low-budget crime drama set in a diner doesn't appeal to me. The title suggests a vampire movie, but it isn't. It's also a lot more than 23 minutes long.

2. 1920: Evil Returns (2012)
Tempting though it is to watch an Indian version of "The Exorcist", I've done that before with another Hindi movie which I can't remember the name of. It wasn't good. There's novelty value here and a very beautiful actress, but I'll pass.

3. American Horror House (2012)
The SyFy channel's attempt to cash-in on the name of "American Horror Story" suggests that it's about ghosts, but it looks like a TV-rated slasher centred around a University sorority. I suspect it to be yet another load of annoying teenage girls running around and screaming. No, thank you.

4. Bigfoot: The Lost Coast Tapes (2012)
I have no interest in Bigfoot or fake found footage, so this is an easy one to skip. I can imagine that it's all shakycams, some guy in a hairy costume, and everybody will die at the end.

5. Black Forest (2012)
Tinsel Korey, the scarred werewolf-girl from the "Twilight" movies is in this, but so is Ben Cross, and it's another SyFy movie. The blurb says that it's a fantasy set in the Black Forest, Germany, and has something to do with fairytales. If it was about gâteau, I'd be more inclined to watch it.

6. The Caretaker (2012)
A low-budget Australian "cabin in the woods" movie with vampires. That's all the information I need. Vampire kangaroos would be a much better idea.

7. Cockneys vs Zombies (2012)
It's a comedy, so it doesn't matter how many well-known British actors have cameos in it. Also zombies. Ugh! If I was still living in England, and it was shown on a satellite TV channel, I'd probably give it a few minutes just to ogle Michelle Ryan.

8. Community (2012)
Reading between the lines, this may be a British shakycam version of "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" set on a council housing estate. It has Jemma Dallender (the pretty star of the upcoming "I Spit on Your Grave 2") in it, but sadly, it's full of angry chavs as well.

9. Creep Van (2012)
Apparently, this is a low-budget slasher rather than the story of a possessed van. Either way, it sounds boring, and it's bound to look like a YouTube video.

10. Crowsnest (2012)
Canadian found footage about nomadic cannibals in an R.V. attacking a bunch of teenagers. Since it's Canadian, I imagine that the acting will be okay, but the plot will rip-off half a dozen more famous American cannibal movies and slashers.

11. The Dead Want Women (2012)
A Full Moon movie full of pretty girls and Eric Roberts. What could go wrong? I'll wait for it to appear on an Echo Bridge multipack, and then fast forward through it for the nudie bits. Not really.

12. Demon Hunter (2012)
There are so many movies like this in existence that I've probably already seen this under another name. Just different girls to see topless, more no-budget effects, and non-existent "acting" to spoil my day.

13. Donner Pass (2012)
This is bound to end up on Netflix. By not having the service anymore, I can ignore another bunch of pretty "teenagers" getting killed and eaten by cannibals. Strange title though. It makes me think of kebabs.

14. Fetish Dolls Die Laughing (2012)
With a title like that, it reeks of being a no-budget horror-comedy.

15. Freakshow Apocalypse: The Unholy Sideshow (2012)
It's one of those no-budget nasties which is directed by, written by, and stars the same person. I'll bet that it's about a bunch of weird-looking friends with more tattoos than teeth as they try to copy scenes from Rob Zombie videos. If I'm wrong, I don't care.

16. Ghoul (2012)
A made-for-TV clone of "The Goonies" and "The Monster Squad" maybe? Nope. I can't stand horror movies with little kids doing a load of investigating and their uncaring parents who don't believe them.

17. Girls Against Boys (2012)
A rape-revenge drama which might be good, but I've seen far too many rape-revenge dramas over the years. I'd be very surprised if it offers anything better than "I Spit on Your Grave" as it's probably a formulaic clone of the same thing.

18. Grave Encounters 2 (2012)
I didn't watch more than 5 minutes of the first one, so I'm not going to watch an obviously inferior sequel. I hate all those bullshit "Ghost Hunters" TV shows which this is supposed to look like anyway.

19. Haunted High (2012)
Another SyFy movie which I've had no interest in since learning that one of the morbidly obese movie reviewers from YouTube has a part in it. That, and the childish story itself, puts me right off wanting to see a couple of minutes of Charisma Carpenter.

20. Lizzie (2012)
Having seen the TV movie version, "The Legend of Lizzie Borden" (1975), I can't see any way that this could offer anything new.

21. Lost Woods (2012)
Because the title suggests a movie about erectile dysfunction on a porn set, I was intrigued for a few seconds. Finding out that it's about an alien creature, i.e. a guy wearing a bear costume and a "Predator" mask, who chases campers through a forest destroyed those hopes. It's clearly no-budget crap of the highest order.

22. Love Bite (2012)
Supposed to be a romantic-comedy version "The Inbetweeners" with a werewolf. Apart from Jessica Szohr, there doesn't appear to be any good reason to watch this low-budget "An American Werewolf in Paris" clone.

23. Monsters in the Woods (2012)
Yet another one of those "film crew shooting a movie" ones with boobs and blood but no-budget. Normally a good choice for a "Woeful Wednesday" post, but I have my limits.

24. The Mooring (2012)
"Every 40 seconds a person goes missing." And he's getting really sick of it now! It's a handycam "Friday the 13th" clone set in Idaho, so it's girls being chased through the woods by a psycho. Probably has potatoes in it too.

25. Night Claws (2012)
I wanted it to be a movie about cats, but it's another one about Bigfoot. It's distributed by Midnight Releasing, so it's got to be worse than something by The Asylum.

26. No Tell Motel (2012)
I have a horrible feeling that I've already seen this one... about 50 times over and made by other people! It's about a haunted motel, but it's not going to be as even half as good as "The Innkeepers". I was very disappointed by "The Innkeepers", by the way.

27. Parasitic (2012)
A Florida nightclub gets invaded by an alien parasite. Alrighty then, it's low-budget sci-fi/horror. Do not want!

28. Poe (2012)
Either a film about Edgar Allan Poe or something about toilets, right? No such luck. The blurb says it's about a serial-killing cannibal. In other words, this is no-budget Hannibal Lecter.

29. Rise of the Zombies (2012)
The SyFy channel does more zombies. Ethan Suplee (Randy from "My Name is Earl") is in this. I like him, but not more zombies! No more zombies ever!

30. Robin Hood: Ghosts of Sherwood 3D (2012)
Just look at the title! You can probably tell me all the reasons why I wouldn't want to watch this! It's got Tom Savini and Kane Hodder in it too, and we all know what fantastic actors they are.

31. The Sleeper (2012)
Supposedly a "throwback to the '80s"-style slasher where another sorority house is killed off. Why would anyone feel the need to make something like this in a market already saturated by no-budget slashers?

32. Snow White: A Deadly Summer (2012)
The girl on the coverart looks beautiful, but I don't think another movie with Eric Roberts in it is going to be all that great. Added to that, it's a modern interpretation of the famous fairytale, and those really don't work well.

33. Vampireland (AKA The 6th Extinction) (2012)
A no-budget version of "Stake Land". In every conceivable way, NO!


Since half the fun of being a horror movie reviewer is finding things which other people may not have heard of, if you've actually seen any of these movies, feel free to let me know if I did the right thing by not watching them.

We Are the Night (2010)

(AKA "Wir sind die Nacht")



"In Berlin, a cop closes in on an all-female vampire trio who just took in a new member, Lena."

Actually, the synopis for this movie would be better written as: "A blonde MILF, a hot brunette, and a cute brunette who are all fauxminist German vampires adopt a much plainer ginger one. A cop who wants to arrest Ginger and her murderous new companions also wants to be her boyfriend. Blondie has an unrequited lesbian crush on Ginger. Much merriment ensues until each vampire dies."

In a nutshell, that's all there is to "We Are the Night". It's just like every other vampire movie ever made but with most of its inspiration coming from "Near Dark" (1987) and a couple of scenes from "Night of the Comet" (1984). Wags might refer to it as "The Lost Girls" one day, even though it doesn't homage "The Lost Boys" (1987) in any way except for being about vampires and being very '80s in all but setting. Some people might see a lick of "The Craft" (1996) about it too, but I didn't.

"We Are the Night" isn't a totally boring movie despite having hardly any kills or sexiness; it's just generic and horribly dubbed (if you only have that version). There are a lot of "Woohoo! Girl Power!" moments for the man-hating idiots out there who would be better off learning how to apply make-up or cook than wasting their time reviewing horror movies, but obviously none of these things did anything for me. I want horror from my horror movies!

"I'll tell you what I want, what I really, really want."

Jumping out of aeroplanea without a parachute, going to nightclubs, upsetting customers in posh restaurants, stealing high-end sports cars and driving them badly, doing late night shopping in closed department stores, or trespassing in other people's swimming pools might be fun to see in a movie if you're a teenager, but my list of what these vampire chicks do sounds a lot more exciting than what's shown on screen. It must be incredibly boring to be vampire, if that's all you can do. So says a man who spends his nights watching crappy horror movies like this and blogging about them. Oh my God, my life sucks as much as theirs!

The only part of this movie which I liked was the brunette who's supposed to have been a silent movie star before being turned. She's incredibly hot and vicious with it! I think her character is called Charlotte, although it could be different in the German language version for all I know. Obviously, I had to look up that she's played by Jennifer Ulrich because I've never seen of the actresses or actors in "We Are the Night" before and probably won't see them in anything else in the very near future either. Look, it's German, and I don't watch many German movies due to the fact that they hardly make horror movies anymore, okay?

As a vampire flick with four alternative endings and not one good one, give or take the opening scene, "We Are the Night" makes a far better poster than a movie.

Sleep all day. Dance and go shopping all night. It's fun to be a vampire.

Dracula 3D (2012)

I've been in two minds about writing anything about Dario Argento's "Dracula 3D" not because I'm a known hater of everything Dario Argento has ever produced apart from "Mother of Tears" (and Asia) but because everyone else in the horror movie reviewing universe has already been as negative as humanly possible about this film before me.

It's not that I usually care about being late in the game when it comes to movie reviews—I'm known for writing about what I want when I want—but this time it's annoyed me even more than having to put a lazy emdash parenthesis in the middle of my sentence. Really, what's left to say about "Dracula 3D" that hasn't been said hundreds of times before? Nothing. We all know that "Dracula 3D" is a terrible movie with mostly horrible performances, bad dubbing, cheap CGI, rushed action scenes, and no originality whatsoever other than a "WTF" moment caused by a giant praying mantis.

What makes everything worse is that every review reads like a carbon copy of the same thing. It's as if someone gave out a press pack before "Dracula 3D" was even released and said, "There ya go, have at it! Hate away!" Judging by the number of reviews which came out before any normal person had access to the movie, I wouldn't be surprised if that very thing happened either.

Yes, I know that the big name horror sites often get advance screenings and a ton of promotional goodies that the independent bloggers are unlikely to see, but even the little guys were hating "Dracula 3D" before it was available to the general public. That tells me two things: 1. They didn't even watch the film, and 2. They lazily copied what the "big names" had to say. While a few may have bothered to watch the trailer, the whole thing reeks of "Rex Reed Syndrome".

So just to be different and a total contrarian, I'm going to tell you what I liked about "Dracula 3D" based on watching it half a dozen times in its entirety. It will surprise you to know that, yes, I liked it. I don't think it's the greatest version of "Dracula" ever made or anything ridiculous like that, but it's not as bad as the "critics" would have you believe. Well, except for the giant praying mantis and other CGI of course.

The first thing that I noticed was how minimalist the set decoration was. While not exactly "Dogville", there's very little in the way of props which aren't necessary to the action. Now, while some people would blame that on the budget, it's clearly intentional. With a budget of over $5,000,000, it's not as if Dario Argento couldn't afford furniture or ornaments, he just decided not to clutter up the scenes with them.

I never thought I'd ever defend a Dario Argento movie, but stuff like this goes back to the "Chekhov's Gun" rule and shows that the director actually knows what he's doing. You can't write Dario Argento off as some hack who hastily threw everything together with the intention of making a bad movie. If you watch closely, you'll even see that more props and set dressing are added as the film progresses. Sometimes the reverse is true too. The effect is like a line drawing being filled in with more details the more you look at it or having unnecessary bits rubbed out. I'd say that was pretty damned clever.

Another criticism is that Dario Argento has too much nudity in this movie compared to his others, but I fail to see how that is a problem especially given that the source material is supposed to a analogous to sexual promiscuity in the first place. Although that oversimplifies the themes used in Bram Stoker's novel, the sexual and erotic nature of the story is one thing which every filmmaker has picked up on over the years. So what's the problem? Did people not find Miriam Giovanelli arousing as Tania? Or was it just that Dario filmed his daughter Asia naked in some perceived to be pervy way? We're talking about professionals here making a professional movie. In the case of Asia being filmed by her father, who's to say that he was even on set at the time? Let's face it, as someone who changed Asia's diapers when she was a baby, it's not as if Dario hasn't seen his own daughter nude before. There's no perversion here, just European arty types who aren't ashamed of their own bodies. Why should they be? It's how God created us! Anything else that you read into those few seconds of film are just your own sick fantasies.

The thing is, I thoroughly appreciate both Miriam Giovanelli and Asia Argento getting naked in "Dracula 3D". Both are incredibly gorgeous women although Asia does sometimes look a lot like her dad facially and it's slightly off-putting. The tease of nudity was always in the Hammer movies which "Dracula 3D" liberally homages, but it's well and truly realised here.

Yes, that's a segue (as I continue to write in a self-conscious and self-referential way just because I can) to all the other homages in "Dracula 3D". Of course the new Dracula (Thomas Kretschmann) dresses like Max Schreck in "Nosferatu" (1922), spouts the "Listen to the children of the night..." line from the 1931 adaptation, and crawls up the wall like Christopher Lee in "Scars of Dracula" (1970), so what? It's all inspired by Stoker. How is that anything to get bent out of shape over? Thomas Kretschmann's acting isn't exactly lousy, and the big action scene where he takes out a room full of peasants is absolutely fantastic. Even the hypocritical, prudish Americans should be appeased by the violence and gore which they find more acceptable than the horror of seeing a nipple or two.

People really don't like the love story aspect of "Dracula 3D", which is a shame since Francis Ford Coppola did well out of it. Again, Dario Argento is merely homaging all the other movie versions of "Dracula" which incorporated the same un-Stokerish plot. Thus, while not being the "definitive version" of Bram Stoker's "Dracula", "Dracula 3D" certainly ties up all the movie adaptations well enough.

Dracula fans have always hoped that someone will make a mini-series several days long which really puts the novel to bed once and for all, but it's not likely to happen any time soon. I can't fault Dario Argento for not overreaching himself here either. He's just not the right kind of director for an intrically detailed adaptation of a Victorian novel which nobody reads anymore. But why then choose to remake "Dracula" which is already the most remade horror story of all time? The answer is complicated, but I'll try to explain my theory at the end of this post.

What I enjoyed most about "Dracula 3D" was the languid pace which is so European and perfect for a vampire movie. I felt pleasantly relaxed and was able to get immersed in what little atmosphere there was. The lack of atmosphere is possibly my main criticism of the movie since it's neither Hammer-esque nor typically Argento. The CGI is weird and jarring although it fits as a new level of Dario Argento "surrealism". The correct interpretion of the giant praying mantis is to see it as an extension of Dario Argento's nightmare style. Imagine, if you will, that "Dracula 3D" is a cheese-induced dream of all the Dracula movies you've ever seen, and you can't dismiss it so easily.

The bad performances including Unax Ugalde's and Marta Gastini's woodenness, Rutger Hauer only stopping short of doing his trademark rolling of his eyes almost out of his head and back in again, every bit of bad dubbing, cheap CGI, the 3D gimmick, and fight scenes over before they properly begin, all point to Dario Argento making an intentional metamovie of a Dracula movie fuelled nightmare in the mind of one of today's typical 12-year-olds rather than the 12-year-old that the director once was himself. Dario Argento uses "Dracula 3D" to criticise contemporary horror movies. This is beyond Wes Craven's dated "meta" abominations for trendy teenagers by miles.

It didn't quite work, but I got what Dario Argento was trying to do here. I enjoyed it. I don't think it was an entirely sensible decision to get so radically experimental again at the end of his career or to alienate his dopey fantards who are still stuck in the '70s and '80s, but Dario has earned a lot more of my respect for doing this (and for making "Mother of Tears") than I ever would have given him before. I probably can't explain why as well as I could because there's always the danger of reading too much into a movie which was never intended, and I'm holding some things back in case I end up looking like a total fool when Dario Argento reveals that he just made a bad film because he couldn't be bothered to make a good one, yet the evidence of the movie makes me willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

If you have time, I suggest you all watch "Dracula 3D" again and think about what you're seeing. This isn't a product to be dismissed like the hobby horror DVD-Rs which get shoved in your faces at conventions. Like it or not, Dario Argento doesn't make "products"; he's an auteur. Should you choose to accept it, there's a message here about the nature of horror movies, remakes, and the state of the younger generation's levels of artistic appreciation from an old man's perspective.

"Dracula 3D" is the quintessential metamovie of every Dracula movie that you've ever seen before and is meant to be viewed as a half-remembered nightmare of a dissatisfied modern horror fan. To see it as anything else completely misses the point.

The Midnight Horror Collection: 8 Movie Pack (Vol. 1)

Although a lot of these movies have been published before in other Echo Bridge Home Entertainment packs, I believe that this was the first of their "Midnight Horror" collections. I bought it for the full $5 price from Wal-mart just to have a DVD copy of "Meridian" (known in the UK as "Phantoms"). Getting "Below" and several lesser known Full Moon movies was simply a bonus.

The thing is that even though I've had the pack for almost two years, I hadn't watched any of the newer Full Moon movies or other low-budget nasties until today.

Overall, I had a good time watching it. While not every movie in the pack is good, it's definitely worth the money.


Prom Night (1980)

"Four seniors, who all share the same terrible secret, are stalked by a vengeful axe-wielding killer on Prom Night."

You all know this one so I'm not going to re-review it.

The ratio is the old fullscreen 4:3 format, and it's a bit dark, but "Prom Night" isn't a bad movie. I've never really raved about it though and used to think it was boring. It's all about the nostalgia for some people.


Below (2002)

"A submarine picks up three survivors of a U-boat attack but these visitors seem to spark a series of chilling, otherworldly occurrences."

I've reviewed "Below" already too, and it's an okay movie. I liked it more when I first saw it on TV and didn't notice some of its more glaringly lower-budget qualities until I watched it again.

At the end of the day, it's just another Miramax/Dimension Films horror with a fairly decent cast and production values.


I Am Omega (2007)

"The lone survivor of a deadly plague is doomed to an eternal battle with the mutant creatures that now control the Earth."

Something from The Asylum to cash-in on "I Am Legend", of course, but it isn't bad at all. Some of the camerawork is a bit shaky, but I got through a couple of bags of crisps and half a pound cake without incident so it's perfectly watchable.

The action scenes are very good indeed, Mark Dacascos has some nice martial arts skills, and Jennifer Lee Wiggins is great eyecandy. The bottom line is that "I Am Omega" is one of the best movies that The Asylum has ever made. If I ever start doing "Sci-fi Saturday" reviews again, this movie deserves a more in-depth and honest critique than anyone else has given it so far.


The Legend of Sorrow Creek (2007)

"When two sisters return to their childhood summer getaway, they soon fall under the wrath of an evil curse—one that threatens to rip them apart forever."

This Canadian "Blair Witch" wannabe is the weakest link on the first DVD, but it's no longer than a TV movie and occasionally looks like one too. If you make it through the first couple of minutes, it gets better intermittently.

"The Legend of Sorrow Creek" is cheap, the dialogue is full of clichés, and the acting is nasty, but at least it isn't a "found footage" movie. Having said that, it's still best to skip it if you don't want your evening's entertainment ruined.


Evil Bong (2006)

"A toke from a mysterious and powerful vintage bong takes a group of college kids on the wildest trip of their lives."

What begins as a passable stoner comedy with a retro vibe eventually turns into an even lamer horror/situation comedy which isn't worth sitting through except for some hot topless girls and amusing vulgarities.

"Evil Bong" is another slightly shorter than regular feature though so it's not worth getting too upset over.


Demonic Toys (1992)

"When a sixty-six-year-old demon with the power to bring toys to life is awakened, he goes in search of a body to inhabit."

Having never been a fan of the "Puppet Master" movies or this spin-off with similar effects, the whole movie feels dated to me in a bad way.

The real draw is Tracy Scoggins rather than the demonic toys themselves although some of the puppetry is nicely done for the time.


Meridian (1990)

"When a young woman visits her recently inherited Italian castle, she discovers that she has also inherited a medieval curse that threatens her life."

If you ever wanted to see Sherilyn Fenn and Charlie Spradling get strumped all over the place by a werewolf, this is the movie for you. There are some nice performances, everything looks great, and the erotic scenes are genuinely erotic.

The only faults are that "Phantoms" is a very girlie, romantic film at heart rather than a horror, and Malcolm Jamieson bears too much of a resemblance to Martin Kemp during his Spandau Ballet days.


Decadent Evil (2005)

"A vampire named Morella feasts upon the blood of strip club clientele while housing her ex-lover Marvin—part human/part reptile—in a bird cage."

"Decadent Evil" is more or less a run-of-the-mill vampire flick with a TV episode running time, terrible dialogue, and a few weird bits thrown in which don't always gel. It's like a mixture of "The Hunger" and a below average "Tales from the Crypt" episode.

This is another Full Moon movie which most people haven't seen (or would even want to), but the girls are all very pretty. It's not really very "decadent" or "evil" though.


If you haven't already got any of the older "4 Films Horror Collector's Set" packs then either this or the newer "Midnight Horror" 20 pack is a decent purchase for $5.

As a gift for someone who is only just starting to collect horror movies, you can't really fault it. More serious collectors who are looking for better transfers will certainly find something to moan about, but it's higher quality than most Mill Creek packs.

There's definitely something for everyone in this collection so I recommend it. It's just a pity that "Meridian" isn't on the first DVD instead of "The Legend of Sorrow Creek" since I would quite happily throw the second DVD away otherwise.

The Midnight Horror Collection: Blood Predators

I've bought and watched some horrible movies in my time, but nothing prepared me for how awful this Echo Bridge Entertainment multi-feature DVD would be. I didn't make it through any of the movies in one sitting and had to do other more interesting things such as housework just so that I could wake myself up enough again to watch them in 20 minute bursts.

As you know, I got this DVD from my local pawn shop ages ago, but didn't get round to watching it. The first three movies are also in the Pendulum Pictures "Mortuary of Madness" pack, but if Mill Creek Entertainment had continued that series, the final one most certainly would have been included in the "big boxes of shite" as I call them.

Just like the Mill Creek/Pendulum Pictures packs, the transfer is terrible and the movies are even worse. While some of us can laugh at how badly made these movies are and use them to torture the people who were involved in them for the rest of their internet lives, there are actually people who like this kind of thing and who clearly have something very wrong with them mentally otherwise there wouldn't be a market for such abominations. No matter how long I live, I'll never be able to work out why that is.

In the coming series of posts, I'm going to go through these multipacks and finally sort out which ones are going to be flipped so that I can buy something good such as all the seasons of "True Blood" on Blu-ray instead.

And so, without further ado, here's what I thought about this one.


The Vampire Conspiracy (2005)

"Five people are abducted by a maniacal vampire and put into a deadly maze of wits and endurance. If they make it through alive, the Vampire's fortune is theirs. If they fail, they'll be placed back in the game—forever—as bloodthirsty slaves pursuing the next round of victims. The group must discover the connection between them to solve complex clues and survive the band of slaves to escape a twisted game of predator and prey."

To say that this is the best of a bad lot doesn't do it any favours since all the movies are total crap. It's all in black and white, with lots of constantly angry, shouty "actors", and whoever filmed it lacks any framing ability whatsoever.

As far as the story goes, I was intrigued enough to want to find out how all the characters were linked together, but as soon as that was revealed, nothing else interested me.


Fist of the Vampire (2007)

"As an undercover detective infiltrates an illegal underground fighting ring, he begins to piece together bizarre clues connected to an unsolved murder. And when he discovers that the ring is run by bloodthirsty vampires, the underworld of the undead becomes more dangerous than ever..."

Although it's pretty much unwatchable due to all the faux film damage effects such a scratches and grit constantly on screen, I stuck with this for the sexier bits. One of the vampiresses looks the part, but it's all bad acting, and the story isn't very interesting either.

I haven't checked out the Mill Creek version of this yet to compare it, but "Fist of the Vampire" came up "windowboxed" right in the centre of my TV screen and was too small to enjoy even if it hadn't been a turd to begin with.


Curse of the Wolf (2006)

"Dakota, a young werewolf, has finally learned to control her nighttime transformations. She desperately wants to live a normal life, and to break free from her curse, she flees to hide in the city. When the pack aggressively hunts her down, the bouncers offer her protection and band together to battle the werewolves who want her dead... and who won't give up their wolf without a vicious fight."

I only watched this to see what happened to Pamela Sutch who I interviewed through MySpace back in the day. "Curse of the Wolf" is very slow with a few nudie bits which don't make up for it. The horrible rock music in the background also had me fast forwarding to anything that looked interesting just to avoid it.

At nearly two hours long, I will probably watch this again one day and review it for another blog I write, but I don't have the patience to do it now.


Bachelor Party in the Bungalow of the Damned (2008)

"Sammy, who wants to throw the ultimate bachelor party in the Hamptons for his best friend Chuck, has scored a bungalow for the fest. The wild weekend takes a turn for the rowdy and raunchy when a trio of strippers arrives at the door... but these are no ordinary strippers! They're smokin' hot and dance to kill. One by one, the guests are seduced and devoured—only a lucky few will survive the Bungalow of the Damned!"

Hahaha. I've finally seen Zoe Hunter in all her glory, but sorry, I'm not impressed. I know this is meant to be some kind of comedy, but it's not funny in any way apart from the amusing end credits.

The best thing I can say about "Bachelor Party in the Bungalow of the Damned" is that it's always interesting to see what the insides of other people's houses look like. These "indie horror" films are great for that.


Although I definitely don't recommend it, if you really want to torture yourself, you can buy the "Blood Predators" collection from Amazon, eBay, Wal-mart, K-mart, and most good pawn shops near you.

I've included the Amazon link to the left (as usual) anyway since it leads to some even more venomous reviews than mine.

You also have to laugh that the best price offered is only 1¢. Bear in mind that the shipping will be probably be equal to the normal retail price that this DVD sells for anywhere.

The best price I've seen "Blood Predators" for is $2.99 in K-mart's bargain bin.

My own copy of this DVD is heading for the yard sale where I'll be lucky if I get $1 for it.

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2 (2012)

"After the birth of Renesmee, the Cullens gather other vampire clans in order to protect the child from a false allegation that puts the family in front of the Volturi."

I can't believe it!!! The final chapter of the series which polarised and ostracised me from every other horror fan is over!!! And guess what? They saved the best for last! Oh my God, "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2" rocks! I hate to say it, but I TOLD YOU SO!

Bella is now a beautiful vampire, her half-mortal child with Edward is growing fast, and Jacob takes his shirt off for the last time. For some of us, the latter is a relief. The romance is still there, but now it's more adult and complicated. Plus the Volturi are back with a vengeance!

The thing which everyone has been moaning and whining about since the very first "Twilight" movie has finally happened... this one is a HORROR movie! Yes, real horror! We're shown a full-on epic battle between Cullens, Quileutes and Volturi with decapitations, dismemberments, gore, and the cruel deaths of several main characters!!!

What will all the fairweather horror fans and douchebag movie reviewers have to complain about now even though they'll all be heading to their local cinemas to watch this film anyway? If any of those hypocrites dare to say that "Breaking Dawn - Part 2" is a pile of crap, they'll just be lying to save face.

Prepare to be shocked, horrified, and maybe even cry a little bit when it's all over. I won't give away what happens until after the next picture, but I found it all very emotional.

If you don't want spoilers, stop reading now!

Okay, so if you've read the books (or watched the trailer), you know what happens anyway. For those of us who haven't, here's a quick summary of the events.

Everything is fun and games for Edward, Bella and Renesmee (their stupidly named daughter). Bella and Edward are working their way through Alex Comfort's "The Joy of Sex" books, Jacob is happily imprinted with "Nessie" (he's nicknamed her after the Loch Ness monster!), and only Charlie Swan's life is in turmoil as he believes that Bella has died. But even Charlie's grief is short-lived after Jacob shows up in his backyard, turns wolfy in front of him, and reveals that Bella is still alive although changed.

Unfortunately, this status quo can't last or we'd have another film as boring as "New Moon". As much as I love "Twilight", I'm the first to admit that "New Moon" sucked. So, to put a spanner in the works, sexy Irina (Maggie Grace) just has to oversee Renesmee leaping high in the air to catch snowflakes. Without giving Bella the chance to explain, Irina runs off to the Volturi to tell them erroneously that the heinous crime of making an infant vampire has been committed.

And so it comes to pass that the Cullens have to assemble an army of witnesses to validate Renesmee's identity and true nature. They travel all over the world (or at least America) to bring their friends together in preparation for a confrontation with the Volturi. Fearing the Volturi's ulterior motives, Alice (Ashley Greene) and Jasper have their own agenda, and have apparently fled.

Thus, just after Christmas, the Cullens, aided by the Quileutes and their other interesting new allies, march out to meet the Volturi. Of course, the Volturi are barely able to accept the truth about Renesmee even when presented with her right in front of them. They want war and are looking for any excuse even when Alice returns and gives Aro (Michael Sheen) her vision as proof that Renesmee is no threat. Her vision half convinces him but then seems to inspire Aro to command a greater punishment. Without warning, Jasper gets his head pulled off and all Hell breaks loose!

It's now that "Breaking Dawn - part 2" stuns everybody and really tugs on the old heartstrings as Carlisle rushes across the snow-covered battlefield to save Alice and gets decapitated, magical powers are unleashed as weapons, and there's bloodshed aplenty!!! Various werewolves die screaming in acts of bravery and, even though we barely know them, the new vampire allies are decimated. It's horrible!!! The Volturi suffer too.

Dakota Fanning is beautifully made up and gives everyone a world of pain to go with her evil looks while Bella protects everyone the best she can with a forcefield. Right, left and centre, the werewolves maul the vampires, and the opposing vampires pull each other's heads off! Just a little drop more blood and this would have earned an R-rating for sure!

The action is top notch, exciting, and has some great choreography. Even the CGI is used well although, personally, I've always thought that the werewolves were a little bit too large to be believable. Jacob's werewolf form is the size of a horse which is taken advantage of by Renesmee as she rides him to safety.

Kristen Stewart finally proves she can change her expression from dour to fierce, and, even though she looks horrid in the process, she really kicks some ass in the battle. If only she'd been this good in "Snow White and the Huntsman" rather than cheating on Robert Pattinson maybe people would still like her. She's definitely got the moves and the looks though so I couldn't hate the Trampire for long.

With everyone dying, Alice wades through the mayhem to take out Jane (Dakota Fanning), and the combined efforts of Edward and Bella destroy Aro... but then there's a twist which is absolutely fantastic!

The battle NEVER HAPPENED! It's all part of Alice's vision! Oh, yes, there will be gasps and cheers from the audience!

Okay, it may be a bit of a cop-out ending - the shocked Aro decides that it's best if they just go home and leave the Cullens in peace - but it's done so beautifully! I didn't know whether to cheer or cry. I was so relieved that I was choked. I'm not ashamed to admit that as a fully grown man rather than a 13-year-old girl either.

The final minutes with Edward telling Bella that he'll love her forever wrap this romance up nicely, but I wish there was more. I want more adventures. I want to see Jacob and "Nessie" get together. I don't want it to end!

I've loved the "Twilight" franchise, looked forward to each new movie every year, and now I really don't know what to do with myself. It's a good job that I have a new blog to play with. The haters will just have to leech onto "The Hunger Games" and try to spoil the enjoyment of that franchise for everyone. I'm tempted to join them, but I probably won't. I've actually started to appreciate "The Hunger Games" too now.

Anyway, it's goodbye to Taylor Lautner, Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson. Farewell to "Team Jacob" and "Team Edward" rivalry (I was always "Team Alice" myself). I've lusted over the pretty vampire girls for the last time and eaten twice my own weight in M&Ms in the process. I'm going to miss "Twilight".

Vamps (2012)

"Two female vampires in modern-day New York City are faced with daunting romantic possibilities."

Given the new format of my blog, I didn't know whether to post this review yesterday for those people who are absolutely terrified of watching romantic comedies meant for middle-aged women or wait until today due to how miserable "Vamps" turned out to be. Obviously, I decided that "Woeful Wednesday" was the best choice.

I should have realised that something was very wrong with a movie that had a very limited theatrical release only a few days before becoming available on DVD and Blu-ray. Call me cynical, but it reeks of the distributor realising beforehand that "Vamps" was going to bomb in the cinemas.

"Vamps" is certainly not in the same league as "Clueless" (1995) in spite of its cast, but it isn't actually that bad if you don't have a sense of humour. I'm lucky that way because I watched it as a straight vampire movie and used it merely as a means to ogle Krysten Ritter. For "normal" people who want something to laugh at other than pop culture references, "Vamps" will probably be a disappointment.

The story itself isn't so much a comedy in the strict sense of the word as it is a semi-tragedy. While there are enough contrived scenes of merriment to appease the casual (and extremely dumb) viewer, the more you think about the macabre existence of the lead vampiresses, Goody (Alicia Silverstone) and Stacy (Krysten Ritter), the worse it becomes.

Like everything Amy Heckerling has written, the dialogue in "Vamps" is clever and witty. Unfortunately, it would be better coming from the mouths of a bunch of desperate, old satchel-asses in a TV series rather than in a movie about vampires. Make up your own mind about which TV series I'm referring to as I'm sure you can think of three or four others off the top of your head.

Unless you are of a certain age, you probably won't understand all the cynical swipes at teenagers, the internet, the "must have gadgets", or the sad message of "Vamps" that eventually you simply have to stop pretending to be young. I get them, and they are kind of depressing especially as I agree with them all. I also despise texters, smartphones, reality television stars, and 99% of the "Sex and the City"-inspired generation that I'm forced to endure daily. Kudos to Amy Heckerling for lampooning today's society even though she's a bit late on the bandwagon this time.

However, as I said, I really only watched "Vamps" to lust over Krysten Ritter. As much as I worship Alicia Silverstone like the crazy goddess she is, a vampiric Audrey Hepburn lookalike really does it for me. Although Alicia is good, Krysten steals the show in every scene they share. I'm not familiar with her work and have never seen her in anything else so presumably she's a known comedy actress. Based on how sexy she looks with fangs, I hope she does some hardcore horror movies in the future.

The other cast members are also culled from the TV comedy genre apart from Dan Stevens who plays Lord Arthur Holmwood in the 2006 TV version of "Dracula" (which I have yet to see), and the once "big name" actors such as Sigourney Weaver and Malcolm McDowell who appear to be slumming it. I can't say that any of them give a bad performance, but it's surprising to see them in something like this.

A precedent for vampire comedies starring actors who should know better goes way back to "The Fearless Vampire Killers" (1967) so "Vamps" isn't entirely out of place among such titles as "Love at First Bite" (1979), "Once Bitten" (1985), "Vampire's Kiss" (1989), "Love Bites" (1993), "Dracula: Dead and Loving It" (1995), and "Vampire in Brooklyn" (1995). I have no idea why anyone would think that vampires and comedy go together as none of these movies really have enough horror to be classed as true horror-comedies. None have enough comedy to be funny either.

"Vamps" does quite well with its plethora of amiable yet slightly odd characters despite them all being inconsistent and woefully underused. In several cases, they aren't much more than extended cameos which is a shame considering the heart that must have been put into creating them. Even in such a throwaway comedy, they deserve better.

Some of the computer effects are horrendous although I have to give credit where it's due for the make-up which is mostly excellent (and also a little bit silly looking on the older "Stem" vampires). Someone did a great job on Sigourney Weaver who doesn't look her age at all. Her Cisserus character is a mixed bag, but it hammers home an excellent jibe at certain TV show cougars.

I wish I had more to say about Alicia Silverstone, but she gets eclipsed by everything else which is going on including a whole world in the background which is more interesting. Basically, Goody isn't ditzy enough or a strong enough character to carry the film on her own. Lovely and talented as she is, Alicia also looks too old for the part. Not that she tries, but she can't get away with being Cher anymore. Lamentably, this is hardly another "Clueless".

With the best lines and scenes already given away in the trailer, I can't recommend that you rush to see "Vamps" if you expect it to contain any more of the same. I'm not saying that it's full of padding because there is more than enough material forced into this to make a decent 92 minute long feature. I just don't think it's put together in the best way possible, and it might have been better as a pilot for a TV series.