Way of the Vampire

People, that loud whirring and rattling you can hear is the sound of Bram Stoker turning in his grave.

*God* this film is bad. Shoddy camera work, shoddy script, godawful sound which meant that a lot of the time the actors were inaudible (thank god) and the music SOHIGHINTHEMIX it made your ears bleed, and a baddie so lacking in charisma not even tight PVC/rubber trousers could save the day. And the acting - OMG, the acting. The last time I saw acting as shockingly poor and embarrassing as this was Yvette and Derek still trying to pretend they were friends on "Most Haunted Live" this week. Yes, really - as bad as that. I swear to you, the acting in this film is so wooden it's on a par with a Gerry Anderson production - and the way the script was delivered would make even a half-way gifted actor weep. I'd say that words cannot truly describe how awful this film is - though I've had a damn good try - and what's so sad is that the video shop had loads of copies of it. That this mess got made and distributed is even more frightening than the thought of Ricky Tomlinson hang-gliding naked.

Usually I'm lenient towards even bad movies since I respect artists like actors and think that everybody is entitled to a mistake.Sometimes,even a bad movie has some acceptable moments and it even manages to throw the spotlight to a new potentially talented young actor/actress.This ,however,without a doubt is the most superficial and idiotic totally unconvincing horror film I have ever watched and the only horror one gets is out of its abysmally low level.It's a disgrace and a total waste of one's money and time.Companies or artists participating in such crimes against the cinema should be put away.

I wonder how on earth these movie companies come out with decisions to produce such garbage.Don't they realise that it will hit them back big time?And the disrespect to the viewer is infuriating!!! The mark of 1 is very flattering ,it should get something like 0,000001.

Imagine a movie with terrible actors, ghastly bad special effects, an anorexic plot, and no budget.

This is worse.

Please don't get me wrong...I love vampire movies...but this is one major waste of money..both to make, and for ANYONE to pay to see.

As I watched the movie, I could see the director coaching the actors, "ok..now look scared...now...look horrified...now succumb...now go limp. It was painful to watch.

Have you ever put "fake fangs" in your mouth to finish your Dracula costume at Halloween? Do you remember how funny you sounded talking with the prosthetic teeth? OMG...the actors lisped their way thru their lines like kids who have just put in their first cheap vampire fangs. Do you think the director/producers/anyone notice this? I am guessing not.

The dialog was shallow and seemed penned by a teenager. (The producer's 8th grade child maybe?) The volume of the voice recording was out of balance with effects and background music. In order to hear and understand the dialog, you are required to elevate the volume so high that the "special effects sounds" become deafening.

The action was limited, and the combat second rate. The actors lacked the combat/martial arts skills you expect to see in a movie of any caliber. The vampires movements were inconsistent and downright silly...sometimes they moved like listless zombies, other times like speed freaks, and still other times they "slinked" with bended knees, swaying arms and drunken swaggers as if trying to pretend to be cats.

If this had been a movie with which I was in any way affiliated, I would never include it in my resume. Further, I think I would change my name if anyone ever discovered a connection! Rating: Less than 1/10 (if that is possible)

Dr. Van Helsing, vampire hunter, is granted immortality by a religious sect that will only let him die after he kills the last vampire. That's the plot of the film right there. I didn't put it in a nutshell for you, dear reader. THAT'S the whole plot. Now what did I think of the film? Well, between the horrid editing, the putrid acting, the 'anti-action', the sound problems, and the WIDE open ending, this is strictly amateur hour. Vampire flicks have made for some simply dreadful films in the past and this, my friends, is one of them. It's a travesty of the current state of B-movie straight to video horror that I don't even consider this one of the worst vampire flick out there.

My Grade: D-

Where I saw it: Starz on Demand (available till September 15th, 2005)

(I don't think this contains spoilers, but if it does,it wan't intentional, and I'm sorry.)

I just rented this movie. Thinking that, ya know..Vampire movie..Bram Stoker..BRING IT! After "Bram Stokers' Dracula" in 1992, I figured "Bram Stokers' Way Of The Vampire" should measure up to the same high standards right? RIGHT?? Uh..no! We started watching it, had to jack the sound WAYYYY up to even HEAR it, and then my roommate tells me that we've rented it before!! HUH? This is a VAMPIRE movie! Something I LIVE for! And I don't remember it? Can I just say..you know it's bad when...! Unfortunately, like most movies you don't initially like, it DIDN'T get better the second time around! The sound was terrible. The acting was either non existent or over blown. (with maybe one or two exceptions) The vampiric dialog? All I could think was who wrote this UTTER rot?! The rest of the dialog was ranging from maybe OK, to weak, to downright SAD!

I checked out the actors on the database, (this one, as I've found no other better as of yet) like I do for almost all movies I watch, and found that this movie was either a jumping point for brand new actors, a fill in for trying-but-not-quite-making-it actors, or a last ditch effort for dieing actors from a third rate soap opera! The nudity was OK I guess. There was T&A to be seen. And it was nice, as far as nudity goes. But like EVERY movie not a hard core porn, for some reason it's OK for a woman to go Full Monty, but a man? *gasp* SHOCKING! And simply NOT DONE! And it's not even that I WANT to see some guys dangly bits! That's not the point! (seen one you've seen em all) MY beef is that they won't SHOW them. That it's OK to bare a girl but not a boy.

Perhaps I've wandered off the path. Slightly. A bit? OK maybe a LOT! *snickers* I had a point I'm sure! Now where did I put it...*checks pockets* Ah yes..On the whole? This movie was very disappointing. A rather black mark on vampire movies as a whole, and NO credit to Bram Stoker what-so-ever. If it had been slightly worse, it wouldn't have been worth the film it was printed on. I know I've seen worse, but Way Of The Vampire was high up there in the "WHY did I rent this" stakes. In short? And pun intended... It sucked!