IMDb RATING
5.3/10
3.5K
YOUR RATING
Harlan Draka is a Dampyr, half-human and half-vampire, but he doesn't know it. Soon he will have to face his powers to destroy a terrible Master of The Night.Harlan Draka is a Dampyr, half-human and half-vampire, but he doesn't know it. Soon he will have to face his powers to destroy a terrible Master of The Night.Harlan Draka is a Dampyr, half-human and half-vampire, but he doesn't know it. Soon he will have to face his powers to destroy a terrible Master of The Night.
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
Featured reviews
This movie is yet another tedious cover of all the vpure movies of the past, the most obvious being John Csrpenter's Vampires. This movie follows that plot almost scene for scene.
That would be fine if there was some meat to chew on, so to speak, but this movie is all bare bones. The acting is - as do many of these entries into the vampire world - dead. The action is just plain dumb. For example, the protagonist charges towards the villain (a vampire) 3 or 4 times, only to be hurled back 50 feet. And what does he do when he gets on his feet again? Yup. He charges at the vampire AGAIN. No matter it didn't work the previous 4 times. And you have the usual humans-encountering-vampires fight. Humans fire their machine guns, the vampires laugh. Well, you can figure out what happens next.
And one can easily predict the dialogue, or the following scene. It drones on and on. The trajectory resembles the recently launched rocket that flew 500 feet towards space - and promptly exploded. If it was an ekg, it would be a flatline. My husband watched, while I just listened. I asked four times how it was, and his response was "bad." There is no genuine tension or climax in the movie. How anyone could get this at 10 is beyond me. I can understand being entertained (and even that is questionable), but objectively? A poorly done film with little plot, bad acting, endlessly derivative. This is a 5 at best. A 3 is a fair rating. Keep in mind, I'm not the demographic for this, whom I would imagine to be 18 year olds who like to watch things explode, or guns firing endlessly. For the rest, this will not cut the mustard.
That would be fine if there was some meat to chew on, so to speak, but this movie is all bare bones. The acting is - as do many of these entries into the vampire world - dead. The action is just plain dumb. For example, the protagonist charges towards the villain (a vampire) 3 or 4 times, only to be hurled back 50 feet. And what does he do when he gets on his feet again? Yup. He charges at the vampire AGAIN. No matter it didn't work the previous 4 times. And you have the usual humans-encountering-vampires fight. Humans fire their machine guns, the vampires laugh. Well, you can figure out what happens next.
And one can easily predict the dialogue, or the following scene. It drones on and on. The trajectory resembles the recently launched rocket that flew 500 feet towards space - and promptly exploded. If it was an ekg, it would be a flatline. My husband watched, while I just listened. I asked four times how it was, and his response was "bad." There is no genuine tension or climax in the movie. How anyone could get this at 10 is beyond me. I can understand being entertained (and even that is questionable), but objectively? A poorly done film with little plot, bad acting, endlessly derivative. This is a 5 at best. A 3 is a fair rating. Keep in mind, I'm not the demographic for this, whom I would imagine to be 18 year olds who like to watch things explode, or guns firing endlessly. For the rest, this will not cut the mustard.
I rarely watch Subtitled movies, as I tend to multi task and miss bits. But this was a bit special, and had my attention all the way through. For me it had echoes of John Carpenters Vampires, 30 Days of Night and another Russian movie, Night Watch. The acting is top notch, and I liked the way the story developed. A few people have commented it is a bit slow, and lacks bite. But for me, the character and story development helps build the atmosphere. I have watched a lot of Vampire movies, and this is definitely up there. The cinematography was superb, with lots of atmospheric scenes, dark woods and swirling fog. All in all a very enjoyable watch.
For fans of the genre, it's pretty much a mishmash of other stories. Hints of Blade, Vampire Hunter D, so on with maybe a touch of Constantine. Definitely scripted to be the start of a series, but would be surprised if someone sprung for the desired sequels. Does meet Netflix criteria, however - Cheap to make. Production quality is fine for the Eastern European origins (on par with Blade 1). Worth the watch if nothing else catches your eye, but don't expect an Oscar quality script or performance. I'm sure any plot holes (big enough to drive a truck through) will be filled in its intended sequels or possibly filled in by its comic book origins.
Harlan's mother died giving birth to him. His Dad, Gorka, is a powerful vampire. Midwifes who assisted Harlan's mother refused to give the child to Gorka, and protected themselves against him with a spell.
Years later, Harlan - together with his 'manager' friend, Yuri - travel to villages as con artists, making villagers believe they can banish evil. When a group of soldiers lead by Commander Kurjak settle in a village, they are attacked by vampires. With their bullets useless against their enemy, they realize there is only one person who can help them: Harlan - or Dampyr as he came to be known.
Taking Dampyr into their custody, they use him as bait to lure the vampires. One of the vampires, Tesla, is captured, and she agrees to help them so she can be freed from Gorka. Kurjak doesn't trust her and there's constant tension between these two characters. I rather enjoyed this friction and also Tesla's unpredictability, as it was never clear whether her intentions were true.
Although an interesting enough watch, 'Dampyr' felt a bit generic - like I've seen everything here before. It offered nothing new to the genre - not story or character-wise. Another issue for me was Gorka, the film's antagonist. He appears briefly in the very beginning, and then only returns again for a showdown with Harlan during the finale. Throughout the film he is not really a force to be reckoned with, and from a villain point of view, he was absent for far too long during the movie. I also didn't find David Morrissey believable enough portraying this character. I didn't find him strong enough as Gorka.
Wade Briggs was ok as Harlan, but the best casting call by far was Stuart Martin as Kurjak, who - for me - was a stronger protagonist as Harlan. He reminded me of Sean Pertwee's character, Wells, from 'Dog Soldiers'.
Despite some flaws, sit back, relax and enjoy the movie for what it is. It surely was entertaining enough. And the film ends so ready for a sequel...
Years later, Harlan - together with his 'manager' friend, Yuri - travel to villages as con artists, making villagers believe they can banish evil. When a group of soldiers lead by Commander Kurjak settle in a village, they are attacked by vampires. With their bullets useless against their enemy, they realize there is only one person who can help them: Harlan - or Dampyr as he came to be known.
Taking Dampyr into their custody, they use him as bait to lure the vampires. One of the vampires, Tesla, is captured, and she agrees to help them so she can be freed from Gorka. Kurjak doesn't trust her and there's constant tension between these two characters. I rather enjoyed this friction and also Tesla's unpredictability, as it was never clear whether her intentions were true.
Although an interesting enough watch, 'Dampyr' felt a bit generic - like I've seen everything here before. It offered nothing new to the genre - not story or character-wise. Another issue for me was Gorka, the film's antagonist. He appears briefly in the very beginning, and then only returns again for a showdown with Harlan during the finale. Throughout the film he is not really a force to be reckoned with, and from a villain point of view, he was absent for far too long during the movie. I also didn't find David Morrissey believable enough portraying this character. I didn't find him strong enough as Gorka.
Wade Briggs was ok as Harlan, but the best casting call by far was Stuart Martin as Kurjak, who - for me - was a stronger protagonist as Harlan. He reminded me of Sean Pertwee's character, Wells, from 'Dog Soldiers'.
Despite some flaws, sit back, relax and enjoy the movie for what it is. It surely was entertaining enough. And the film ends so ready for a sequel...
Dampyr is a B-movie that wears its B-movieness with pride. It is solidly in the category of "so bad it's good", with every possible cliche and Godzilla-sized plot holes.
At first, I had high hopes for the 1990s Yugoslavia war setting hoping to see a blend of history and fantasy, but 10 minutes later, it became clear that whoever wrote the script, had a very vague idea about history, Slavic names, how human beings talk, or how to write a script. Were the soldiers Serbs? Croats? Who knows, and none of them wore uniforms, nor indicated who they were fighting for nor the actual country they were in. The war is a vague event with a bunch of plainclothes fashion models drive around in Al Qaeda-style pickup trucks with big guns and kewl 1970s music, occasionally shooting a surviving civilian. What, you didn't know? War is hell.
But once you stop expecting any semblance of logic and assume it's a parody, it turns out to be a tolerable experience. Commander Dolce & Gabbana (background: requisite dead family) and a vampire slayer (background: Jesus with a drinking problem; never asked himself why he's been alive for hundreds of years without aging) are joined by a hot blonde vampire (background: hot; blonde; vampire) to take on a bad vampire. That's it. The rest is what you'd expect it to be, plus plot holes. Turn off your brain, watch, and enjoy, with an optional drinking game for cliches and plot holes.
At first, I had high hopes for the 1990s Yugoslavia war setting hoping to see a blend of history and fantasy, but 10 minutes later, it became clear that whoever wrote the script, had a very vague idea about history, Slavic names, how human beings talk, or how to write a script. Were the soldiers Serbs? Croats? Who knows, and none of them wore uniforms, nor indicated who they were fighting for nor the actual country they were in. The war is a vague event with a bunch of plainclothes fashion models drive around in Al Qaeda-style pickup trucks with big guns and kewl 1970s music, occasionally shooting a surviving civilian. What, you didn't know? War is hell.
But once you stop expecting any semblance of logic and assume it's a parody, it turns out to be a tolerable experience. Commander Dolce & Gabbana (background: requisite dead family) and a vampire slayer (background: Jesus with a drinking problem; never asked himself why he's been alive for hundreds of years without aging) are joined by a hot blonde vampire (background: hot; blonde; vampire) to take on a bad vampire. That's it. The rest is what you'd expect it to be, plus plot holes. Turn off your brain, watch, and enjoy, with an optional drinking game for cliches and plot holes.
Did you know
- TriviaMythical creatures like dhampirs are widely associated with Balkan folklore. In the rest of the region, terms such as Serbian vampirovic, vampijerovic, vampiric (thus, Bosnian lampijerovic, etc.) literally meaning "vampire's son", are used.
- ConnectionsReferenced in Half in the Bag: The Kyle Gallner Triple Feature Spectacular! (2023)
- How long is Dampyr?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- €15,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $362,113
- Runtime1 hour 49 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content