Vegas Vampires

As someone who loves blaxploitation movies and modern vampire movies (i.e Lost Boys, Interview with a Vampire, and Underworld ) and paranormal TV shows (i.e. Super Natural, True Blood), I can say this is hands down the worse vampire film I have seen that was made in the past 20 years. It was the kind of movie you watch because it is so bad you can't stop but watching it to see if it gets worse, and you know, it does get worse. I really wonder if the actors knew the movie was as bad as it was while they were making it. The only reason I gave it a 2 out of 10 is because there were a few fine chicks in it and it showed a little booty. Otherwise, this is garbage!

This film appears to be scraps from an editing room floor that were very, very poorly spliced together into a completely incoherent and ridiculous mess. I can enjoy a really bad horror film, but this one is so bad, there isn't even one redeeming quality to be found. I rented this because Tommy Lister is in it and the premise looked amusing. Unfortunately Tommy's part was dull and one dimensional, and not even one of the scattered plots managed to be redeeming.

The fact that I rented this is proof that there is far too little to do in the town I live in, and that I will, in fact, rent absolutely anything. I have to say "hats off" to anyone that got paid for any portion of this film. Hopefully it was some kid's film school project, and said kid has subsequently decided to find a more suitable career.

Overall, a rather bad movie with a few redeeming qualities. Vampires in Las Vegas run amok and are hunted by a variety of police officers, who eventually defeat the vampires with the help of a sexy nun. Naturally. There are a number of flaws in the movies: day turns to night and night to day in the middle of scenes; characters' appearances change between cut away scenes, only two vampires combusted when exposed to daylight while many others walked around during the day without problems. The number of gaffes in the film provide the viewer ample opportunity to play "find the error." The main premise of the movie seems adequate (hunting down a 300 year old vampire who has returned to seek a new wife), but there are too many sub-plots floating around that provide tenuous links to the main premise.

Three characters stand out for their contributions to this film. Eric Etenari does an excellent job as the main vampire's henchman, a smooth talking, lady's man who provides the boss with his victims. Comic relief is provided by two legendary stars of the 1970s, Fred Williamson (who also directed the movie) and Richard Roundtree (best known for his role as Shaft). In some sense, Vegas Vampires seemed to be an effort, though largely deficient, to remember the days of the blaxploitation films in which Roundtree and Williamson starred in the 1970s.

Vegas Vampires (2003) is a low budget film directed and co-starring Fred Williamson. A vampire is running around Las Vegas creating problems for the local police, especially two of them (Tiny Lister and Glenn Plummer). During this time, a P.I. and his buddy (Fred Williamson and Richard Roundtree) decide to have some fun in Vegas. An outbreak of vampires starts to slowly spread about the city and our heroes and a lot of innocent people are about to get caught up in a vampire holocaust. Entertaining and funny, it was great to see Richard Roundtree and Fred Williamson kicking arse and taking names.

Two problems I had with this movie, one was blurring of name brand t-shirts and jerseys. That was a big problem, it was such an eye sore. The second one was the lead role given to Tiny Lister. He's good as a secondary character, but the man's not a lead actor. He wasn't that good. Otehr wise I enjoyed the movie. It was a big shock. I would rather watch this than have to suffer through another viewing of UNderworld.

cheers,

The hands down worst movie I have ever had the misfortune of watching. I can't believe I actually watched the whole movie and feel dumber as a result. This is truly a case of the train wreck syndrome and I simply could not stop watching because it was so awful. I kept thinking that it had to get better and was always amazed at how it progressively got worse. From the acting to the script to the editing to the photography, absolutely terrible. I can't believe that somebody actually made this movie and thought "wow, this is great piece of cinema!" If I could give it a lower rating than 1 star I would. I highly recommend this movie for all film students as an excellent example of what should never be done in cinema.