Why Did Vampires Have To Become So Lame???

[Dino Velvet]

WHEN VAMPIRES WERE EVIL

http://www.chicagostagereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/dracula-film1.jpg http://www.whitbyseafishing.com/images/dracula.jpg


MODERN DAY LIMP WRISTED VAMPIRES

http://static.tvguide.com/MediaBin/Galleries/Editorial/081110/FavoriteVampires/FavoriteVampires-InterviewWithVampire7.jpg http://313merch.com/big_images/twilight.jpg

[Coroner]

"Interview with the Vampire" is not an appropriate example. It´s a good novel adaptation and not about "bad" or "evil". Stuff like Blade, Van Helsing or underworld sucks ass.

[SarahG]

WHEN VAMPIRES WERE EVIL

http://www.chicagostagereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/dracula-film1.jpg http://www.whitbyseafishing.com/images/dracula.jpg


MODERN DAY LIMP WRISTED VAMPIRES

http://static.tvguide.com/MediaBin/Galleries/Editorial/081110/FavoriteVampires/FavoriteVampires-InterviewWithVampire7.jpg http://313merch.com/big_images/twilight.jpg

At least somebody fucking gets it.

Vampires do not sparkle. Vampire movies aren't supposed to have prepubescent girls as their target audience. Characters from vampire movies aren't supposed to be sold as dolls for girls to play with.

[BrassVillanueva]

It's just a different way of telling the same story, really... or, in Twilight's case, a slightly different story. I wouldn't say they've become lame, they've just adapted to today's societal norms, tendencies and fears... which aren't at all the same as they were when the vampires of yesterday were being written. Take a look at the "reboot" movies... the Batman flicks, Star Trek, Superman Returns... all of them are essentially telling the same stories as the films before them did, just in a different way. The same idea applies here. Just because YOU see them as lame doesn't mean everyone else should have to.

[raybbaby]

Yes, I'm glad somebody said it. I'm sick of vampires, and werewolves as sympathetic figures. They are supposed to scare the shit out of you and be fuckin' bad ass! Robert Pattison probably farts glitter.

[russtafa]

brian lumley writes a good vampire novel

[SarahG]

It's just a different way of telling the same story, really... or, in Twilight's case, a slightly different story.

Slightly? What's your definition of extremely? :?

Just because twilight has characters that are supposed to be vampires doesn't mean it's the same (or, "slightly different") story as the classics in that genre.



they've just adapted to today's societal norms, tendencies and fears...

Interesting proposition. So the reason why twilight's dramatis personae is an effeminate early pubescent boy who sparkles when exposed to sunlight is because, in our society, ...that would be frightening?

Or is it that the frightening part of twilight is the fact that it's so successful? I could get on board with that.

[Dino Velvet]

It's just a different way of telling the same story, really... or, in Twilight's case, a slightly different story. I wouldn't say they've become lame, they've just adapted to today's societal norms, tendencies and fears... which aren't at all the same as they were when the vampires of yesterday were being written. Take a look at the "reboot" movies... the Batman flicks, Star Trek, Superman Returns... all of them are essentially telling the same stories as the films before them did, just in a different way. The same idea applies here. Just because YOU see them as lame doesn't mean everyone else should have to.

Old vampire movies were supposed to make you scream in terror. Modern ones make little girls scream because they're in love with the vampire. I remember having my dad tell me how scared people were in the theater when they saw Bela Lugosi. I also heard stories about people getting freaked out by Christopher Lee in Horror Of Dracula. Both Nosferatu movies are still creepy even to this day.

I'd worry more about today's vampires teaching my son how to apply eye liner that influencing him go to the dark side.

[raybbaby]

The really bad news is that the Twilight movies are a tool to try and propogate abstinance. Think about that. In a word, LAME!

[Dino Velvet]

Yes, I'm glad somebody said it. I'm sick of vampires, and werewolves as sympathetic figures. They are supposed to scare the shit out of you and be fuckin' bad ass! Robert Pattison probably farts glitter.

As far as Werewolves, Lon Chaney Jr and Oliver Reed were somewhat sympathetic but also badass. Paul Naschy followed the Universal Horror formula too.

[Dino Velvet]

The really bad news is that the Twilight movies are a tool to try and propogate abstinance. Think about that. In a word, LAME!

That's the opposite of Christopher Lee. He would just look at a woman and her panties fell off. Those Hammer babes were hot and showed tons of cleavage.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y201/punkrocker1472/movies/Christopher_Lee_as_Dracula.jpg

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n134/bigrickou812/Dracula4.jpg

http://i623.photobucket.com/albums/tt316/godzillavsdracula/DracLeeMonro.jpg

[BrassVillanueva]

Slightly? What's your definition of extremely? :?
What I mean by that is, it's the "forbidden love" tale. It's been told many different ways in many different genres, including vampire stories. Yes, Twilight is a new take on the idea, but at heart, it's the same old story.


Interesting proposition. So the reason why twilight's dramatis personae is an effeminate early pubescent boy who sparkles when exposed to sunlight is because, in our society, ...that would be frightening?

Or is it that the frightening part of twilight is the fact that it's so successful? I could get on board with that.
The Edward Cullen character himself is not what the readers are intended to fear, as much as he tries to persuade Bella that she SHOULD be afraid of him. In fact, fear isn't even the primary emotion that the story is intended to be a vehicle for. There's a whole variety there. It's a love story, first and foremost. But what fear IS there comes from all sorts of things... fear of losing someone you love, fear of losing yourself, fear of alienating your friends, fear of living without a purpose... it's not supposed to be a horror story in the sense that there's blood and gore or death. Right up front, Bella states she isn't afraid of dying, even violently. The horror is the concept of having and being nothing.

[CaptainGeech]

I think its more a sign of Hollywood and there view on "marketable" movies. In books (and some past movies) vampires are extremely sexual and brutal in nature. Hollywood doesn't have the nuts to do a quality film with those character tendencies today. When they do its usually some campy joke or late night piece of shit.

I thought Bram Stoker's Dracula had a chance of being good but a fully clothed Winona Ryder and a poorly cast Keanu Reeves put an end to that fairly quickly.

I will admit that I do have a major crush on "The Vampire Diaries" Nina Dobrev. She is stunning.



farts glitter :lol: :lol:

[fred41]

"Underworld" doesn't count 'cause it's got Kate Beckinsale in latex..and , well..Kate Beckinsale looks damn good in latex!!

[SarahG]

The really bad news is that the Twilight movies are a tool to try and propogate abstinance. Think about that. In a word, LAME!

What do you expect considering who the author is?

I mean really!

[SarahG]

Slightly? What's your definition of extremely? :?
What I mean by that is, it's the "forbidden love" tale. It's been told many different ways in many different genres, including vampire stories. Yes, Twilight is a new take on the idea, but at heart, it's the same old story.


Only that's the whole point, the classic vampire movies weren't about "forbidden love." They weren't a retake on romeo & Juliet type scenarios where two people fell in love when they shouldn't (for various reasons).

The classic vampires followed a totally different type of plot, where love was, if present at all (It wasn't always) it was as a foot note, not as the main portion of the plot mechanics.

If you go back and you look at some of the early Bela Lugosi movies, like The Vampire Bat- you don't find this forbidden love crap. What you find is an evil character who is terrorizing a community, killing people for various means, eventually requiring someone to rescue the community by finding a solution to the problem.

Or how about The Return of the Vampire? In that one Bela played an evil vampire set on raping a daughter for revenge after her parents had tried to kill him decades earlier. The hereo of the day was a man who Bela had enslaved by turning him into a warewolf; who had to find redemption from Bela's evil influence in order to slay him, eventually sacrificing himself to do so.

To have love be the major part of the plot in the classic vampire movies would be a gross abnormality, not the rule.


In fact, fear isn't even the primary emotion that the story is intended to be a vehicle for.

That's because twilight has nothing in common with the classic vampire movies and is simply trying to use sex appeal to sell lots of tickets to young girls all over the country.

[BrassVillanueva]

EDIT: Quote removed for purposes of brevity.

On the one hand, I wasn't only talking about the films of the past, I was also referring to books, plays, short stories, etc. Forbidden love has, indeed, been a common theme. No, not in all of the stories, but in a good portion of them. And as I said before, it's a common theme across ALL genres. It's just something we're intrigued by, whatever the reason for the love BEING forbidden in the first place.

No one can deny that the sex appeal is what's primarily drawing people to the theaters... but how is that ANY different from the picture Dino just painted of a Christopher Lee who, and I quote, "would just look at a woman and her panties fell off"? You can't tell me there weren't women who watched him play a vampire just because they found him sexy. The kid they've got playing Edward in the Twilight films has that same appeal, apparently. The story just happens to be targeted at a younger age group, that's all. There's no real difference there.

[SarahG]

On the one hand, I wasn't only talking about the films of the past, I was also referring to books, plays, short stories, etc.

But see here's the thing, the thread was about comparing the classic vampire movies with the new stuff like twilight.

In making those comparisons it is clear, crystal clear- that the only commonality between them is the fact that some of the characters are supposed to be vampires.

Whether forbidden love is found anywhere else is irrelevant, in comparing the old vampire movies with the new ones- the plot mechanics are different, the characters are different- and that was what Dino's post was all about.


No one can deny that the sex appeal is what's primarily drawing people to the theaters... but how is that ANY different from the picture Dino just painted of a Christopher Lee...

Easily; sex appeal on its own isn't enough to say "all movies with sex appeal are the same or very similar"

That would be like saying Twilight and the classic vampire movies are "very similar" because most of the actors & actresses in them are white.

Or saying they are all the same or "very similar" because they were recorded with cameras.

Those things may all be true, but they're not particularly relevant.

With twilight what makes the sex appeal an issue is the fact that it is targeted at one group and one group only; the young twilight book fangirls all over the country who want a new teen boy to lust over now that people like Hanson and Decapio (sp?) have gone out of style while lacking all the characteristics that used to make a vampire movie a vampire movie.

It's that point, all the stuff this movie is simply missing, that the genre of vampire movies used to be known for, that Dino and I were lamenting over. It is as if hollywood couldn't give two shits about making a good vampire movie, and is only concerned with getting little girls' panties wet.

[2009AD]

At least somebody fucking gets it.

Vampires do not sparkle. Vampire movies aren't supposed to have prepubescent girls as their target audience. Characters from vampire movies aren't supposed to be sold as dolls for girls to play with.

Vampires do not sparkle. They do if you plan to market them and make money!

Vampire movies aren't supposed to have prepubescent girls as their target audience. They are if you plan to market them and make money!

Characters from vampire movies aren't supposed to be sold as dolls for girls to play with. They are if you plan to make money!

[SarahG]

At least somebody fucking gets it.

Vampires do not sparkle. Vampire movies aren't supposed to have prepubescent girls as their target audience. Characters from vampire movies aren't supposed to be sold as dolls for girls to play with.

Vampires do not sparkle. They do if you plan to market them and make money!

Vampire movies aren't supposed to have prepubescent girls as their target audience. They are if you plan to market them and make money!

Characters from vampire movies aren't supposed to be sold as dolls for girls to play with. They are if you plan to make money!

My point, as illustrated^^^

What ever happened to movies being an ART?

[BrassVillanueva]

On the one hand, I wasn't only talking about the films of the past, I was also referring to books, plays, short stories, etc.

But see here's the thing, the thread was about comparing the classic vampire movies with the new stuff like twilight.
The title of the thread is "Why Did Vampires Have To Become So Lame???" and he initially posted four pictures under the headings "When vampires were evil" and "Modern day limp wristed vampires." If he was specifically talking about the movies, it wasn't made explicitly clear until later in the thread -- after I made my initial post. That's why I didn't take it as such.



No one can deny that the sex appeal is what's primarily drawing people to the theaters... but how is that ANY different from the picture Dino just painted of a Christopher Lee...

Easily; sex appeal on its own isn't enough to say "all movies with sex appeal are the same or very similar"
Ah, but here you're contradicting yourself. They are both vampire movies, and they both have sex appeal. In that sense, they are the same thing. Women are watching them for that sex appeal.


That would be like saying Twilight and the classic vampire movies are "very similar" because most of the actors & actresses in them are white.

Or saying they are all the same or "very similar" because they were recorded with cameras.

Those things may all be true, but they're not particularly relevant.
Perhaps not, but the argument being made was that the vampire movies of the past were not sold based on their sex appeal, which is not entirely true at all, is it?


With twilight what makes the sex appeal an issue is the fact that it is targeted at one group and one group only; the young twilight book fangirls all over the country who want a new teen boy to lust over now that people like Hanson and Decapio (sp?) have gone out of style while lacking all the characteristics that used to make a vampire movie a vampire movie.
That may be true to most extents, but that doesn't mean that it's any less a good story. I'm a straight guy, I've read the books and I thoroughly enjoyed them. I'm interested in the movies simply to see the story move from paper to screen. I know I'm in the minority on that, but the point is that you can enjoy the story just for being a good story, regardless of whether or not you enjoyed past vampire stories (which I do).


It's that point, all the stuff this movie is simply missing, that the genre of vampire movies used to be known for, that Dino and I were lamenting over. It is as if hollywood couldn't give two shits about making a good vampire movie, and is only concerned with getting little girls' panties wet.
Oh, you'll get no argument from me there. Fact is, the studios know that parents are willing to dish out money for these kids to go see this stuff, so they keep making it. A good, old-fashioned Dracula-type story isn't going to make the same gross income Twilight films will, so they won't bother with it. Sad, but that's the way it is.

[2009AD]

At least somebody fucking gets it.

Vampires do not sparkle. Vampire movies aren't supposed to have prepubescent girls as their target audience. Characters from vampire movies aren't supposed to be sold as dolls for girls to play with.

Vampires do not sparkle. They do if you plan to market them and make money!

Vampire movies aren't supposed to have prepubescent girls as their target audience. They are if you plan to market them and make money!

Characters from vampire movies aren't supposed to be sold as dolls for girls to play with. They are if you plan to make money!

My point, as illustrated^^^

What ever happened to movies being an ART?

There are plenty of them floating around. They don't make any money, but they do exist.

[rockabilly]

There needs to be a balance , we need a new dark tone Vampire movie in theaters. The 30 Days of Night sequel is in the works ... but so is a Lost Boys 3 w/ the Corey's (facepalm)

Marvel was supposed to do a "Morbius" film to replace the Blade franchise. And yes Virginia , Vampires do not sparkle.

Edit - Morbius was rumored to be the baddie for Spider-Man 4 ... Just use the Lizard damn it since Dr. Connors has been in all the Spider-Man movies!

[sucka4chix]

Damn! Vampire geeks, what a novel concept. You guys sound like my old college roommate, who used to argue with his friends about how fast the starship enterprise can go!

[rockabilly]

Which model ? As there have been many Enterprises (pushes glasses up) and depending on warp drive they all have different top speeds. lol

But i'm a Star Wars fanboy.

[SarahG]

Which model ? As there have been many Enterprises (pushes glasses up) and depending on warp drive they all have different top speeds. lol

But i'm a Star Wars fanboy.

Exactly, I don't believe there was ever consistency in the maximum speed capabilities of warships in the star trek universe.

Actually I take that back, there was an upper most limit but that was based on the limit of technology, not the limits of specific ships. Warp speed 10 was supposed to be the maximum technology could allow, and was never actually reached.

[SarahG]

Ah, but here you're contradicting yourself. They are both vampire movies, and they both have sex appeal. In that sense, they are the same thing. Women are watching them for that sex appeal.

I don't believe that would be a contradiction, my point was that sex appeal wasn't enough for them to be very similar, especially in light of all the things that seem to be absent from the newer movies.


Perhaps not, but the argument being made was that the vampire movies of the past were not sold based on their sex appeal, which is not entirely true at all, is it?

But it is true, the sex appeal of the older movies was just one of many characteristics those films used to draw crowds. The horror component, the component that Dino mentioned in the OP of scaring people, was a major part of why people went to see the genre.

Since all the newer movies have is the sex appeal, you could argue that the two are just not the same thing.


That may be true to most extents, but that doesn't mean that it's any less a good story. I'm a straight guy, I've read the books and I thoroughly enjoyed them. I'm interested in the movies simply to see the story move from paper to screen. I know I'm in the minority on that, but the point is that you can enjoy the story just for being a good story, regardless of whether or not you enjoyed past vampire stories (which I do).

Fair enough, I don't mean to imply that the books or the newer movies aren't (or can't be) enjoyable- I just don't see them as being anywhere close to the same as the classic examples of the genre. Things have changed, and I for one would like it if hollywood was willing to make some along the classic mechanics again.


Oh, you'll get no argument from me there. Fact is, the studios know that parents are willing to dish out money for these kids to go see this stuff, so they keep making it. A good, old-fashioned Dracula-type story isn't going to make the same gross income Twilight films will, so they won't bother with it. Sad, but that's the way it is.

Exactly! No argument there.

[praetor]

To learn about vampires, you must read Temple of the Vampire, to know the real vampires, like Vlad Drakul, the Bathory family, the Cillei family(who lived in Varazdin Castle), in Romania, central Europe.
The real vampires who Bram Stoker based her novel "Dracula".

[Yoite]

My favorite Vampire:
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y199/Hard_Drugs_and_Hot_Luck/Bloodghast.jpg
(If you know what this is from I love you...)

[rockabilly]

OG Vampire

[rockabilly]

And the vivacious Vampirella.

[Dirky]

Just give me Christopher Lee and Hammer and you can keep the Twilight crap.

Sarah absolutely rocks on this thread, btw.

[rockabilly]

Am i the only fan of "The Fearless Vampire Killers" by Roman Polanski? That movie is incredibly funny.

And Sarah always rocks.

[SarahG]

Just give me Christopher Lee and Hammer and you can keep the Twilight crap.

Sarah absolutely rocks on this thread, btw.

I'm just voicing my frustrations, well, some of them. There are plenty (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_M21-q1qmSDo/SgruSb0mzAI/AAAAAAAACK4/no5-TUrilTI/s400/twilight+condom.jpg) and plenty (http://pitchfork.com/news/37042-peter-murphy-of-bauhaus-to-cameo-in-next-itwilighti-movie/) of things I could be bitching about with this movie...

[rockabilly]

Rockabilly Vampire .... or Grace Jones in Vamp .... any thoughts?

[Dirky]

Just give me Christopher Lee and Hammer and you can keep the Twilight crap.

Sarah absolutely rocks on this thread, btw.

I'm just voicing my frustrations, well, some of them. There are plenty (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_M21-q1qmSDo/SgruSb0mzAI/AAAAAAAACK4/no5-TUrilTI/s400/twilight+condom.jpg) and plenty (http://pitchfork.com/news/37042-peter-murphy-of-bauhaus-to-cameo-in-next-itwilighti-movie/) of things I could be bitching about with this movie...

I don't know what's more disturbing, Peter Murphy appearing in an upcoming Twilight or just the fact that there's going to be another sequel.

[SarahG]

Just give me Christopher Lee and Hammer and you can keep the Twilight crap.

Sarah absolutely rocks on this thread, btw.

I'm just voicing my frustrations, well, some of them. There are plenty (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_M21-q1qmSDo/SgruSb0mzAI/AAAAAAAACK4/no5-TUrilTI/s400/twilight+condom.jpg) and plenty (http://pitchfork.com/news/37042-peter-murphy-of-bauhaus-to-cameo-in-next-itwilighti-movie/) of things I could be bitching about with this movie...

I don't know what's more disturbing, Peter Murphy appearing in an upcoming Twilight or just the fact that there's going to be another sequel.

As long as they don't conscript siouxsie into an appearance. :angry

The peter murphy part is probably all my fault, I mentioned the idea sarcastically (http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=49746&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=peter+murphy&start=20)on HA a few weeks ago saying something to the effect that "it would be like finding peter murphy in a twilight convention."

Seriously tired of having stuff I say when I am intending to be cynical playing out IRL.

Hmm, what are the odds that David Slade lurks on HA and got the idea from my post?!

[gotchagood]

I hate the new vampires!!! They have humanized them to the point that they are now glamorized. They're supposed to be the "UNDEAD" not someone you'd want to hang out with! I saw the new vampire movie Vampires Assistant, what a joke. Not only do they "not" turn into bats, wolves and creatures of the night; they don't even neck bite anymore!! They say they're redoing Bramm Stokers Dracula (his grandson or great grandson) except with a lesbian side kick, as if Dracula needs a partner. I hope they don't destroy a great classic.

Have a great day

[SarahG]

I hate the new vampires!!! They have humanized them to the point that they are now glamorized. They're supposed to be the "UNDEAD" not someone you'd want to hang out with! I saw the new vampire movie Vampires Assistant, what a joke. Not only do they "not" turn into bats, wolves and creatures of the night; they don't even neck bite anymore!! They say they're redoing Bramm Stokers Dracula (his grandson or great grandson) except with a lesbian side kick, as if Dracula needs a partner. I hope they don't destroy a great classic.

Have a great day

I would rather hang out with an "undead" vampire of the classical variety than edward cullen.

[Dirky]

Just give me Christopher Lee and Hammer and you can keep the Twilight crap.

Sarah absolutely rocks on this thread, btw.

I'm just voicing my frustrations, well, some of them. There are plenty (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_M21-q1qmSDo/SgruSb0mzAI/AAAAAAAACK4/no5-TUrilTI/s400/twilight+condom.jpg) and plenty (http://pitchfork.com/news/37042-peter-murphy-of-bauhaus-to-cameo-in-next-itwilighti-movie/) of things I could be bitching about with this movie...

I don't know what's more disturbing, Peter Murphy appearing in an upcoming Twilight or just the fact that there's going to be another sequel.

As long as they don't conscript siouxsie into an appearance. :angry

The peter murphy part is probably all my fault, I mentioned the idea sarcastically (http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=49746&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=peter+murphy&start=20)on HA a few weeks ago saying something to the effect that "it would be like finding peter murphy in a twilight convention."

Seriously tired of having stuff I say when I am intending to be cynical playing out IRL.

Hmm, what are the odds that David Slade lurks on HA and got the idea from my post?!

I guess you can't blame him in a way. More publicity = more albums sold. It also might turn more young people on to the Bauhaus. I'm sure Siouxsie would appear in a Twilight too if they asked her.

[SarahG]

Just give me Christopher Lee and Hammer and you can keep the Twilight crap.

Sarah absolutely rocks on this thread, btw.

I'm just voicing my frustrations, well, some of them. There are plenty (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_M21-q1qmSDo/SgruSb0mzAI/AAAAAAAACK4/no5-TUrilTI/s400/twilight+condom.jpg) and plenty (http://pitchfork.com/news/37042-peter-murphy-of-bauhaus-to-cameo-in-next-itwilighti-movie/) of things I could be bitching about with this movie...

I don't know what's more disturbing, Peter Murphy appearing in an upcoming Twilight or just the fact that there's going to be another sequel.

As long as they don't conscript siouxsie into an appearance. :angry

The peter murphy part is probably all my fault, I mentioned the idea sarcastically (http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=49746&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=peter+murphy&start=20)on HA a few weeks ago saying something to the effect that "it would be like finding peter murphy in a twilight convention."

Seriously tired of having stuff I say when I am intending to be cynical playing out IRL.

Hmm, what are the odds that David Slade lurks on HA and got the idea from my post?!

I guess you can't blame him in a way. More publicity = more albums sold. It also might turn more young people on to the Bauhaus. I'm sure Siouxsie would appear in a Twilight too if they asked her.

There is one way they could fix this;

Throw the book and the script in the trash. Set it on fire, and pretend it never existed.

Fire everyone. The writers, directors, managers, producers, actors and actresses. SPARE NO ONE.

Then hand it over to peter murphy and have him fix this mess.

[rockabilly]

Damn Vampire Kids!

[Helvis2012]

Great post!
Just the other day someone said the same thing to me.
Hilarious!

[gotchagood]

I hate the new vampires!!! They have humanized them to the point that they are now glamorized. They're supposed to be the "UNDEAD" not someone you'd want to hang out with! I saw the new vampire movie Vampires Assistant, what a joke. Not only do they "not" turn into bats, wolves and creatures of the night; they don't even neck bite anymore!! They say they're redoing Bramm Stokers Dracula (his grandson or great grandson) except with a lesbian side kick, as if Dracula needs a partner. I hope they don't destroy a great classic.

Have a great day

I would rather hang out with an "undead" vampire of the classical variety than edward cullen.I'm with ya on that one 8)

[muhmuh]

ive never really cared too much about the whole vampire genre but i wouldnt be caught dead in a twilight movie
that said i rather enjoyed the dead hobo in the freezer, sucking fat cats blood, getting drunk by first making a hobo drunk then drinking his blood, going out at sunrise and waking up in a cheerleader outfit sticky with her boyfriends cum type vampire in some of my favourite books


My favorite Vampire:
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y199/Hard_Drugs_and_Hot_Luck/Bloodghast.jpg
(If you know what this is from I love you...)

pro tip if you say something like this make sure the filename is scrambled

[Dino Velvet]

Did you guys know that Lon Chaney Sr was the actor originally planned to play Dracula? Unfortunately, he passed away in 1930. Bela Lugosi was playing the character on stage and was chosen for the role. Bela was great but Chaney would have been interesting too. Lon Chaney's make-up in London After Midnight was sinister looking.

http://www.cinefania.com/movie/200702/london01.jpg

[BrassVillanueva]

But it is true, the sex appeal of the older movies was just one of many characteristics those films used to draw crowds. The horror component, the component that Dino mentioned in the OP of scaring people, was a major part of why people went to see the genre.

Since all the newer movies have is the sex appeal, you could argue that the two are just not the same thing.
They're certainly being SOLD on the sex appeal alone, as I said previously, no question about that, but I'd hardly say that that's all they have that makes them popular.


Fair enough, I don't mean to imply that the books or the newer movies aren't (or can't be) enjoyable- I just don't see them as being anywhere close to the same as the classic examples of the genre. Things have changed, and I for one would like it if hollywood was willing to make some along the classic mechanics again.
Again, agreed. And I think that the classic style could be done very well today... and, if done the right way, would sell based on that alone. If done properly and marketed well enough, it could even gross as much as, if not more than, the Twilight films. There IS an audience there, and a very large one at that, but getting Hollywood to figure out how to make them show up is the problem. They want to do everything the easy way these days. Unfortunately, they're in one of the very rare businesses in which you can pretty regularly get ridiculously more money back than what you've put into your product. It's made them lazy.

[Dino Velvet]

With all this Vampire talk I had to watch the one that began it all.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/517gLgbkqLL._SS500_.jpg

http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/67/fe/d071e03ae7a00609c109f110.L.jpg

[SarahG]

Such a great movie but I always find myself torn between watching it with the tinted frames, or untinted.

I have both versions and it really changes the feel of the whole thing.

[raybbaby]

On a similar note, I loved "In the Shadow of the Vampire". with Dafoe and Malkovich. That was just plain cool.

[rockabilly]

Near Dark was a great take on the Vampire story , same w/ The Hunger.

[Dino Velvet]

On a similar note, I loved "In the Shadow of the Vampire". with Dafoe and Malkovich. That was just plain cool.

Agreed. After watching Nosferatu last night I want to watch my Shadow of the Vampire DVD again.

For those who haven't seen the Werner Herzog/Klaus Kinski remake of Nosferatu, you must see it. Kinski is creepy just by himself but his creepiness is off the charts in this.

[sunairco]

Geesh, what's so new about effeminate vampires? When I was in jr. high during the late 60's, we used to laugh our ass off about the character Barnabas Collins in the original Dark Shadows. Johnathan Frid played the consumate limp wristed, lisping vampire. The running joke was "I have come to suck your dick" anytime the subject came up.

[rockabilly]

Prepare for another Dark Shadows remake. :roll:

[rockabilly]

Lauren Hutton made a sexy Vampire in Once Bitten.

[Dinand]

Count Yorga was the man!

[Aaliyah]

i'm scared of vampires ;(

[raybbaby]

Anyone seen the demotivational poster that says Robert Pattison looks like he would fart glitter if he was punched hard enough? It is a classic. Wish I'd grabbed a copy of the picture when I ran across it.

[rockabilly]

Anyone seen the demotivational poster that says Robert Pattison looks like he would fart glitter if he was punched hard enough? It is a classic. Wish I'd grabbed a copy of the picture when I ran across it.

I found this one.

[BlackAdder]

I have to beg to differ on Lestat.....Lestat is actually pretty much a monster lol..if youve read the books. He doesnt much come across that way in the movies though.


True Blood is a good representation...Especially Eric. Some of those vamps are fucking whacked.

[southern81]

i thought the Tv show Vampire Embrace was really good but the best books are by Brain Lumley