Vampire - Evil Pleasures

Evil Pleasures

follow this blog

9 followers

77 daily readers

rank of 141

E-mail Subscription

Receive an e-mail notification of new posts on this site:

Genre

Slasher

Creature

Zombie

Ghost

Werewolf

[ Not ] Vampire

Demons

Discussion

Psychological

[ more ]

Quality

[ And ] Classic

[ And ] Great Horror

[ And ] Good Horror

Standard Horror

[ And ] Sub-Par Horror

Absolute Trash

So Bad It's Good

[ more ]

Spotlight Posts

Coming Soon & Wish List

[ more ]

Plot: A young horror buff by the name of Charlie Brewster (William Ragsdale) becomes convinced that his next-door neighbour, Jerry Dandrige (Chris Sarandon) is a vampire, and must enlist the help of his friends and his hero (Roddy McDowall) to stop his murderous rampage!

Having seen Sarandon in Bordello of Blood, I was inspired to revisit this old classic. The movie follows young horror-nut Brewster as he desperately tries to enlist his friends, and later washed-up horror presenter Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall) to help him combat Vamp-next-door Dandrige. I hadn't seen this one in years, but I've been having a good run with revisiting childhood classics, and so thought I would give this one a fresh reviewing. And, again, this one has failed to disappoint; I can still say with refreshed clarity that this is one of my favourite vampire movies of all time.

Acting: Probably the stongest part of this movie. Simply put, everyone is fantastic. However, there are 4 performances in particular that stand out above the rest. First mention in the best supporting actor category goes to

Now say AAAAHHHHH

Stephen Geoffreys as 'Evil' Ed Thompson. His performance as the quirky if slightly unhinged best friend is top-notch, particularly after be becomes one of the undead. The fact that he went on to star in hardcore gay porn... don't hold that against him (or do, if you're into that kind of stuff!). His high-pitched, maniacal cackle still creeps me out to this very day. However, it is the three leads who steal the spotlight, and what a contest it is to pick a favourite from the trio; Brewster, Vincent and Dandrige. Ragsdale offers a fine performance as Brewster, even if at first it is a bit hard to empathize with his character (I mean... who turns down a long-awaited sexual encounter to stare at a coffin!?). However this is a scripting thing, and doesn't at all detract from Ragsdale's portrayal. However, in my mind his performance is overshadowed by that of Roddy McDowall as Peter Vincent, recently-fired host of Fright Night, and closet coward.

McDowall does something really special with his character, and gives us one of those performances that almost seem written just for that person. Apparently David Tennant (of Dr. Who fame) is set to take McDowall's place in the upcoming remake... not quite sure how I feel about this yet!

I have, of course, saved the best for last. The highlight of the movie, the king among princes, is Chris Sarandon, and his wicked portrayal as the vampire Jerry Dandrige.

I don't think I can emphasize enough how well Sarandon portrays the character, ranging from a ruthless killer to a charismatic seductor with ease. In vampire mode he is, of course, helped out by some impressive prosthetics, but even when he's just plain ol' Jerry, he still manages to convey an air of menace. Sarandon has played some great roles over the years, but to me he will always be Jerry Dandrige.

Script: While I have read some criticisms of the script, I really didn't have any problems with it. Sure, if you look at it too closely you will find some plot holes, and some parts don't make that much sense, but in comparisson to most of the junk around at the moment it's a very solid script. It delves into campiness without becoming cheesy, and manages to achieve that perfect blend of gore, tension and black comedy that is so hard to achieve.

Effects: Excellent. The vampires are

Come here and gimme a kiss!

horrendous looking, and there are several graphic death scenes that were particularly impressive death scenes (Evil Ed, Billy Cole and Dandrige, to be precise). The CGI, while looking dated, is thankfully kept to a minimum (as it should be!), so the movie has aged well.

Overall, this movie is a wickedly fun romp, with some excellent performances and great effects. If you haven't seen it, you're doing yourself an injustice... and if you have, you know it's time to take it out, blow the dust off, and treat yourself to another viewing. I know I will be.

Vote

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Someone - Category: Vampire, Classic

Email this Post to a Friend

Movie Review: Bordello of Blood

July 18th 2010 10:53

Plot: An overzealous reverend (Chris Sarandon) obtains a mystical artifact that allows him to control the vampire queen, Lilith (Angie Everhart). He uses her to create a bordello full of vampires, with the intention of using them to wipe out all of the towns sinners. Meanwhile, a down-on-his-luck detective, Rafe Guttman (Dennis Miller) is hired by reverend's assistant Katherine Verdoux (Erika Eleniak) to find her missing brother, Caleb (Corey Feldman). Guttman uncovers the secret behind the bordello, and tries to prove it to the rest of the town before the vampires turn him into lunch.

Bordello is the second part of the Tales from the Crypt trilogy, following 1995's Demon Knight.. Unfortunately, due to it's poor reception at the box office, the third installment was canned. However, after 2001's Ritual also performed poorly, it was retrospectively added to the trilogy.

Now, I loved Demon Knight, and so I had high hopes for this one. Like it's predecessor, I had seen this one way back when I was just a wee lad, and I have fond memories... and, again, it has held up well. It has gore, it has shameless nudity (I mean... it's set in a damn bordello!), and it has some great comedy. However, despite being entertaining, it isn't as good as DK, and it isn't hard to see why it flopped at the box office.

Acting: For the most part, not bad. Dennis Miller has the standout performance as smartass detective Rafe Guttman, a role in which he is cast perfectly. I have a feeling that he improvised alot of his lines (or else the role was written specifically for him), and he is genuinely funny to watch. Also enjoyable to see is Reverend J.C. Current, suitably amen'd

Corey Feldman's feeling a bit heartless

and hallelujah'd by Chris Sarandon. Interestingly, Sarandon played a wicked vamp in Fright Night, so it's nice to see him on the other side of the fangs, so to speak. Also keep and eye out for Whoopi Goldberg, who gets in a 15 second cameo as a hospital patient, and for William Sadler as the Crypt Keeper's not-so-friendly Mummy companion.

The big letdown for me was Angie Everheart as Lilith.

Baby, you can suck more than just my blood

Don't get me wrong, her performance, despite being a bit poor in parts, was ok overall... but what elevated Demon Knight to awesome-status was Billy Zane, and unfortunately Angie just doesn't compare. That being said, it isn't nearly enough to spoil your fun (and she is ridiculously good looking), but she doesn't have that cheesy charm. One genuine criticism I have is that Everheart doesn't get her kit off, but I guess we can't have everything...

Script: Piss-poor. But come on; it's a movie about a bordello full of vampires, and a Tales from the Crypt movie to boot. If you came here expecting a high-quality script, you must be (at least) mildly retarded.

Definitely gonna feel THAT in the morning

Effects: Awesome. Although the CGI looks a bit dated, the creators opted to use prosthetics, and they use that to great effect. Also, there are plenty of hearts being ripped out, heads being torn off, dismemberment, and of course vampires being reduced to heaps off puss, so the gorehounds will not be left wanting.

Overall: This is not a film that takes itself seriously. I mean... how is that possible in a movie in which a detective and a reverent take on a whorehouse full of vampires with supersoakers and water pistols? What it is... is wickedly entertaining. So sit back, crack open a beer with some mates, pass the spliff, and just enjoy.

110

Vote

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Someone - Category: Vampire, Good Horror

Email this Post to a Friend

Movie Review: Daybreakers

March 5th 2010 02:46

Premise: An infection originally from bats spreads through humanity, turning the majority of humanity into vampires. These vampires then enslave most of the remaining human populace, using them as living blood farms. However, there is not nearly enough blood to go around, and without fresh blood the vampires devolve into mindless mutant bat-people, the wicked looking Subsiders.

Enter Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke), a human-sympathising vamire blood doctor working for the corporation that runs the blood farms, headed by Charles Bromley (Sam Neill). Dalton sympathises with the humans, and wants to create a blood substitute to eliminate vampire dependance on them as a food source, allowing them to be freed. I won't give away much more than that, but the plot revolves around Dalton's compassion for humanity and his fight for their survival.

Now, this is the Spierig brothers' follow-up to 2003's brilliant horror-comedy Undead (quite possibly the best Aussie movie I've seen), and needless to say my hopes were pretty damn high going in to this one. Unfortunately, this movie is not as funny or as original as Undead. That being said, however, this is most definitely not a bad movie.

Acting: Solid. Ethan Hawke does a good job as the conflicted vampire haemotologist,

and Sam Neill is a great Evil Boss character. The main rogue human (Claudia Karvan) and Edward's polar-opposite brother Frankie (Michael Dorman) both put in convicinging performances. However, my hat goes off (and it usually does) to Willem Defoe as Elvis, the comic-relief gung-ho cowboy human renegade with a crossbow and an attitude. He comes out with some truly quality lines (eg. When Edward asks him "is this place safe?" he replies "Living in a world where vampires are the dominant species is about as safe as bare backing a 5 dollar whore"). You can tell that the Spierigs had alot of fun with Elvis, and the audience does too. He's a pretty central character, and Defoe plays him perfectly (as he usually does).

Effects: Mind-numbingly excellent.

. The highlight in the effects department are the Subsiders, who look truly horrific (like a deformed mutant vampire should). As you can see from the picture, these vamps are pretty nasty, and I love the irony of a vampire plague affecting a plague of vampires. It's a (very, very) welcome break from the la-di-da fairy princess (Twighlight) vampires that seem to have been dominating the scene lately. Creature effects aside, the rest of the effects were top-knotch as well. The gore was plentiful (especially towards the climax), and very well done.

Direction & Script: Normally I would judge these separately, but considering the Spierigs both wrote and directed it, it seems only fair. This movie, while not being genre-defining, is just good. Yes, I do have a few qualms with it; some of the dialogue was a bit thin, and I felt the whole sub-plot involving Sam Neill's daughter, while important, felt a bit rushed. But these are minor criticisms with what is overall a very impressive offering. Not since Eskalofrio can I remember a movie which so effectively used the interplay between light and darkness to effectively shape the mood, and the movie is all the better for it. From what I have read, alot of people think they have spotted a whole mess of plot holes; actually, if you look a little closer these people are, in fact, idiots. This movie has very few problems in terms of the script. For example; in one scene, we see Hawke's clothes in a mirror, as the vampire is invisible, and in another he is adjusting his clothes in another mirror. However, if you pay attention, you will notice that the second mirror is actually a small camera with a TV. It's little details like that that help make this movie great to watch.

So, overall, a great vampire romp. Definitely more enjoyable than watching all the teen vampire crap that has been shoved down our throats in recent times, and easily my favourite vampire flick since 30 Days of Night.

Vote

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Someone - Category: Vampire, Great Horror

Email this Post to a Friend

Movie Review: Bram Stoker's Way of the Vampire

July 2nd 2009 03:32

Premise: Van Helsing kills Dracula, but while he is doing so another vampire turns his VH's into the undead. In revenge, VH makes a pact with the church: He shall be immortal, until he has killed all of the vampire princes

[ Click here to read more ]

Vote