ok Vampires!!!!!!!!

[Rashagoth]

We all know about the legends of the Vamp! Well then is BL the only one that mainly stays with the old legends? BL lords and ladys are hard to kill! Were most movies now a days have them weak aka Dawn till Dusk!
Your thoughts or oppions?

[Canker]

Because Hollywood can not grasp the concept of a creature that can not be overcome as easily as they have been portraying their vampires. If they did, their movies would run 3 hours instead of 1 1/2. *L* I know what you mean though. Dusk till Dawn and John Carpenter's Vampires were a bit of a let down. All except Valic and even he died kind of lousy.

[Lichloathe]

Well Dusk till Dawn is more an action movie than vampire film. Typical Tarantino movie, only the bad guys happen to be... vampires! I personally liked the film, on the above premise that is.
Even in Blade vampires die right,left and center.
Only Gary Oldman in Dracula was hard to kill, in recent films that is.

[Vormulac]

You know, the only vapire flick that comes to mind when persuing the topic of -tough- vampires would be Bloodstone, and the following Subspecies sequels. Granted, the movies were low-rated, but the plots were at least half-way feasible ~L~ Kind funny to.. that the main vampire in the flicks was named Radu... and he was one mean, and tough SoB.

[candun]

My idea of a bad vam film is the lost boys,some good names were used to make this film but they could not make it great. Any one vampire that can be killed by three kids is not worth his weight in blood,let alone a groupe of them. The ending was a typical live happily ever after by the sea.
Film makers now seem to concentrate to much on the hero than the baddie so before the end you will know what is going to happen, vampires have to many talents,so how is it that the hero can creep up on them and have all the time in the world to kill at their lesiure. Don't forget that it took a vampire to take care of Thibor in the beginning then another one to finish him off.

[kortag]

Hmmm...well, There are so many differnt concepts on vampires, so many cultures etc.
I like many Vamp movies and tv shows as well.
I think B. Stoker started the whole romantic Vamp thing and from then on they had weaknesses. Of course, I would prefer that they kick ass all the time but sometimes you just dont get that. I dug Blade for pure action content and I liked Vampires by J. Carpenter as well. Just different ways to tell the story on the myth. Of course Brian has probably the most original way to tell the story. Chances are if the movie has vamps in it, I would enjoy it on some level.

Hail Lord Shadoewolf

[Scarlet oHorror]

i don't like these new movies about vamps...i prefer all the old cheesy green and white movies...(notice how it wa never realllly black and white???)
i much prefer those for suspense content...ok ok they were cheesy but i thought they were good, pure evil vamps with no hint of being stupid or able to set up easily...don't get me wrong, i did enjoy dusk till dawn, mainly coz i ws trying to find out where the tattoe went to...i haven't seen Carpenters Vampires...but i still don't like the way vamps are portrayed nowadays...they are weak...a bit stupid and damn ugly...i like BL's vamps coz u can imagine how they look, even when they turn you can still imagine them as the most handsome vamps with strength and power, if all the vamps in BLs books were to be killed off easy we would be on the 5th book instead of the 11th...and that would be boring.....
have i talked too much?...u see i'm trying to lull y'all into a false sense of security so i can get my SSF and be done with all of u so i may rise to the top........
i need to learn how to use these emoticon thingies.....
Later Vamps
Scarlet

[Rikus]

Does anyone remember Salems' Lot? That was a cheesey film. But the vamps were pretty spooky.

[Mike C]

Rikus now that was a scary movie (the original)to me, of course I saw it when I was about ten years old without my parents around on a dark and stormy night... also remember special effects back then weren't what they are today. Thinking about a child vampire scraping his nails on a window pane still gives me the shivers.

[Vormulac]

Rikus: The book is much better, honestly. Alot different then the movie, as they ussualy are. ~shrugs~ In the book Barlow (the main vamp) is quite the distinguished looking fellow.. not some baldheaded freak with funky front teeth ~shakes head~....

[Mike C]

Vormulac I may be mistaken but I think the idea behind making the main vampire baldheaded with those teeth was in homage to the original vampire movie Nosferatu. That was supposedly a revolutionary movie for its time (1930's). I was supposed to watch it for a movie class in college.

[Krynus]

I'd have to say that in recent years, the best vamp flicks were the Subspecies movies. The vampires were actually mean. The vamps in Blade sucked.... cut his finger he dies, punch him he dies. are they vampires or what? I like the vamps in JC Vampires a lot, though the movie could have been better. A hell of a beginning though.... the vampires were pretty mean, meaner than most you see these days.

[Krynus]

I hear that Carl...

I had read Interview to try it out, and I kept waiting for something to happen.... and waiting... and waiting.... Louie and Lestat kept running whenever any other vamps showed up. wtf?

So I tried the next one... made it about half way through it and just couldn't stomach it anymore. I think ol' Annie could take a few lessons in horror from the Master BL here.

[Rashagoth]

The sad thing is that ANN RICE is held a the greatest vampire horror writer!! YUCK that makes me sick. If fact I have banned her for over 4 years now! BL is the greatest!!! ANN RICE is just a sissy writer were the only thing she cares about is if the char is gay or not! Hail BL!!!!!!

[Mike C]

Krynus, Carl, and Rashagoth you are all absolutely correct... I was reading the Necroscope series while a coworker was reading Rice's vampires, and we compared books. My coworker never read the Necroscope and I just read Interview recently... I should have read it sooner so I could convince her to stop reading Rice and start reading from the master.

Krynus to get italics...
< i > Krynus < / i >.

[This message has been edited by Mike C (edited 12-05-1999).]

[ShadoeWolfe]

Licheloathe,

Watch it there bud! Let's keep the author bashing to a minimum. Everyone likes different tastes. Obviously we all like Brian's vamps, but maybe we like them better thanks to Anne's take on the more feminine vamp? So you should thank her for writing the way she does. Remember, some people like her and that's their choice.

Look at me being politically correct. Oh well. Keep it toned down - so says Shadoe.

[Trampas]

When I read how nearly indestructable BL's vamps are, I was reminded of two other creatures:
The aliens in John Carpenter's remake of "The Thing". Every single drop of their blood had its own will to survive by any means it could. They had metamorphic flesh: cut off their head and it grows eight legs and crawls away. The only real way to kill them was to burn them until nothing but goo remained. They might have even been more powerful than the Wamphyri in that they could tolerate sunlight and they could mold themselves into the shape of anyone they touched. Their intelligence though was only that of a Warrior.
BL's vamps also remind of a short story I read somewhere in which a vampire, intoxicated on the blood of a drunk man, tells a soldier how he could be killed. He had to be burned and the fire must be watched. Bats, roaches and centipedes fled from the fire and if any one of them was allowed to escape, the vampire could regenerate through them.
As for vampire movies.. "Fright Night" wasn't too bad. The cross only warded off the vamp if the holder of the cross was a true believer. And it took a fair amount of planning and subterfuge to finally kill the vamp.

[Pybob]

Surley the case with all vampires is that they are next to impossible to kill... it's just that Hollywood vamps are, well, not vampires in the truest sense- they're just a monster, a boogey-man to overcome... a simple plot device there for a few cheap special effects, some dodgy Bondian one-liners and that's it.

I'm sorry to say the only people ever to treat the legend with any respect (?!?) was Hammer, after all Chris Lee kept on coming back!

Also, there are so many different takes on the legend, as BL himself testifies, that any attempt to film them will inevitably cause dissappointment amongst die-hard fans...

[Rhyis]

First of all...i would like to say; Anne Rice is not a bad author...I still find that Lumley towers over her as vampires go...but still, its almost two differant subjects...Rice is more into the Romantasm of the vampire, where lumley..is more into the evil side of the vampire and thier said, true nature.... anyway...you have to admit, Interview was a good movie...still i would rather read any of the Necroscope series over again than any of the vampire trilology more than once......and as movies go..Interview and B.Stoker's Dracula are the only two vamp flics ive seen, that i can sit through...The blood is the life..


So forth these words are spoken by Rhyis, no one has had any direct influance in writing this....so please, no hard feelings...and again...The blood is the life..

[This message has been edited by Rhyis (edited January 14, 2000).]

[Quail]

I didn't have anything to say on this topic but I recently watched From Dusk Till Dawn again and I have an idea why most vamps are easy to kill. It's because they are all arogant about their status. After many years of killing and feeding the vamps don't see how any "mere" mortal could possibly pose a threat to them, so that when the humans finally fight back the vamps have no idea whats happening until they've been staked. But Brians vampires are cunning, clever and secretive. And would never let a human get the better of him. Well apart from a Necroscope that is.