John Carpenter's VampiresVampire films usually tend to fall into two categories: those obsessed with symbolism and metaphors, and those obsessed with violence, gore, and sex. For me, there's only one true vampire story: Bram Stoker's. That's not to say I hate all others. I thought Interview with the Vampire was a highly underrated film. But it really is Bram Stoker that brought vampires to light (no pun intended), and his story has become an obsession with the film industry. Many great directors have tried their hand at the story, but not many succeed. F.W. Murnau's 1922 classic is the best due in part to the terrifying performance by Max Schreck (who looks a lot like the rats that infest the boxes he travels with). Herzog's remake Nosferatu the Vampyre is a highly overrated piece of film making. And then Francis Ford Coppola remade the story with Bram Stoker's Dracula, which received critical praises from this critic.
Violence in vampire films is essential these days. People expect to see bloody necks and stakes through hearts. And for the most part, the most violent vampire movies fall flat. From Dusk Till Dawn was an extremely violent film but came off as a vehicle made only for George Clooney. Bordello of Blood was obnoxious and tedious. And the other vampire film this year, Blade (which is even better than this John Carpenter film), is all about style over substance. So this could be the year of vampires, as two have been released which manage to entertain quite a bit. And both surprisingly rely on violence more than anything else.
VAMPIRES begins with the powerful score written by Carpenter himself, as the camera approaches a mysterious and foreboding house. Two trucks drive up, and a band of men get out. The leader is Jack Crow (James Woods) whose parents were both bitten by vampires. Now he wants revenge, to cleanse the world of vampires. Hoping to find a Master vampire in the boarded-up house, the group equips themselves with all sorts of artillery, most importantly wooden stakes. "Crosses don't work. If you stand there wearing garlic, they'll walk over you, bend you in half, while drinking your blood," Crow says. The only two things that can kill a vampire are the sun and a stake through the heart. They walk in and proceed to destroy each vampire, one by one. But no Master is found.
Later that night, they celebrate in a hotel with hookers and alcohol. Crow meets Katrina (Sheryl Lee), and he takes her to his room. But she gets bitten by a Master vampire, Valek (Thomas Ian Griffith), who then he goes on a murder spree, killing all but Crow, his sidekick Tony Montoya (Daniel Baldwin), and Katrina. Crow decides to go talk to Cardinal Alba (Maximilian Schell) who sponsors his vampire hunt. Turns out that Valek isn't just a Master... he's the Master. "The first vampire," Alba says. Apparently, Valek was prosecuted 600 years earlier for being possessed by demons. During an illegal, experimental exorcism, an accident occurred, and an inverse exorcism was performed. This leaves the body dead, which allows the demons to take over. Valek wants to finish the process so that he can survive in the sun, but he needs a black cross which was used in the original exorcism.
The plot is not really important in this film, and it's easily noticeable. It wanders from attack to attack, but thankfully the plot does give us enough information as to how the heroes knew where to go. Some movies just put the heroes into locations without any purpose (see The Avengers). The screenplay, adapted by Don Jakoby from the novel Vampire$ by John Steakley, is adequate for the purposes, and includes some very good dialogue. Watching the film, I began wondering what Steakley's novel added to the plot, as it touched on some subjects that could have been more fully developed. The main character was traumatized as a child, and I would have liked to see more of that subplot. After all, his bad attitude towards women isn't explained, and it's rather off-putting.
As with Bride of Chucky, the violence is the true star here. There's an extremely high amount of gore, usually which bends into the absurd. If you can't take vampire gore, I wouldn't recommend this film. But for a Halloween release, it's exactly what people are looking for. Frankly, Saving Private Ryan was more graphic because it was realistic. Here, there's decapitations, slit throats, limbs being torn off, and one incredibly sick moment when a man gets split in half (think a more gruesome Rob Roy). The vampire deaths are just as bad, as many of them are very raw. One has Crow jamming a stake through one's heart and continuously pounding at it. It's not the image that's gross... it's the sound. Many vampires are dragged into the sunlight where they burst into flames.
James Woods is so good in the movie that it almost makes me want to give it a better rating. Woods is always a good actor in every role he gets. He made The Specialist bearable. He won't get an Oscar nomination like he did with Ghosts of Mississippi, but he makes the film work. His experienced face makes for a likable hero, even if he slaps women around. He's one bad-ass man. Daniel Baldwin isn't up to par with brother Alec or Stephen, but he's surprisingly effective here. His staunched appearance and puppy-eyed expressions make him a very good sidekick. Poor Sheryl Lee. Last year, she starred in one of the best films of the year, Bliss. Now she's here, giving a good performance for a bad character. She's got many harsh emotions to go through, and she gets beaten up quite a bit. Too bad it wasn't in a better film. Thomas Ian Griffith is suitably scary with as little dialogue as possible. Just looking at him makes you want to run for cover. Tim Guinee is similar to the character played by Jeremy Davies in Saving Private Ryan. Guinee does a good job portraying the priest who has never experienced battle before. Maximilian Schell is effective if a little dull. And that's Frank Darabont as the owner of the Buick. He wrote and directed the great film The Shawshank Redemption.
Speaking of directors, John Carpenter is well known for his fright-fests. His low-budget Halloween went on to gross over $40 million, and it's now hailed as one of the best slasher films ever made. But that one hit doesn't make him a great director. He did good work with The Thing and the remake of Village of the Damned, and he adds another good film to his list. It's not as scary as it should have been, but it's suspenseful at points. An elevator chase sequence is intense, as is the first battle between Crow and his crew and the vampires. In fact, the opening sequence is reminiscent of the talent he showed with Halloween. His use of atmosphere and lighting is very effective at creating truly suspenseful moments. His score is even superior to his direction. It's a mix between country western and heavy metal. Carpenter has been known for creating some great scores, and his Halloween music is continuously referenced to in other films. The cinematography is well-down, and the pyrotechnics are superb. The blood effects are superbly crafted, with some terrifyingly gruesome moments. The special effects probably could have used some tweaking, but it doesn't matter. This isn't a special effects-driven film.
VAMPIRES is rated R for strong vampire violence and gore, language and sexuality. Sheryl Lee is nude for some of the film, but you don't see as much of her as you did in Bliss. The language is harsh, but it's essentially the violence that got the rating. This is definitely not a film for children. Not only because of the violence, but because of the cruel treatment of women portrayed (but, in its defense, the women being beaten up are either vampires or vampires in the making). It's an extremely stereotypical film that was made solely to entertain with gratuitous amounts of violence. Hey, be thankful you didn't get another vampire film pretending to be something it wasn't. The film knows exactly what it wants to show us, and it does so. In short, the film is fun to watch, but don't be expecting Saving Private Ryan.