A Polish Vampire in Burbank – review

Director: Mark Pirro

Release date: 1985

Contains spoilers

Comedy is a funny old thing – if you pardon the pun. Of course personal tastes effect what one deems as funny or not, that is a given. When it comes to this no-budget effort from 1985 I cannot help but compare it to the recent UK cinema release Lesbian Vampire Killers (LVK), mainly because I watched this just after the more modern, high budget film with ‘professional’ comedy actors. Also because it became clear that the later film actually shared at least one comedy concept with this.

What I found was that this film might not have been either the greatest vampire movie, or the greatest comedy, ever made but it was certainly funnier than the modern vehicle. Like LVK it is obsessed with sexual simile and in this case that is all focused around Dupah (Mark Pirro) – the Polish vampire of the title. Incidentally the film doesn’t state that Dupah is Polish; characters guess that Dupah is a Polish name, whilst Dupah himself never asked which ‘old country’ his folks emigrated from. However Dupah is, I believe, Polish for ass.

The film begins with very grainy shots of a gothic looking castle. The graininess of the film really does serve to hide some of the low budget issues. It seems there is a large gothic castle in Burbank – it is the sort of incongruous feature that Tim Burton likes to throw into his films, unfortunately this doesn’t have the budget to make it as apparent within the neighbourhood. Dupah wakes in the castle and rises from his coffin but his father (Hugh O. Fields) and sister, Yvonne (Marya Gant) are already on the hunt.

As Dupah settles down to watch the Fearless Vampire Killers, hosted in this case by Elvira, his father is busy feasting on a prostitute (Louise Samuels) whilst Yvonne enjoys the pimp (Tyrone Dubose). They are about to leave but she says he is forgetting Dupah. Father siphons some blood from a whore into a plastic baggy. Back home they give the blood to Dupah (who complains that it is not warm enough), but father has had enough – Dupah must go out and lose his virtue. Yvonne will take him. Of course the vampire bite is directly associated with penetration in this movie, leading to much innuendo. Dupah’s problem is that he believes his fangs are too small.

As they head out Yvonne tells him of Sphincter (Eddie Deezen) his long missing brother. Yvonne had to take him out – Sphincter didn’t have fang envy, he couldn’t even stand the sight of blood. She took Sphincter to a bar, picked up a guy and had him watch. Then it was his turn. He tried to pick up a woman but was kicked out of the bar, he then approached a girl outside (Catharine Wheatley) but she produced a cross and asked him if he believed that Jesus was his saviour. Yvonne walked away in disgust, she assumes he never came home as the shame was too great.

Ernie (Steven Dorsch) and his date, Delores Lane (Lori Sutton), come out of a cinema. They have been to see the movie hit “the Enema Vampires”. Ernie is less than impressed, though Delores adored the film as she is a vampire fan. Ernie thinks she is freaky and they argue. Ernie leaves and Dupah approaches the girl. Yvonne slinks off – believing her work to be done – and Dupah asks the girl to go for coffee, she agrees. They talk until a rooster call is heard – what’s a rooster doing in the city, is asked, artistic licence is the reply. Dupah has to race home from the sun but has arranged to meet her again.

In his coffin he is visited by the skeleton of Sphincter – who has come to help him (in a device that was rather reminiscent of Jack in ‘An American Werewolf in London’). Thus we get to discover what did happen to Sphincter. When he wouldn’t say that he believed that Jesus was his saviour the girl turned, revealing her Judo for Jesus logo on her shirt. She kicked his ass and knocked him out. He came round but it was already dawn and he perished in the sun. Now he intends to help his brother. Following this Dupah has a dream that, due to being shot in black and white and due to his clothing, was almost reminiscent of Martin and was clearly the vampiric equivalent of a wet dream.

From here on in what we have is an atypical sexual misadventure film with the gags skewed slightly so that they are about vampires (but packed with innuendo still). Dupah must try and get his fangs into Delores, steering a path through her ditzy roommate (Bobbi Dorsch), a jealous ex-boyfriend and the misunderstandings that occur when confronted by the Queerwolf (Paul Farbman) – a concept which, incidentally, would be followed up in the 1988 Pirro film ‘Curse of the Queerwolf’. It has to be said that this predates LVK’s gay werewolf gag by almost quarter of a century and, to belabour the point, the film takes the standard ‘werewolf rhyme’ and alters it: “Even a wrist that is strong and firm and holds itself up high may become limp when the moon is out and the owner becomes bi.” It might not be sophisticated but its funnier than the LVK gag.

The lore was fairly much as explained. Vampires drink blood, burn in sunlight (and become talking skeletons, which is genre unusual!) and, it appears, have fang size issues. After several bite sessions a male vampire is won’t to roll over and snore.

The acting is not great, the gags are silly and the budget is painfully low but it had something. Perhaps it was the fact that I watched it so close to having struggled through LVK, perhaps it just had a stupidity and charm all of its own. 4 out of 10.

The imdb page is here.

The Rest Falls Away – review

Author: Colleen Gleason

First Published: 2007

Contains spoilers

The Blurb: Beneath the glitter of Dazzling Nineteenth-Century London society lurks a bloodthirsty evil…

Vampires have always lived amongst them, quietly attacking unsuspecting debutantes and dandified Lords as well as hackney drivers and Bond Street milliners. If not for the vampire slayers of the Gardella family, these immortal creatures would have long ago taken over the world.

In every generation, a Gardella is called to accept the family legacy, and this time, Victoria Gardella Grantworth is chosen, on the eve of her debut, to carry the stake. But as she moves between the crush of ballrooms and dangerous moonlit streets, Victoria’s heart is torn between London’s most eligible bachelor, the Marquess of Rockley, and her duty. And when she comes face-to-face with the most powerful vampire in history, Victoria must ultimately make a choice between obligation and love…

The review: This is the first book of the Gardella Vampire Chronicles and looking at the blurb (and content) we can tell that this is set in the Late Regency to early Victorian period – the book mentions the Vampyre by Polidori and this was published at the end of the Regency period. However we can also see an immediate certain similarity with the premise behind a certain contemporary vampire slayer. Indeed there are similarities – a young woman called to slay vampires except… Victoria is a venator and whilst the familial line produces a strong venator once a generation not all venators are from the family. Victoria has innate abilities due to her familial line but also her vis bulla – a silver piercing given to all initiated venators – gives her additional strength and power.

Her enemy, Lilith, is the daughter of Judas Iscariot: “He is known as the betrayer, yet the Lord forgave him as he did all mankind. But Judas Iscariot did not accept the forgiveness, and he hanged himself, as you know. He was thus damned to eternal hell. The devil sold him back his corporeal body, and gave him the power to walk the earth”… which, whilst slightly changed to include the devil, is fairly much lifted from Dracula 2001.

However the vampire genre is a hotchpotch of lifted concepts and reworkings and there is something to be said for the chosen setting. There is a sensibility that harks back to the Regency/Victorian periods within the chapter titles and Gleason even adds in an occasional eroticism that works. There might be a degree of it being a stylised or romanticised look at that period but I don’t know enough about the period to tell (or, quite frankly, care). However, what I do care about is vampiric lore and myth and one aspect of this really irked me.

Gleason has different levels or grades of vampires (fair enough) that can be despatched by stake (they dust), beheading and sunlight… She also mentions The Vampyre, as I said earlier. “…he hadn’t wasted his time reading that ridiculous novel by Polidori, he knew what lore said about protecting oneself from the undead.” At the time this is set Polidori’s novel would be the first and only English language vampire story. There would also be traditional lore, but neither Polidori’s work nor the lore would mention sunlight, as the dissolution of vampiric flesh in the sun had not been invented by the film industry (which itself did not exist). Of course you can have sunlight in your lore but don’t, even in such a cursory way, connect your lore with something else that had very different lore and not explain the inaccuracies between their story and yours… Perhaps I am too harsh… Incidentally we have the strange lore that sunlight will destroy a vampire but fire will not.

So the book is somewhat derivative but the setting is quite nice. That said I could take or leave this as a book, it did nothing that really grabbed me and took my breath away, and whilst I might read book 2 if found in a second hand store (as book 1 was actually) I wouldn’t personally go out of my way to search it out. However if you are looking for something a little Buffy, a little period and a little vampire chick-lit, then this might be for you. 5.5 out of 10.

Honourable Mentions: The Three Stooges: Space Ship Sappy

I must admit I am not au fait with the work of the Three Stooges, they just didn’t really come onto my radar as I was growing up. However, fellow genre fan Leila suggested that I look at this. It wasn’t suggested that it was actually vampiric but it was suggested that it deserved an Honourable Mention.

This was directed by Jules White and was first aired in 1957. The stooges line-up at the time consisted of Moe (Howard), Larry (Fine) and Joe (Besser). The beginning of the short establishes them as out of work bums, reduced to eating a shoe. Larry checks the paper and sees a situation vacant for three sailors to go on a cruise.

The boys head over to the home of Professor A K Rimple (Benny Rubin), as they approach they are watched by the professor and his daughter Liza (Doreen Woodbury). She hopes they won’t refuse the job like other applicants and the Professor decides he won’t tell them what is really going on. They hide the control panels (the house is a space ship) but they needn’t have bothered – the boys are more bothered about the rate of pay.

Liza gives them pills and injects them (with the obvious slapstick results) as the professor preps the ship. When they take off they believe there is an earthquake until the Professor confesses they are ascending. They are going to the moon but, first, they are going to the planet Sunev (Venus backwards). It is here that we are concerned with and I apologise to Stooges’ fans if I have glossed over or avoided a favoured gag.

The boys go out to explore the planet but the planet is inhabited (as spotted by Liza and the Professor) by cannibalistic amazons – billed as Flora (Lorraine Crawford), Fauna (Harriette Tarler) and Amazon (Marilyn Hanold). Liza knows they are cannibals because they have a big cooking pot. I was somewhat amused by the alien language – “Aye, aye, aye… Be-bop!” They are after the boys.

Of course the boys just see girls and try to kiss them. The return kiss involves biting the cheeks/lips – which convinces the boys that ‘these girls don’t know how to kiss’ and, of course, someone has to teach them – it appears they are quick learners (who’s teaching who?) The professor uses his tannoy to try and warn them – he actually states that they are vampires and they will love them to death – but the boys are overpowered and dragged off.

Food preparation seems to involve tickling the boys to death, on the sole of the foot whilst they are tied to posts. After a bit of this the girls develop fangs and claws and encroach upon the boys… How will they get away? What is the punch line pay-off for the short? I’m not going to spoil that – we have reached the end of any vampire-like activity. To be honest cave girls, with fangs, on a distant planet reminded me of Horror of the Blood Monsters and some of the footage in that was probably older than this… however this is vastly superior as a piece of televisual art.

The imdb page is here.

Some Kudos

The Headless Werewolf recently gave me the great honour of awarding me a Premio Dardos Award, which "is given for recognition of cultural, ethical, literary, and personal values transmitted in the form of creative and original writing. These stamps were created with the intention of promoting fraternization between bloggers, a way of showing affection and gratitude for work that adds value to the Web."

Such peer attention is wonderful to receive, however the tradition is to pass these on to another 5 blogs. This is where things become a little sticky as there are many, many amazing blogs out there – many of whom are listed in the right hand links box. I have selected five favourites, five blogs that keep me coming back regularly – some post daily, some not so frequently but I am always excited when a new post appears. The guilt then flows at those missed out, but if I listed you in the right hand list it is because I greatly appreciate your work.

I offer the Premio Dardos to (in no particular order):

Arbogast on Film

Exclamation Mark's Vintage Sci/Fi Horror Review

Trash Aesthetics

The Groovy Age of Horror

The Uranium Cafe

I'd also add, to Exclamation Mark, that its good to see you back blogging, buddy.

In another moment of gratitude I also want to say thank you to my wife. I got home the other day to a couple of small gifts – a wind-up set of walking vampire teeth and a jar of “drunken vampire chutney”.

Let the Right One In – review

Directed by: Tomas Alfredson

Release date: 2008

Contains spoilers

Låt den rätte komma in, to give the film its Swedish title and can I point out just how long it is that I have been waiting to bring this to you on the blog. Still unreleased, at time of review, in the UK – finally – due to the magic of international DVD sales and multi-region players (when are the companies going to get rid of that stupid regioning thing?) I can bring you a review. So let us get some of the controversy out of the way…

Subtitles... It has been widely reported that Magnolia Home Entertainment/magnet have dumbed down the English subtitles on this (and I rarely watch a dub if there is a subtitle to be had). I did not think that the subtitling made this unwatchable but, well let us say that I might have had… ahem… opportunity to see the theatrical release somehow and the subtitles do leave a lot to be desired. The review is of the film, despite the subtitles, and with full knowledge of the theatrical release – so, whilst the DVD is watchable, I seriously recommend that you wait for proper subtitling. EDIT: The UK (blu-ray) edition has the theatrical subtitles.

Next, let me just make my thoughts clear between this and John Ajvide Lindqvist’s book. I called the book an “excellent, innovative but highly disturbing novel”. The film is very different. Much is either left out or left unspoken and the horror level is dramatically culled as a result. I don’t know how the film would have faired with the censors should this have been filmed as per the book – I suspect it wouldn’t have reached the screens.

The book and the film are two different creatures and the book was a Naked Lunch moment, a disturbing look at what was really on the end of our fork, with a story of vampirism added to that almost as a counterpoint to explain that the supernatural was nowhere near as horrific as the darkness within the heart of man and society. In the film we lose the evils of child rape, domestic violence, juvenile crime, drug abuse and even the bullying is, whilst still poignant, less hard hitting than the novel. Even the gender identity aspects, whilst subtly referred to in the film, are avoided in the depth to which the book explored them. The film does, however, become a lyrical fairytale (I will expand) where our protagonist, Oskar (Kåre Hedebrant), is actually more sympathetic than his literary counterpart. Some of Lindqvist’s vampire rules are lost (namely around the nature of the infection) but the film does not lack for that. We begin with Oskar.

He looks out of a window and repeats about squealing like a pig… we later discover this concerns the bullying he is subjected to. We see a car, driven by Håkan (Per Ragnar) with the child passenger Eli (Lina Leandersson), Oskar sees them arrive at his building - at this point I have to refer to the book and state that whilst I saw Håkan as the most unsympathetic and disturbing of the characters, in the film he is almost (though not entirely, he is still clearly a child murderer) nondescript, showing the shift in emphesis. Oskar hides his knife under his mattress and can hear the newcomers in the apartment next door. A man, Lacke (Peter Carlberg), sees Håkan putting cardboard up against a window.

At school we see how Oskar is bullied by classmate Conny (Patrik Rydmark). The bullying aspect is there but, as I said earlier, I think it is less pronounced than in the book – that is not to say that it seems less unfair but that it is not focused on as much. In the evening Håkan prepares a case, there is a plastic bottle, a funnel, a knife and gas.

We see Håkan in the woods and we see him gas a boy. Then we see him winch the boy up, by his ankles, from a tree. In a scene that is disturbing as, beyond anything else, it is almost matter of fact, a plastic coat wearing Håkan slits the boy’s throat into the funnel to fill the plastic bottle. A dog happens along and, hearing the owners, Håkan runs off – leaving the bottle behind.

At the apartments Oskar is by the play area, he has his knife and is stabbing at a tree talking to it in a way that could only bring Taxi Driver to mind and the seminal scene in that movie. He is being watched by Eli. They speak and she says she can’t be his friend. When Håkan returns home she admonishes him, he is supposed to help her and she’ll have to do it herself. It is clear that she is the dominant part of the relationship.

The murder is headline news at school, counsellors are available. Oskar returns home and places a clipping of the murder in a scrap book that is full of tales of murder and violent crime. He goes to the play area and meets Eli again. He has a Rubik’s cube and she seems fascinated by it. To me that played into the traditional obsessive compulsive aspect of a vampire. She is wearing light clothing and he asks if she is cold – she tells him no, she has forgotten how to be cold. He also tells her that she smells funny but lends her the Rubik’s cube and it becomes clear that the two will be friends despite themselves.

Meanwhile, at a Chinese restaurant – the Sun Palace – we meet our main adult characters. Lacke has seen Håkan around and asks him over – this is one of the areas where the DVD subtitles really fail us and fail to add any depth to the film and characters – but Håkan avoids the contact. Later we see Lacke walk Jocke (Mikael Rahm) to an underpass – this is observed by the reclusive and cat loving Gösta (Karl Robert Lindgren) from his balcony. Jocke sees Eli curled up asking for help, he lifts her and she attacks – the little girl overpowering him, drinking his blood and then snapping his neck (presumably to prevent infection). Håkan has to go out and dispose of the body.

That is about as far as I want to go on a blow by blow plot but I love what the film does with the genre and thus I wish to explore that. Firstly we should note that Eli states that she is alive rather than dead – and at times her face seems to age. This aging effect was subtly done and added a level of creepiness to the entire film. I should also note that there is almost an animalistic level to Eli’s vampiric responses but, rather than give her a jungle noise – as it where – a similar but less intrusive effect is achieved by having her stomach growl when hungry or near blood.

We discover, after Eli attacks Lacke’s female friend Virginia (Ika Nord) but fails to finish her, some of the dangers of being undead. The first to be noted is just how violently cats react to vampires. She is in Gösta’s flat when his cats attack her – she has turned by then but thinks she is ill – now the trouble with the scene is that the cats are clearly CGI but the idea of cats detesting the undead is nothing new and I would cite the film Sleepwalkers as a primary example.

We also discover the effect of sunlight is somewhat explosive. Eli sleeps in a bath, covered in layers with the windows blocked out and we see Virginia’s finger start to blacken on exposure. However it is when Virginia is in hospital that we see the full, devastating, effect of sunlight as the body is consumed in huge, roaring flames. We also discover that Eli can climb multiple stories of a building, she suggests to Oskar that she can fly but it is more likely that she can leap and climb.

Probably the most clever aspect is that about being invited in – hence the title. Vampires cannot enter somewhere uninvited but there are no invisible barriers – as sometimes portrayed. Eli enters Oskar’s apartment uninvited as Oskar refuses to say come in, disbelieving that anything bad will happen. Eli starts to bleed, from her pores, from her eyes, from her ears. The bleeding ceases when Oskar vocalises an invitation.

I said that this is a lyrical fantasy and, in many respects, I would put it in the same arena as Valerie and her Week of Wonders but, where that was a coming of age, this is a coming of violence. In the book things are different but in the film I got the impression that Eli represents a physical manifestation of Oskar’s darker personality. In the book he is already, at twelve, a petty criminal, his decent into violence, later in life, is virtually guaranteed. In the film I did not get so much of a sense of that but, rather, that he is a bullied boy being pushed towards counter-violence (with extreme prejudice). Eli represents that part of him – she says, at one point, that he should be her a little, in other words a killer, rather than tries to talk him out of violence.

One has to appreciate the performances of the two child actors who carried this film from beginning to end. They are the main focal point of the film, with other performers almost being ciphers to them. Kudos.

The film has many levels and it draws a beautifully cold and sparse landscape around the viewer. Even with the dumbed down subtitles it is worthwhile, hopefully the edition with proper subtitling will not be too far away. The score I give may seem a little incongruous as it is higher than that I gave the book but the film is a very different beast and some of the (probably translation) clunkiness I felt with the book isn’t apparent through the cinematography. Note that the film is easier to watch, than the book is to read, as the book is very disturbing. 9 out of 10.

The imdb page is here.

Dracula, the Vampire & the Voivode – review (documentary)

Directed by: Michael Bayley Hughes

Release date: 2008

Contains spoilers

It is astounding, sometimes, just how you get to see certain things. For instance, this documentary was viewed because (somehow) my parents know Jason Walford-Davies who narrated the documentary. So I settled down to watch it and my heart sank because the title seemed to make the Dracula and Tepes connection.

As it began, however, it seemed professional and accurate. Then I heard tell that the latest film incarnation of Stoker’s novel was the 1992 version and assumed some age to the documentary. The documentary is very new and clearly there have been later adaptations but… hold on one moment… the documentary has just pointed out that the film erroneously connects the novel and Vlad Tepes…

Suddenly my heart is not sinking, indeed it is soaring. The first half of the documentary looks at Stoker’s Dracula and then moves to Vlad Tepes and his history but is clear that there is no real connection. What it does show is the connections made in Romania, due to tourism (incidentally, kudos to the guest in fancy dress at the Dracula Castle Hotel, at the Borga Pass, who was dressed as Santo!)

Of course this accuracy in documentary making must owe something to Elizabeth Miller who was script consultant for the film. The balance is so good that we even get multiple resting places listed for Tepes rather than just relying on Snagov and the conspiracies surrounding that. We also get some breathtaking photography of Transylvania in the process.

Interesting snippets come in all over the documentary – despite having visited Whitby a couple of times I have yet to do the Dracula Walk so did not realise that the Dracula Experience attraction is where the Captains Reading Room used to be and that the principle ship owner in Whitby, in Stoker’s day, was Captain Gideon Smales – the connection to the old sea dog Swales, from the novel, is made. I will say that I felt some tightening of script around this section of the documentary could have been done as there was a little repetition in what Harry Collett, the Whitby Dracula Guide, says – though that is probably how the Dracula Walk runs live and would likely work as you walked around Whitby with the gentleman.

So, some interesting snippets, lovely photography and a documentary direction that is (from my point of view) accurate and balanced as it looks through its theorems. Excellent. 8 out of 10.

At the time of review there is no imdb page but there is a homepage here.

The Space Vampires – review

Author: Colin Wilson

First Published: 1976

Contains spoilers

The Blurb: The Energy Eaters

Far out in the asteroid belt an alien spaceship of colossal dimensions is discovered. Initial investigations of its vast, gothic interior reveal a number of humanoids preserved in a state of suspended animation. At last, there is real proof that intelligent life does exist in other galaxies. But when three of the beings are brought back to Earth, disaster strikes. The humanoids are discovered to be vampires – preying on people’s life-fields, sucking the body’s energy with a kiss of death.

Suddenly one of the vampires – a female of extraordinary beauty and sexual allure – escapes. And the hunt to track it down soon develops into a psychic struggle for the survival of the human race…

The Review: Regular readers will be aware that I rather like the 1985 space epic Lifeforce. Thus I have wanted to read the book it was based on for some time and… well, whilst aspects are familiar, this is a horse of a very different colour.

Familiar aspects are found in the name of characters and in certain scenes (the mental institution scene is fairly book accurate, up until leaving the institute, it transpires) but, whilst the film was contemporary to the time it was filmed, this is set in 2076 with an end note set in 2145. The spacecraft is not hidden in a comet (jumping into the ‘Haley’s Comet being the harbinger of doom’ bandwagon) but in the asteroid belt. There are not the desiccated corpses of bat like creatures (rather the aliens’ true forms are more akin to squid or octopus). They find some thirty or so humanoids (not three) and the three they bring back are two female and one male not the other way round.

Most importantly we do not have the ‘suck the lifeforce out to make a lifeforce sucking zombie’ – as happened in the film. Things are more subtle, played out between three creatures that can transfer their essence body to body. Possibly the reason that the film put the zombie plague bit in was (beyond it being visually and cinematically more exciting) the fact that, in the novel, Carlsen’s own inherent vampirism is awakened by his contact with the creatures. Indeed we discover that psychic vampirism is a natural occurrence on certain sexual and predatory levels.

My main issue with the book was that I felt it fudged the presence of the creatures. Explanations are given but, despite the overarching story concept working, the fine detail seemed a little incongruous – but perhaps that was just me missing a point. In essence I understood the source of the creatures and their interactions with earth but then, it seems, there were creatures like this on Earth when the ship wasn’t nearby (or was in stasis) – I refer to the story of Count Magnus. I also felt the conclusion was somewhat of an anti-climax and this might have had something to do with the issues I had with the fine detail.

As a sci-fi I felt it was sci-fi light. Other than finding the ship and having lambda energy-field readers there was no apparent need to set it into the future – thus there was no problem setting the film in the 1980s. This will, of course, appeal to those who do not get on with hardcore sci-fi.

A very different experience to the film, interesting ideas and more than competent writing, however the ending left me a little cold. 6 out of 10.

Vampire (1979) – review

Directed by: E W Swackhamer

Release date: 1979

Contains spoilers

There is something odd about this title and not that in a genre so filled with movies they went for the most singularly uninspired title. It is more in the fact that I have read thoughts that this is under-rated and an example of a fine TV movie (actually a pilot but we’ll get to that later).

Frankly, for a vampire movie it is lacking bite, quite literally. A distinct lack of blood and fang curtail the horror and we are left with a melodrama that fairly reeks of broken hearted angst.

It begins with a cross. A blooming big cross that marks the location of a church to be built on the site of a development. Architects John (Jason Miller) and Leslie Rawlins (Kathryn Harrold) are there as they have designed the whole development. As the dedication goes ahead we notice that the shadow of the cross is rather dark. When an old man, later revealed to be ex-cop Harry Kilcoyne (E G Marshall), approaches it he sees that it is not a shadow but scorched earth burnt where the shadow of the cross has fallen on it.

It is a neat idea except… later we discover that Harry knows somewhat more about what is going on as he investigated a rash of vampire like killings forty years before and yet he just leaves. Indeed, had he not had an idea as to its meaning he’d probably have asked. No one else noticed the blooming huge scorch mark either. Neat idea poorly executed. Anyway, that night the ground opens where it has been scorched as Prince Anton Voytek (Richard Lynch) awakens from his slumber.

A few weeks later and the Rawlins are throwing a party. We hear background chatter about murders, throats torn and bodies drained. One Good Samaritan points out that the victims are all either the disenfranchised or known criminals – so who cares! Leslie speaks to her attorney friend Nicole (Jessica Walter) who has a new man – Anton. He is introduced to the Rawlins and tells John he might have a project for him.

He offered to take them to the ballet but does not show up himself, instead Nicole tells them that his family had fled Europe during the war and much treasure had been taken to their estate. The estate had been demolished but the treasure was in an underground complex – under their development. The treasure is made up of artwork and Leslie discovers that much listed had been reported looted during the war.

They find the art – along with a skeleton that turns out to be the remains of Harry’s old partner, who became a priest and then mysteriously vanished. There is millions of dollars worth of art and so John reports it and Anton is arrested for conspiracy to commit grand theft – until he can prove that it did belong to his family. Nicole bails him out but he has to run to escape the sun, he swears revenge on John.

His revenge takes the form of seducing Leslie with eye mojo and leaving her mutilated and drained for John to find. We see neither the attack nor the body when found; all we see are John’s histrionics when he discovers the body. John knows Anton did it but, from the police’s point of view, he has an alibi (Nicole). He breaks into Anton’s apartment and sees the coffin he sleeps in and gets a name for his nemesis – vampire. Of course he ends up sectioned in an asylum where Anton goes to kill him – until harry saves him. The two men team up to end the 700 year old fiend’s unlife.

I won’t go further – except to say that it was blooming clear, when they searched for his hiding spots, that the last one they arrived at (as the sun set) would be the one he was in. It was also clear that Leslie would be a vampire, even though they state she had been mutilated, and I was only surprised it took so long for that revelation to come out. I will also say that the ending was unsatisfying in its open-endedness as this was a pilot for a series that never emerged and there is no real conclusion. I was not struck by any of the performances, except maybe E G Marshall as the retired cop and the soundtrack was painfully melodramatic.

All in all this was far from the greatest vampire film I have experienced but I have to repeat that it was the lack of anything visceral in the movie that really did for it. 3 out of 10.

The imdb page is here.

Commercial Vampire: Snickers

I still remember when Snickers were called Marathons... but never mind. Trust the Japanese to tie a frankly bloomin’ brilliant bit of vampire imagery in with a chocolate bar. To be honest it also makes me forgive the company for changing the name… almost…

First Impressions: Lesbian Vampire Killers

I went into the cinema knowing that this film has been fairly panned by most critics but with hope in my heart – after all it had a redeeming feature in the first instance… vampires. Before I tell you whether such hope was in vain let us look very briefly at the plot.

The village of Cragwich was invaded by the evil lesbian vampire queen Carmilla (Silvia Colloca) until a knight (Mathew Horne) returned from the crusades and discovered that his bride, Eva (Vera Filatova), had been seduced by the vampire. He forged a magical sword, the sword of D’ildo, and slew the vampire but not before she cursed him and his bloodline. From then on – at eighteen – all the village girls transformed into lesbian vampires. It was said in prophecy that with the blood of the last of his line, mixed with the blood of a virgin, could resurrect Carmilla – something that would plunge the world into the endless night of the blood moon – but only the last of his line could destroy her forever.

Jimmy (Mathew Horne) has been dumped by his girlfriend Judy (Lucy Gaskell) – this is the seventh time she has left him. His friend Fletch (James Corden) has been fired as a children’s entertainer for punching a seven year old. As they have no money to go to Ibiza (Jimmy lent his savings to Judy so she could buy a car) he, drunkenly, throws a dart in a map as they will go hiking. The dart hits Cragwich.

Fletch is less than impressed with the concept of hiking and the countryside in general – and smashes Jimmy’s mobile when Judy phones him to try and get back with him – until he sees a group of girls leaving the local pub and getting in a van. They go to the pub but it is full of men, however free beer and a promise of free lodgings, in the same cottage to which the girls have been sent, soon perks him up. The village vicar (Paul McGann) is angry with the locals – he knows that the deal is to send visitors to the cottage for the vampires so they don’t attack the village – and then realises what we had already gathered; Jimmy is the heir of the knight. As the vicar's daughter (Emer Kenny) turns eighteen that night, fast action might save her from her fate.

The boys catch up with the girls – Swedish students studying the legend of Carmilla – and go to the cottage. Soon, however, Heidi, Anke (Louise Dylan) and Trudi (Ashley Mulheron) have all been turned into lesbian vampires, leaving the boys and the virginal Lotte (Myanna Buring) besieged.

Firstly the good news. There is some rather fine lesbian vampire imagery through the film – lots of fangs, ethereal vampires flouncing around and so forth. It owes lots to Hammer but that is no bad thing. It also plays with some vampire genre staples in a way that is amusing. Stick with me, states the vicar, for he knows all about killing vampires. Well so does everyone, the retort is, a list of killing methods rattled off and the mass of genre films and books pointed out. Fair enough so far however we then come to the bad news: the film, touted as a comedy, generally fails to be funny.

In the main it is a series of cock gags and, whilst there is nothing wrong with that necessarily, they have to be funny to work. For my self, I don’t entirely blame the script (though it has real problems). Corden and Horne might have a touch of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost envy (I think comparisons to Shawn of the Dead are unfortunate – there is a much more fitting programme to believe this ripped off, to me at least) but envy is all it is. They are not engaging, do not fit the roles, have no charisma and are just not funny. Also, in a plot so thin, one wonders at the leaps of faith the writers introduced – Judy turns up (of course we know the vampires have turned her, even though Jimmy doesn’t realise it) but we wonder how she found him - the film does not say. That's not to mention the fact that they even managed to have plot holes in the film!

The vampires are fairly standard, holy water kills, crosses ward, beheading and staking finishes them off. There are some nice kills – beheading by the chain of a crucifix springs to mind as does putting a vampire in the shower and holding her in the water as the priest prays, so that it is a shower of holy water – but one has to wonder at the way they die. I was curious as to why they died in gushes of white gloop, as I watched the trailer. Watching the film it is obviously symbolic of sperm. The lesbian vampire is penetrated by a stake and is stopped being a lesbian vampire as she explodes in a shower of sperm – Freud wouldn’t have a field day as it is so obvious. The Queen of the lesbian vampires can be killed only by a magic sword, there are endless comments about the pommel looking like a cock and it is the sword of D’ildo… oh… dildo… at least killing a female vampire by silver dildo in the sex comedy "The Case of the Smiling Stiffs" was original.

Yes the message is clear, lesbians are evil… so intimated one critic as they slagged of the misogynistic aspect of the film calling it a “cruel and furtive revenge fantasy”. It is, however, clear that the filmmakers just tried to play with the genre staple of the lesbian vampire - but were hamfisted about it. If the film fails it is not because of this but because of the lack of humour and decent lead actors.

So, if this isn’t a Shawn of the Dead wannabe (and if it is, it failed miserably) or a Withnail and I wannabe (the only similarity is that two friends go into the countryside and Paul McGann is in the film, who incidentally puts a sterling performance in as the swearing priest and vampire slayer, certainly giving the film more than it deserved), what is it? Well to me Steve Coogan did it first and made a much, much better effort when he made the episode of Dr Terrible’s House of Horrible Lesbian Vampires Lovers of Lust. To be honest you are much better off getting the Coogan DVD, as it is genuinely funny. So, nice visuals, Paul McGann is good but the film fails to be funny. A full review when the DVD is available. The imdb page is here.

New Film: Bonnie and Clyde Vs Dracula

It seems it was just the other day that I was talking to a friend, Ian, about the truth behind Bonnie and Clyde. He was explaining how they outgunned local law enforcement and their cars out-powered them.

I believe it came out of a discussion about icons – and the strangeness of what is chosen as an icon. Certainly the posed photos of Bonnie and Clyde found by the cops propelled them to a culturally iconic place that belied exactly what they were.

Then I noticed this, a dose of weirdness – if the trailer is anything to go by – with Bonnie and Clyde up against another cultural icon – Dracula. Will it work? Time will tell but my normal scepticism when I see the word versus in a title has been slightly calmed by the fact that the trailer looks more professional than I would have expected.

The film has a homepage here.

Dracula and Son – review

Directed by: Edouard Molinaro

Release Date: 1976

Contains spoilers


This was a French vampire comedy and one cannot but help compare and contrast with Tender Dracula as they are both comedies, from the same country of origin, they both featured Gernard Menez in the cast and this starred Christopher Lee, whilst the earlier film starred Peter Cushing. You’ll be pleased to note that this did not plumb the depths of movie Hell that Tender Dracula managed.

There is a degree of compare and contrast to this article, however, as I watched two versions of the film before writing it. Obviously I would dearly love to see the original French film with English subtitles – as far as I am aware there is no way that’s going to happen *Edit 08/08/2022 Severin have released a 4k restoration of the Director's Cut (in French or English) and the US re-cut and dubbed version as part of the Eurocrypt of Christopher Lee Collection 2, links below – but what I actually watched were two different dubbed versions of the film. One, more comedic with very silly dubbing, came in at 78 minutes (and for clarity I shall refer to it as DaS_A). The second was less comedic, had more serious dubbing and was 94 minutes in length (for clarity I shall refer to this version as DaS_B).

How different was the dubbing? If you research the film you find that Christopher Lee shot the film in French. Some sources state he was dubbed into English and others state he dubbed himself into English. DaS_B was certainly Lee’s own voice, I am fairly certain that it was another voice actor in DaS_A. Indeed the dubbing is very silly in DaS_A, voiceovers that aren’t on the other version, characters referring to the voiceovers and even different character names. The son of ‘Dracula’ (Bernard Menez) is called Ferdinand in DaS_B and Victor in DaS_A (in which he has a faux Bronx accent). Even the start of the films are different, with the shorter film having an animation of vampires through the ages curtailing the actual running time further.

In eighteenth century Transylvania a coach looses its wheel. Before it can be fixed a second coach comes along and transports the two female passengers, Herminie (Catherine Breillat) and her chaperone Marguerite (Claude Génia), away. It is clear that it is a vampire’s coach and Marguerite is bitten on the journey. They reach a castle and Herminie is left to meet the Prince of Darkness (Christopher Lee). We should note that, on release, it was decided he was Dracula – against Lee’s protest – though the film never actually was meant to be a Dracula movie. We see one of the problems with DaS_A here – which is it creates its own plot holes. Herminie and the Prince end up having some coffin sex and she notes that she has no fang wounds with her reflection. In both versions the Prince falls for her and wants a child and heir, however in DaS_A he says he is professional with his bites and has not left a mark, but she does not turn and he leaves quite vivid wounds when he does turn her after she has given birth, whilst in DaS_B he makes it clear that he has shown self control and not bitten her.

Anyway, she does become pregnant and gives birth to a son – at which point the Prince does turn her whilst leaving the child in the care of Marguerite, who is to be the nanny. Herminie goes on her first hunt – at which point we see a cross that in DaS_A is referred to as the Transylvanian double-cross – but she fails to return to the castle in good time and is fried in the sun. Five years later and Ferdinand is a precocious brat who plays bowling with a skull and the urn of his mother’s ashes and traps Marguerite in the sun – killing her off.

By the time he is over 100, the Prince takes Ferdinand hunting as he cannot be fed from the bottle all his life. At this point Ferdinand is sporting a very silly moustache. In DaS_B no comment is made with regards this, in DaS_A the dub suggests that it is a false moustache as he doesn’t want to be seen with his father! Then the castle is lost to the Communist revolution and the Prince decides it is time to leave. Interestingly we get a call for a cross, when confronting a vampire servant, and a hammer and sickle are crossed to make a cross – I preferred the Doctor Who – the Curse of Fenric idea that faith in the revolution made the hammer and sickle a potent symbol.

To cross the border the prince has them kill a couple of French sailors and then they take their place in the coffins. Unfortunately they end up being buried at sea. Ferdinand washes up in France whilst a fishing boat picks up the Prince and he ends up in England. The next segment shows their fight to survive. The Prince struggles – even biting a rubber doll – until he is found by a movie producer who thinks him perfect for his vampire movie, obviously vampires can be filmed in this despite having no reflections. In DaS_A it is because he looks just like Christopher Lee!

Later, as a successful star, the Prince travels to Paris and is reunited with his son. However they both fall for the same girl, Nicole (Marie-Hélène Breillat) and Ferdinand decides he must protect her from his father whilst wooing her – she shows more interest in the Prince at first. The Prince wants to have his toothsome way and has decided she will replace Herminie and Ferdinand just wants a girl it seems.

Lore wise I have mentioned much of it – sunlight kills, lack of reflections etc. What I probably didn’t make clear is that a cross can kill as well as ward. However one thing that neither version of the film explains well is the fact that Ferdinand is able to become human. To be honest he doesn’t know how but I suspect it was meant to be a combination of him being a particularly poor vampire and experiencing true love.

The two films are very different experiences. One, DaS_B, a gentle comedy with some languid moments that amount to poor pacing. The other much better paced but with the most ridiculous dub and some very silly humour – that does work on certain levels but does come across as a bit student/puerile. Neither version noses above the other score wise.

I would love to see this restored and in the original French and DVD companies should note that if they released a set with an original French/English subs and the two dubbed versions it would be something, I think, collectors would go for. For both the dubbed versions 3.5 out of 10.

The imdb page is here.

On Blu-Ray @ Amazon US

On Blu-Ray @ Amazon UK (note this is Region A)