I'm trying to kickstart this community by posting various vampire movies; some obscure, some classics. This is definitely a classic. To the point that I don't know what else to say about it. It's great, go watch it. It makes being a vampire fun and exciting (not just old aristocrats in castles!) while also having kids going on an adventure (Corey Feldman and Corey Haim at their peak). The effects are perfectly 80s, the dialogue is perfectly 80s, the action is perfectly 80s. I don't know what else to say if you haven't seen it. Here's a trailer.

I've watched a lot of random old/bad horror movies on Prime Video, to the point that Prime now recommends even more old/bad horror movies to me. I guess the algorithm is working. Anyway, Prime suggested Subspecies to me and the cover looked like a perfectly bad horror movie so I gave it a try. And it was a fun vampire movie; I really enjoyed it. Not a "good" movie of course, but a "fun" movie. So then Prime suggested I watch Subspecies 2. So I did. And then Subspecies 3. And then I was hooked. I finally looked online for this series that I had never heard about in any discussion of vampire movies and found there were 6 movies, with the most recent being from 2023!

The series even has a surprisingly cohesive storyline and each movie directly leads into the next. It's primarily about a vampire named Radu who falls in love with a woman and spends 4 movies desperately trying to convince her to join him as a vampire. He doesn't want to kill her; he wants her to join him. He

I've never read any Anne Rice novels and don't really have any nostolgia for the Interview With The Vampire movie. I'll absolutely admit it's a good movie, it's just not the type of vampire story I typically enjoy. I guess I'm too low-brow and prefer vampire action/horror over the more introspective stuff. And I guess that's why I probably won't be posting anything here about Only Lovers Left Alive or Let The Right One In. I understand these are good (great?) movies, but they're not for me.

Anyway, I've heard good things about the new Interview With The Vampire TV show. I'm curious if any of you have seen it and how you'd compare it to the movie. Is it any good? What'd they do differently from the movie? Does it follow the books more closely? If you haven't seen it, here's a trailer. You can currently watch it on [Netflix](https://www.ne

First of all, let's get this out of the way. There's a lot of 70s nudity in this movie. It's also billed as an "Adult Vampire Sex Comedy" so they really lean into it. Also, it's a low-budget movie from the 70s so expectations are a bit different. I can't quantify this as a "good" or "bad" movie, it's just an oddity in my opinion.

The movie is about an American actress who inherits a castle in Transylvania (pretty standard so far). She moves into the castle and learns she looks just like her ancestor, who was supposedly a vampire. The caretaker shows the actress the tomb where her ancestor was buried. She opens the tomb and finds her ancestor still looks exactly like her (hasn't decomposed) and runs away, leaving the tomb open. The vampire ancestor (played by the same person, of course) wakes up and climbs out of her tomb. Then we have a lot of wacky misdirection where the human actress and vampire ancestor constantly swap places to seduce/bite men in the village.

Anyway, the

Fright Night (1985) and Fright Night (2011) have the same basic plot and are both products of their time. Fright Night (1985) is just a fun 80s vampire movie that wants to tell a fun story. It's got that over-the-top acting and line delivery that makes 80s movies so fun and quotable. They weren't trying to setup a franchise or a sequel, they just did whatever they wanted. Meanwhile, Fright Night (2011) looked at Fright Night (1985) and said "how can we modernize/update every single aspect of this movie and make a quick buck?" I don't think Fright Night (2011) is a bad movie, but I wouldn't argue with anyone who said it was. It definitely doesn't have the same charm or "fun" as the original, but that's true of every movie that has tried remaking an 80s classic.

Both movies involve a teenager who thinks his new next-door neighbor is a vampire. Honestly, for both movies, I was expecting there to be a lot more doubt/suspicion/paranoia involved. But both movies answer the question

I'll be honest, I had never heard of Near Dark prior to seeing James Wan's Vampire Watchlist. But then I looked up other lists of classic vampire movies and Near Dark always seemed to be there. So clearly I must've missed out.

The movie was directed by Kathryn Bigelow, who also directed the forgotten cyberpunk classic Strange Days. So even when her movies aren't popular, they still seem to find their audience. For Near Dark specifically, its popularity was hurt by being released a couple months after The Lost Boys. The Lost Boys was a more "fun" movie that made vampires at least a little appealing (in an escapist fantasy sort of way), whereas Near Dark shows how being a vampire... kinda sucks. I guess I'd say it's a more realistic take on vampires, rather than being romanticized like in The Lost Boys. I personally wouldn't call it a Neo-Western

I know most people probably don't care about this game, but I'm not aware of any other big budget vampire games coming out soon and I like posting vampire news when I can. Otherwise, this community will just end up being nothing but nostalgia-bait. I don't want it to be an endless stream of " 'member this movie?" even though that's primarily what it is now.

Anyway, the "something that nobody yet has done" mentioned in the title is this part:

I designed a protagonist who, in the day, is a human, with all the weaknesses of a human being. [However], at night, you are a vampire, which is stronger and faster, and you have better abilities and supernatural skills. It’s somehow interesting, this duality of the hero, which we know from Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde, for example. It’s something in pop culture that is well known and wasn’t yet explored in games.

These two sides of Coen, human during the day and vampire at night, play directly into The Blood of Dawnwalker's novel 'time as a r

Dark (2013) was released on the Xbox 360. At the time, it got terrible reviews. But the game is now available on steam, where it... also has terrible reviews. And I don't get it, I think the game is a lot of fun. It's definitely a game from 2013, with clunky character models and dialog that doesn't match the lip syncing, but I don't think that puts it outside of the norm for other games at the time. Maybe the plot was too dumb for most people. Or maybe I'm just a sucker for video games with a vampire protagonist.

Anyway, the game is about some random dude (you) who wakes up to discover he was bitten by a vampire and has no memory prior to waking up. In this world, if you kill the vampire who turned you, you'll turn back into a human. So your goal is to find the vampire who turned you, kill him, and become a human once again. But since you have no memory, you have no idea who to hunt down. Some helpful vampire (and owner of a vampire night club) says "you know... it was proba

Daybreakers is an interesting movie. There are a lot of vampire stories where some powerful vampire wants to enslave the human race and keep them as cattle. But in those stories, the vampire is always stopped before they can actually enact their plan. Daybreakers imagines the logistics involved with 95% of humanity being vampires.

You can tell the filmmakers spent a lot of time thinking about how life would be different if everyone was a vampire. If everyone on the planet would die if they saw sunlight, how would cars change? How would houses change? How would cities change? Suddenly subways become the dominant form of travel. Also, there wouldn't be enough blood to go around and now you have a food shortage.

The movie has a great cast with Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe, and Sam Neill. While the setting and world-building is fantastic, I think the story's plot gets a little 'deus ex machina' where the solution was a little too easy just as a way to end the movie.

Anyway, here's

Bloodrayne was originally a series of video games about a half-human half-vampire dhampir named Rayne. She works for the Brimstone Society and fights against evil vampires. I'll make a post later about the Bloodrayne series of video games though since that's a different discussion. For now, let's talk about the movies.

All three movies were directed by Uwe Boll, which gives you an idea of the quality (he's never made a good movie). And the first movie was the only one to actually be released in theaters. It was also the only one to have a relatively recognizable cast. Both Bloodrayne 2 and Bloodrayne 3 had different actresses play Rayne. It's always a good sign when you have to recast the main character in each movie...

Anyway, the first movie takes place in the 18th century with Rayne trying to track down the vampire ruler who is her father. This is by far the most watchable movie in the trilogy. The second movie takes place in th

I've never played any of the Soul Reaver/Legacy of Kain games so I don't have any nostalgia for them. But I have a co-worker who absolutely loves the series and will regularly re-watch all the cutscenes on youtube. His description of the games make them sound amazing so I'm tempted to try them, but I worry they'll have janky controls and awkward early-2000s puzzles that will just annoy me since I don't already have a soft spot for these games.

So I'm looking for an outside opinion. What do you think? Are the games fun to play if you've never played the originals?

Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust (2000) and Hellsing Ultimate (2005) are both amazing vampire animes and I highly recommend either one. The animation style in both is incredible. But be aware that they each have earlier animes (Vampire Hunter D in 1985 and Hellsing in 2001) which aren't as good. I'd watch Bloodlust and Ultimate first and only watch the originals if you want more.

Also, I really just wanted to see if there were any Vampire Knight or Trinity Blood fans out there that I could annoy with this question.

I thought this was a really fun movie and a great premise. The entire movie is taken from one chapter of Bram Stoker's novel. And this was the perfect chapter to adapt because it didn't have much detail and none of the other characters from the book appear in it (and none of the characters in the chapter appear elsewhere in the book). In the chapter, Dracula's coffin travels by boat to London. When it arrives, everyone on the boat is dead. That's the entire chapter. So it gave the filmmakers a lot of room to work with.

I remember seeing an interview with the director where he compared it to the movie Alien, which had a crew trapped aboard a spaceship being slowly hunted by the alien. He wanted to make a similar movie but with the crew trapped aboard a ship being slowly hunted by Dracula. And I think it worked beautifully.

I have one nit-pick about the movie and it's in the final scene. I'm going to try using spoiler tags, although I don't think it really "spoils" the movie.