Children of the night

Morbid Angel · Post by **Morbid Angel** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:46 am

Dracula movies, are by far my favorite movies to watch.

Nosferatu (1922), one of personal favorites was one of the first Dracula movies ever made, during the wonderful German expressionist movement. Rat-toothed with a penis-shaped head, Count Orlock was quite a frightening site, but I rather liked how they didn't portray him as a suave gentleman. A remake was done in the 1970's with Klaus Kinski in the starring role, but I still don't think it lives up to the orginal.

Universal of course, in 1932, came out with a series of horror movies, one of them being the now infamous Dracula movie staring Bela Lugosi. He was quite different from Max Schreck's Nosferatu character, of course featuring the heavy Hungarian accent and more eye-pleasing appearence. Quite tame by today's standards, it's still an enjoyable movie, and the basis for many movies to come. And excellent collection to pick up (featuring the Orginal version and 4 other Dracula-related movies) is the Legacy Collection for 30 bucks.

I've been quite getting into the Hammer Films versions of the stories as of late, mostly the ones featuring Christopher Lee as the count. Sure, they can be campy, tomato-y looking blood, and have plenty of fake bats, but it's that and Lee that makes the movies quite charming. In fact, he's my favorite Dracula, besides Gary Oldman. Not only that, it was really one of the first series to really give Dracula erotic overtones, as you may notice with the heavy breathing and the woman waiting for Dracula to come. And also the first to actually show the biting. Dracula: Prince of Darkness is perhaps my favorite out of the whole series, but I still love watching all of them.

Another version I rather like was made in 1979 with Frank Langella in the starring role. Not liked by critics really, but I enjoy the sensuality and sexuality of the character. Penetration without actual sex.

Then come up to 1992, with Francis Ford Coppola in the director's chair, with the beautiful movie that is "Bram Stoker's Dracula". Gary Oldman did a magnificent job as Dracula, and the story of Dracula was revamped (nice pun) nicely. I especially enjoyed the inclusion of some history of Vlad Tepes, and playing around with some stories connected to him. His search for the incarnation of his beloved Elizabeta (Winona Ryder) was especially nice (appealing to the girly, romantic side of me). I've always been a big supporter of Dracula and Mina, so you can imagine the appeal. Harker (played by Kenanu Reeves) sucked as usual, and Van Helsing was especially a dick (I've never been a fan of those two). And on a side note, the costumes were absoulutely gorgeous in the film. Victorian and vampires can never go wrong with me.

Dracula II: Ascension (Sequel to Dracula 2000) is another movie that sticks out in my mind. For once, Dracula gets away in the end. I also like the addition to the story that he was Judas, and him reincarnating as different people every time he was destroyed. Dracula as a blonde though, was a bit odd.

As for the worst Dracula movie...I thought "Dracula's Curse" was pretty bad, even for my tastes. Dracula resembled a washed-up porn star.

I could go on and on still about these movies, but it's time for others to discuss.

kaos · Post by **kaos** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 5:34 am

I watch vampire movies, but ive got nothing on you with them.
however I do try and watch most werewolf movies that I can, and ive seen quite a few.
I cant lay them all out all nice and neat like you did.

But aside from Americam Werewolf in London (which was kinda comical) I cant think of any movie that I feel has done it just quite right for me, including way back when Chaney jr. played the wolfman. but honestly Im having trouble remembering that one fully as theirs another one with lural and hardy or abbot and costello that keeps blending in.

The sorry ass american werewolf in Paris title really bothered me tho. Theirs just no way it supposed to based on London. london gave an origin, and a structure for its wolf mythology. unfortunatly it seems like most wolf stories turn out paris style and end up more about the gore than about the person or persons who are afflected.

It seems the problem lies in that, unlike Vampires, theirs no real widely accepted nor common mythology about Werewolves, and oddly enuff the idea of them has been around just as long as vamps have.

You'd think that would lead to some cool and imaginitive stuff in the movies, but somehow movie makers who even have the balls to do a wolf story dont even realize that theyve got somthing they can sculpt all on their own..

Underworld was a pretty good for it guess, unfortunatly it seemed to give more spotlight to vampires, I dont know if that was intentional or not, but I thought they could have really built somthing there with a little more focus.

I think for once I'd like to see a Wolf movie were the amount of blood that gets spilled during the film came secondary to building the character and attributes of his afflection and origin. I'd also like to get away from the whole wolf vs vamp thing. its getting really over played.

some may not agree, but I think making a good wolf movie could be as simple as taking the bases of the HULK movie and modifying it.

Edit: if you want a good vampire story thats a drastic change from the norm, you should try hunting down english versions of Requiem and Cluadia...of course thats gonna be tuff and cost money.
[attachmentid=272][attachmentid=273][attachmentid=274][attachmentid=275]
[attachmentid=276][attachmentid=277]

Morbid Angel · Post by **Morbid Angel** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:11 pm

Gorgeous artwork.

As for Underworld, I couldn't sit through the whole movie. It was boring as hell.

I'm not a fan of the big action movies with vampires or werewolves either, I like my classic gothic movie.

Post by **Mik** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:34 pm

I watch a lot of films, I read a lot of books and I research way too much mythology for someone who isn't doing a degree and I have this too say

...Vampires, I fucking hate vampires...

hehehe, Maybe that's a tad harsh. I am however very jealous, vampires get all the good press and much like John, I am a mad werewolf fan, and I yurn for a time when we can have a film that is clever and without the crutch of Vampires or the usual gore-fest. But I don't want to hijack the topic onto Wolves (thought I may mention them later) , I enjoy a good vampire story, the underlying sexual tension has always been there between a vampire and his/her prey and is well documented.

Underworld is actually a fairly bad vampire film because much like Blade before it, it actually takes the piss. In as far as vampires are portrayed as these neo-gothic fuckwits. As Blade continues along his story they just get worse. In Blade: Trinity for example Dracula (Dominic Purcell) is the only redeemable character the rest are all moronic, sexually lurid to the point of absurdity, wimpy goths incapable of anything without 'divine' assistance.

Underworld continues this trend and most of the Vampires bar Selene and Viktor are vapid back-stabbing retards in frilly silk shirts. Although I did like the whole werewolves as day time guardians of the vampires, it kind of links back to the hounds that surronded Dracula's mansion in Stokers tale. As a werewolf movie it's pretty good (they do win the battle), although sadly very little pack interaction and models that looked more Feline than Canis.

There seems to be a backlash in vampire films as of late, as they see yet another evolution to some what less than their orgins of dracula in his all out badassness that could woo the ladies with a single look. Kelley Armstrong actually addresses this change in her book 'Industrial Magic', where an old-skool vamp is confronted with one of these newage neo-gothic vampires and is disgusted by there antics.

Even still there are better bad vampire films that would be in contrast quite great werewolf films simply because they take the time to explain the characters rather than just have them run amok and kill all their friends

Super Goat Weed · Post by **Super Goat Weed** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 9:16 pm

i suppose i'm more of a general fantasy fan, although i HATE most modern stuff. Asside from the recent Lord of the Rings films, Fantasy films in general seem to be aimed at a juvenile audience, with no real content or story behind them

nothing clever anyway.

I've heard that the recent Earthsea is worth checking out, but i'm not getting my hopes up. I want to see something mature (not in the rated x meaning of the word) and DARK for a change. I get sick of all the candyass disney stories and chipper 'oh it's the end of the world, yippie' style writing. I want some tension, some anxiety, and i want someone to fucking DIE for a change.

my god, you can't take on the forces of evil and expect EVERYBODY to survive, but that's ALWAYS what happens...

and if someone does die, it's more like, oh well, i can live without him or her.

and don't start telling me OH, you should watch ANIME. 'cause i have, and while the stores are good and what not, that dosn't change the fact that IT'S A FUCKING CARTOON. Yes i've seen some good anime movies, but most of them seem to be trash to me honestly, and i've really yet to see a good anime fantasy series on TV

bah, the scene seriously needs to grow some sack before i watch anything else 'fantasy' labeled

Post by **Mik** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 8:37 am

Earth sea was alright kind of LOTR meets Harry potter acted as fine any Kevin Sorbo series.

Super Goat Weed · Post by **Super Goat Weed** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 1:27 pm

... that sounds horrid

Morbid Angel · Post by **Morbid Angel** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 7:34 pm

What's that have to do with vampire movies...?

Or am I out of touch with movies today?

kaos · Post by **kaos** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 8:50 pm

not really a vamp movie, but theire were nuns and "nameless ones" it was actually pretty dark when you think about it. but like Mik said...it played out like a TV series rather than a movie.