Way of the Vampire

source: Way of the Vampire

Way of the Vampire_720p(480P)

source: Way of the Vampire

I really miss watching horror movies, just a good and gory film that you can just have fun with. I saw the cover for Way of the Vampire, I mean this was just the coolest cover, it looked like a great cover with vampire hunters. So I rented it and took it home, sat down and watched it first thing, I don't know why I get my hopes up with these straight to DVD's. As always these movies are just bad, the script(which obviously had no research), the actors(who you can tell are the desperate waiters in LA, waiting for their "big break"), the effects(which could've been done by a 10 year old I know who's much better with computers), the editing(I think the editor, this must have been his first time because he went a little crazy), just everything about this movie is bad, but I'll try to explain the story. Van Helsing is given immortality to hunt down the vampire "princes" after the love of his life is turned into a vampire and he has killed her. So over a hundred years later he has lived to try to catch one vampire, Sebastien. He's got a new girlfriend at the hospital, but cannot find the prince, so when Sebastien is awaken by his vampire girlfriend to create an army of darkness, oh, what will our Van Helsing do? I guess get stung by a wasp who does apparently die by one sting, lol. Way of the Vampire is just one of those bad straight to DVD's that really sucks, believe me, I can't believe I fell for it, I know that I sometimes say that the ratings are wrong here on IMDb, but this is the rating I really wished I paid attention to the rating because I might have saved some time and money on this trash. Just trust me when I say that this is one of the worst excuses for film that you'll ever see in your life, it's worse than amateur, I just don't know how else to go on but to just warn you to stay away from this piece of trash. 1/10

Until tonight, I was sure that the Third 'From Dusk Till Dawn,' was the worst vampire movie ever made. I was sadly mistaken. The F-grade acting, horrible cuts, sloppy dialogue, and lack of substantial story line make this the worst vampire movie I have ever seen. It is absolutely essential that you counter balance the respect you will lose in vampire movies with the following; 'Interview with a Vampire' (For its incredible acting and top-notch story-line), 'Blade' (For its scientific, as opposed to religious, take on the disease and symptoms), and 'Underworld' (for its action-packed entertainment value). If you have not, please do not, watch this movie, or do so only to contrast how good some Vampire movies are comparatively.

I only spent a dollar on this movie. Jesus this thing wasn't even worth that, if I had seen this movie for free I would still feel violated, and if I had been paid to see it, the money would not have been enough. Below is my vent as I just endured this movie and I need to let it all out First of all, the holy water in her neck jugular??? WTF. And he's all "wow, you are such a genius, no one would ever think hey, holy water hurts them, they bite necks, maybe if i somehow drink this holy water and absurd it into my neck area I can kill them." Stupid, very stupid element of the film and that last line "or maybe a princess" or something of that effect, I nearly cried. That made even the holy water and wasp and training scenes seem well thought out and deserving of an Oscar. Who wrote this movie, were they in Kindergarten, but of course six year-olds are so much more intelligent than the team behind this crap, and actually have imaginations and could probably write better material, so I take that back, that is an insult to compare kindergarten children to the inbred morons who wrote this movie. None of the actors in this movie could act, it all felt very very daytime drama or school play. But of course the director must take some of the responsibility for that as well. The action scenes were embarrassing and the effects were crude and ugly, primitive, extremely half arced, just like every single element of this film. The sound effects were pathetic, that's all I will say on the matter. So moving on.. The Vampires in this movie should not even be classed as that, they are degrading the entire world of fiction and it is an insult for them to be named as the likes of Lestat, Vlad deMagpyr or Bela Lugosi's classic Dracula. These are suave, charismatic, alluring, elegant and beautiful beings (but also a bit evil) the creatures shown in this movie were boring, stupid, abysmal and unoriginal. *end rant* I do really feel a lot better. Do yourselves a favour, stay away from this movie. It is not worth a single moment of your time. Go to the video store and re rent Interview with a Vampire, Underworld or the Buffy TV series instead.

(I don't think this contains spoilers, but if it does,it wan't intentional, and I'm sorry.) I just rented this movie. Thinking that, ya know..Vampire movie..Bram Stoker..BRING IT! After "Bram Stokers' Dracula" in 1992, I figured "Bram Stokers' Way Of The Vampire" should measure up to the same high standards right? RIGHT?? Uh..no! We started watching it, had to jack the sound WAYYYY up to even HEAR it, and then my roommate tells me that we've rented it before!! HUH? This is a VAMPIRE movie! Something I LIVE for! And I don't remember it? Can I just say..you know it's bad when...! Unfortunately, like most movies you don't initially like, it DIDN'T get better the second time around! The sound was terrible. The acting was either non existent or over blown. (with maybe one or two exceptions) The vampiric dialog? All I could think was who wrote this UTTER rot?! The rest of the dialog was ranging from maybe OK, to weak, to downright SAD! I checked out the actors on the database, (this one, as I've found no other better as of yet) like I do for almost all movies I watch, and found that this movie was either a jumping point for brand new actors, a fill in for trying-but-not-quite-making-it actors, or a last ditch effort for dieing actors from a third rate soap opera! The nudity was OK I guess. There was T&A to be seen. And it was nice, as far as nudity goes. But like EVERY movie not a hard core *, for some reason it's OK for a woman to go Full Monty, but a man? *gasp* SHOCKING! And simply NOT DONE! And it's not even that I WANT to see some guys dangly bits! That's not the point! (seen one you've seen em all) MY beef is that they won't SHOW them. That it's OK to bare a girl but not a boy. Perhaps I've wandered off the path. Slightly. A bit? OK maybe a LOT! *snickers* I had a point I'm sure! Now where did I put it...*checks pockets* Ah yes..On the whole? This movie was very disappointing. A rather black mark on vampire movies as a whole, and NO credit to Bram Stoker what-so-ever. If it had been slightly worse, it wouldn't have been worth the film it was printed on. I know I've seen worse, but Way Of The Vampire was high up there in the "WHY did I rent this" stakes. In short? And pun intended... It sucked!

I admire the reviewers of this abominable film who actually watched it all the way through. Thirty minutes was too much for me. It is, without any shadow of a doubt, the most puerile and baseless horror movie of all time. It makes 'Killer Tomatoes' look like Oscar material. The acting is unbelievably bad, the editing pathetic and the storyline must have been written by a seven-year-old. One can only wonder at how movies like this get made. A total waste of money, effort and intellectual rigour by everyone involved. In short, this film has no redeeming features whatsoever.

There are a few good things about this movie, but the negatives are so overwhelming that I could only give it a 1 on the ole 1 to 10 scale. The cinematography is very pretty and the miniature set models are excellent. At least I think they're models. Everything about this movie is so bogus that they may actually be real locations which the directors (yes, it took two directors to cook this turkey) somehow managed to make look like models. With two directors you'd think that it might only be half-bad. Instead it's doubly pretentious. The lovely Denise Boutte may well be the hammiest actor on planet Earth. Rhett Giles as Van Helsing looks like a reject from the Pet Shop Boys, and his acting is nearly as overblown and stuffy as Ms. Boutte's. Every line by just about every "actor" is recited in emo overdrive. There were also at least two writers involved. The version I saw had three listed, unless I was hallucinating, but IMDb says two. The third one may have requested anonymity. Or hacked the webpage and erased his or her name. In any case, the dialog is so cheesy you'd think it was written by the teen Gothtards from Saturday Night Live. If I see one more pseudo-Goth vampire movie with semi-clad model-pretty airheads melting into the arms of Ralph Lauren pretty men in ersatz under-populated nightclubs I'll puke up a kidney. Anne Rice has apparently spawned a sub-race of cretinous filmmakers. This is the first film I've seen which challenges Uwe Boll's "House of the Dead" as the WORST horror film ever made.

Dr. Van Helsing, vampire hunter, is granted immortality by a religious sect that will only let him die after he kills the last vampire. That's the plot of the film right there. I didn't put it in a nutshell for you, dear reader. THAT'S the whole plot. Now what did I think of the film? Well, between the horrid editing, the putrid acting, the 'anti-action', the sound problems, and the WIDE open ending, this is strictly amateur hour. Vampire flicks have made for some simply dreadful films in the past and this, my friends, is one of them. It's a travesty of the current state of B-movie straight to video horror that I don't even consider this one of the worst vampire flick out there. My Grade: D- Where I saw it: Starz on Demand (available till September 15th, 2005)