Depiction of Vampires
Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.
Evil_Ash
Problem I have come across with many vampire flicks (particularly modern ones), is that the vampires themselves aren't really scary like they're intended. They are often characterized too human, and performs stupid Kung-Fu moves. There also seems to be eroticism involved with Vampirism, which is usually overly done...
In Stephen King's vampire mythos, once a vampire is created they become complete slaves to their hunger and epitomize evil. The best thing for them is to stake them. Salem's Lot (1979) presents vampires as what they are, not stylish conversative and sometimes stupid sentient and pretty creatures, but meta-physical representations of evil in its superlative form, that is, SCARY, and I mean TRULY SCARY things to avoid like hell itself! They are are not the twisted politically correct teenager role model vampires of the '90s. They are hideously mysterious, ethereal, chilling and extremely dangerous demonic things with human form. Foul, corrupt and evil aberrations whose eyes glow in the dark like some animals' do.
steverules
Have you not seen fright night??
Evil_Ash
Originally posted by steverules
Have you not seen fright night??
Yes...
It's actually my favourite vampire movie next to Salem's Lot...
SelphieT
Originally posted by Evil_Ash
Problem I have come across with many vampire flicks (particularly modern ones), is that the vampires themselves aren't really scary like they're intended. They are often characterized too human, and performs stupid Kung-Fu moves. There also seems to be eroticism involved with Vampirism, which is usually overly done...
In Stephen King's vampire mythos, once a vampire is created they become complete slaves to their hunger and epitomize evil. The best thing for them is to stake them. Salem's Lot (1979) presents vampires as what they are, not stylish conversative and sometimes stupid sentient and pretty creatures, but meta-physical representations of evil in its superlative form, that is, SCARY, and I mean TRULY SCARY things to avoid like hell itself! They are are not the twisted politically correct teenager role model vampires of the '90s. They are hideously mysterious, ethereal, chilling and extremely dangerous demonic things with human form. Foul, corrupt and evil aberrations whose eyes glow in the dark like some animals' do.
The annoying eroticism originates from succubi/incubi, creatures that have sex with the opposite gender they are at night and drink their victim's blood, which are obviously vampiric creatures.
Deano
near dark is the best
Espantada23
Bram Stoker is one of the writer's that caused the sexualization of the vampire....before his novel they were thought of as terrifying creatures not sexy beasts.
Big Sexy
I agree that the vampire has taken a more docile role in horror. They are depicted more as aristocratic humans more than creatures. Bram Stokers novel as well as interview with the Vampire have just made it worse.
steverules
oooh Dusk till torn is good
Espantada23
DUSK TIL TORN?
Evil_Ash
Originally posted by Espantada23
DUSK TIL TORN?
SelphieT
My favorite vampire movie is Interview with the Vampire. *shrugs*
I hate Brad Pitt, but he's just so stunning as Louis, my favorite vampire
Bat Dude
Though they are not accurately depicted, I really like Lost Boys... Except, when the guy revealed himself to be the head vampire, he went on about how a vampire cannot enter a house unless invited... Yet, his "kids" got into the house without being invited at all... Why is that?
2D_MASTER
Originally posted by Evil_Ash
I still have a difficulties with watching this scene...
Hahaha yeah, that's why that movie is a classic. Ever read the book?
Evil_Ash
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Hahaha yeah, that's why that movie is a classic. Ever read the book?
Yeah. Good read. Although, I prefer the 1979 mini-series, mainly because I saw it as a kid before I read the book...
A lot of people disliked the Nosferatu-like version of Mr. Barlow. But I don't think the sophisticated, intelligent, and more-human Barlow from King's book would have the effect and scariness that we got:
ywGEOHjjUdk
I haven't seen the 2004 remake. I just recently bought it. Should arrive in the mail soon. Although, from what I've heard, it isn't so good. Despite it being apparently closer to the book....
ragesRemorse
Originally posted by Evil_Ash
Problem I have come across with many vampire flicks (particularly modern ones), is that the vampires themselves aren't really scary like they're intended. They are often characterized too human, and performs stupid Kung-Fu moves. There also seems to be eroticism involved with Vampirism, which is usually overly done...
In Stephen King's vampire mythos, once a vampire is created they become complete slaves to their hunger and epitomize evil. The best thing for them is to stake them. Salem's Lot (1979) presents vampires as what they are, not stylish conversative and sometimes stupid sentient and pretty creatures, but meta-physical representations of evil in its superlative form, that is, SCARY, and I mean TRULY SCARY things to avoid like hell itself! They are are not the twisted politically correct teenager role model vampires of the '90s. They are hideously mysterious, ethereal, chilling and extremely dangerous demonic things with human form. Foul, corrupt and evil aberrations whose eyes glow in the dark like some animals' do.
yeah, but when you have 90 minutes to tell a visual story it is hard to tell a vampire story and keep it consistantly scary. Vampires, and werewolves are one dimensional. When your focusing on them for 90 minutes, you either focus soley on the attributes which make them scary, or try to add a new dimension and explore the personal story of the vampire. When you remove the person behind the vampire out of the story, you are left with what makes a vampire scary...,mystery. This path has a tendancy to become redundant though. You can only have a vampire leaping form the shadows so many times before it becomes typical. When you focus on the perosnal story of the vampire, it is near impossible to have fear in the story. People generally dont fear what they understand or sympathise with, its the other way around. The vampire has been done many times, it has also been perfected many times, which is why i believe filmakers try to stay away from the story. Monsters in the dark just isnt scary anymore, its already been done.
Röland
Originally posted by Evil_Ash
I haven't seen the 2004 remake. I just recently bought it. Should arrive in the mail soon. Although, from what I've heard, it isn't so good. Despite it being apparently closer to the book....
I thought the 2004 mini-series did the book justice, I really hated how Tobe Hooper's Barlow was a Nosferatu knockoff. But still, neither of the two versions came close to being as awesome as the book.
Röland
Originally posted by Evil_Ash
Tobe Hopper had really nothing to do with changing Barlow...
It was the Producer's decision, who wanted Barlow to have a more monstrous appearance.
I'm just saying that I didn't like how he was portrayed.
PONG_MASTER
Originally posted by Evil_Ash
And I'm just saying that it wasn't Hopper's decision on changing Barlow. Which a lot of people blame him for...
Anyway, if it wasn't for the Nosferatu appearance, I wouldn't be able to buy this for Halloween...
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y37/Nightmareman95/HAL10WEEN/vampyre_mask.jpg
Ghey.
Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.
Copyright 1999-2024 KillerMovies.