Dead of Night (1996) Poster

(1996)

User Reviews

Review this title
8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Slight T&A vampire story.
capkronos9 July 2003
In 1889 London, Christian (Robert Knepper) mourns the loss of his wife and takes up an offer from vampire Nina (Diana Frank) to live another 1000 years as her slave so he can search for the reincarnation of his lost love. Over 100 years later in L.A., he finds his wife in the form of a compassionate nurse named Katherine (Kathleen Kinmont). Christian is relieved, as he's having a miserable time stalking seedy nightclubs with Nina for (mostly female) victims to take home for kinky sex and a quick meal. Police investigate as the bodies pile up, one officer also getting the hots for Katherine.

Knepper and Kinmont do what they can in their roles and if Karen Kelly's script piles on way too much mumbo jumbo, at least it attempts to be mature and romantic, which means it will appeal to a certain kind of audience who don't want to watch another vampire gorefest. That said this Playboy production is dull and dreary much of the time. Not exactly a good time at the movies unless you're looking for a plethora of naked chicks.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
No Blood, No Fangs and No Silicone
claudio_carvalho21 August 2004
I am a great fan of vampire movies. When I saw the cover of this VHS, I immediately bought it without reading the reviews of IMDB. The storyline of `Dead of Night' is not bad: about a hundred years ago, a man loses the great love of his life. He becomes a vampire, expecting to find her reincarnation in future lives. Along the years, he stays with his sire looking for his former passion, and they feed every fifteen days with the blood of a lonely woman. In the present days, a detective is investigating their crimes, assuming the existence of a serial killer, and he meets a nurse, who is the reincarnation of the vampire's love. There are some good dialogs along the story. The problem is that the objective of this Playboy's production is not to be a vampire movie, but only an argument to show nude women. Therefore, there is no blood, no fangs, but lots of naked women. Fortunately there is no silicone also, and the naked bodies are indeed very beautiful. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): `Sangue nas Trevas' (`Blood in the Darkness')
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Playboy-funded romantic vampire thriller
Leofwine_draca27 June 2016
Warning: Spoilers
What purports to be a cheap B horror flick involving vampirism turns out to be a cheap B skin flick involving vampirism and couples hopping into bed every ten minutes or so to further the plot, as is the norm for the late night Friday slot on Channel 5 in the UK where I caught this one playing. The minute you notice one Andrew Stevens (former boy actor in the likes of THE FURY turned adult actor/director/producer of loads of erotic thrillers in the '90s) in the crew and the backing of one "Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc." you realise that this will be nothing more than late night smut, although Playboy have in the past come through by giving us Roman Polanski's harrowing version of MACBETH back in 1971. Unfortunately, DEAD OF NIGHT is another run-of-the-mill story of romantic youthful vampires with not a lot to distinguish it from the rest.

The vampire folklore that the film employs is traditional stuff, all holy water and stake-through-the-heart routines which have been done to death in recent years. Rather like the vampire Christian in this film, who has tired of his eternal existence, I too have tired of the vampire cinema as of late, films which all tend to be the same in scope and action and offer little in the way of surprises. DEAD OF NIGHT has a group of characters all linked in complex ways (as other Shannon Tweed-starrers tend to have) and takes us through a bizarre, sometimes unconvincing story involving them.

First up is Christian, a lovesick guy whose wife died in childbirth and who now searches for her reincarnation. Luckily he finds it in the form of Katherine, a nurse at a hospital in Los Angeles with whom he falls in love. At the same time he falls foul of Nina, the vampire who 'turned' him back in 1889 and the toy-boy vampire Eric that she has fallen in with and also 'turned'. To make matters more complex, a police investigation into the murders caused by the vampire group, led by detective Woods, is hot on the trail of the vampires with Woods threatening to fall in love with Katherine himself. Confused yet? Seeing as this is the entire story of the film you won't be, but it's all rather bland, typical stuff.

The first half of this movie is rather slow, with character-building interspersed with lots of gratuitous sex scenes in which the attractive female cast members are bound to lose their already-scant clothing. The second half is the more interesting of the two, bringing focus to the plot and introducing some unbelievable character twists (such as two vampires suddenly turning from being pretty indifferent to the villains of the piece to make way for an action ending). The finale itself is the stuff of tragedy and quite a nice way to tie off the proceedings. Budget-wise the film is poor, with mostly unrecognisable actors and hardly any special effects to speak of (aside from some cheap, rather poor glowing contact lenses).

This film's cast is actually one of its strongest points. Despite their unfamiliarity most of the actors possess certain characteristics to make them interesting to watch. Take for example Robert Knepper as the gloomy vampire Christian - here he reminds me of an angsty Tim Roth performance and gives quite an interesting turn. The foreign-accented Diana Frank also excels as the seductive and rather feral vampiress Nina whilst Kathleen Kinmont (BRIDE OF RE-ANIMATOR) is believable as the object of Christian's love. Ironically, the film's central character - the policeman Woods - is given the most wooden actor in John Enos III, a pretty-boy with little display of talent evident here. Naturally the best performances come from the two veteran 'name' actors in the cast, Alex Rocco (THE GODFATHER) and Paul Winfield (THE TERMINATOR) who both play slightly eccentric characters to the hilt.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Totally enjoyable and updated horror flick
koolgirlie8 December 2003
12-8-03 I can't figure out why the first comment I read was so negative. Don't people have open minds anymore? I've learned not to take critics so seriously and form my own opinion instead. Since I'm not really into horror flicks, I half expected to see someone running around with a black cape, biting random people on the neck and drinking their blood. Instead, the storyline was updated to modern times and quite interesting. JOHN ENOS who is my favorite actor did a really good job as the detective. He followed thru re the 17 year old hooker and I loved the way it ended where he honestly submitted his report to the police dept. Thank goodness for a backup partner to corroborate his findings. Kate Winslet's love scene was tastefully done. It WAS a lovestory, afterall. The only thing I would've changed was Mike asking her out to dinner, not just a burger, of course, that's just ME. Great Job JOHN ENOS. Gloria Milwaukee
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Pretty good vampire movie.
golffnutt11 July 2001
The director and writer do a good job in portraying the vampires. Young, attractive immortals --- the mesmerizing quality of supernatural powers. Yet they suffer emotionally because at one time they were mortals, and they have a hard time moving on from their past. I do recommend the movie.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I really enjoyed it
dbrennan-65 November 2006
I found the movie to be very romantic and sad. Here are these two people, well not exactly people, one is a vampire and the other is human. The reason why they can't be together is because of the choice that he made centuries ago. In a previous life she was his love, and then she died in childbirth and he was lost without her, and then came this vampire seductress promising that he will find her if he became one of the undead. Then centuries later he finds the modern incarnation of his lady love, and he almost feels human. He can't go on with the killing that his vampire master tricked him into after seeing his true love. He was able to save his true from his evil master, then had the cop kill him, and promised his love that one day they would be together the way they were meant to, as humans living a normal life. They would be reincarnated one day and find each other in their next life that was his promise to her, because of the fact that they were able to find each other in this one
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Dead Of Night
a_baron3 September 2017
This is not a particularly original take on the vampire theme but is nevertheless not a bad film. Our doomed soul marries in 1888, his wife dies in childbirth the following year, and he swears he will be reunited with her someday. Then, surprise, surprise, a lady vampire steps out of the shadows and offers to grant his wish.

Fast forward from Victorian London to 1990s California, and he finds her reincarnated in a nurse. There are complications though, his mistress is still with him, and shortly she recruits another disciple. Three may be a crowd, but four...

Not only that, but the nurse has another potential love interest in a homicide detective who is following a hunch looking for missing girls. Guess who is responsible for their disappearing? Obviously, most police officers being level-headed, they don't jump to conclusions even when a mugger who attacked the nurse is found dead drained of all his blood, but when they confront him in her apartment and he vanishes like The Flash, they realise the shocking truth. What will happen next, will they all die happily ever after? The only thing that need be said is that this is one vampire who for all his dreadful deeds does not appear to have lost his soul.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Dead of Night (1996) (106 minutes)
trimbolicelia15 April 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Not bad vampire horror/thriller with some romance and sexuality thrown in. In the late 1800s a man loses his wife in childbirth, and in grief and despair succumbs to a vampiress who promises him he will find his love reincarnated in the future. One hundred years later the man has almost given up hope when he sees his wife again, now reborn but having no knowledge of him but somehow aware of him. His vampire partner becomes jealous and wants to do away with the woman so as not to lose him. Meanwhile all the mysterious vampire killings are baffling the police. Being produced by Playboy Entertainment there are a few simulated sex scenes. Rather long. If they deleted the rather unnecessary Playboy required parts the movie would be a little tighter. Still, not bad. I liked the romance between the vampire and the woman. This film has not been shown on cable, as far as I know, since the late 90s. I finally found a good (but not great) DVD-R. Probably will never be released professionally.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed