Vampires

The movie opens with a trained, fully-equipped team of vampire slayers, led by Jack Crow (James Woods), methodically purging a "nest" of its fanged occupants. This is one of the best scenes of the movie and sets the viewers up to think, "Hey, these guys know what they're doing. They're some rough-and-ready characters."

But, lo, where is the master vampire? Not to worry, he'll have his chance at revenge...later that very night, as the "trained" vampire hunters go to the nearest town, lay down their weapons, and begin drinking and whoring. And they knew full-well that a master vampire, whose "subjects" they'd just fried, was still lurking about! How stupid can you be???!!!

The movie marches on, showing carnage and betrayal as the plot is advanced. (And, frankly, it's not a bad plot). But there are many holes, many questions that are not answered, like, Why was such an mysterious and important item (a cross that would permit a vampire to walk in the sunlight) guarded by such a inept group of robe-clad nincompoops, who, according to their own harried screams, knew "The day has arrived!"? If they knew that a particularly horrific "day" was inevitably going to "arrive," why, then, did they lack even a modicum of defensive capability. Why were they caught frantically scampering around like a herd of panty-clad Dr. Smiths (from TV's Lost in Space..."Oh the pain, the pain of it all..."). Oh well, we'll never know, and they're too dead to tell us.

Be that as it may, this movie does have some good dialogue, interesting characters, a unique idea or two, and an actual plot--which makes John Carpenter's "Vampires" stand head and shoulders above most of the horror movies that are out today. I enjoyed it despite its defects.

"Vampires" is great popcorn entertainment. While fans will always compare Carpenter's later movies with his early genre classics, "Vampires" is excellent entertainment, even if it isn't an "important" or "milestone" horror event.

James Woods is not the most likable of heroes here but he's very watchable. Daniel Baldwin delivers a believable performance as his dependable sidekick. "Twin Peaks"' Sheryl Lee plays the leggy small-town hooker who is unfortunately bit by a Master Vampire, Valek. There are also appearances from Maximilian Schell and "Miami Vice"'s Gregory Sierra.

In Carpenter's "Vampires", the undead don't exit this world peacefully. Instead, they explode like giant Catherine wheels. This is exciting to watch - you can't have enough sparking vampires, can you? With lots of action and a few dark laughs, you could do a lot worse than see this movie.

With an excellent score, great visuals and a fast pace, "Vampires" scores a strong 8 out of 10.

But then kind of sputters out a bit and devolves into a bunch of talking with a decent finale scene. It was ok, entertaining enough. I was genuinely so excited to watch this again after watching the first 15-20 minutes, thinking it's a bit of a hidden gem, eh, not exactly, but wasn't bad. If it kept the pace of the first 20 minutes it would have been an absolute classisc.

Carpenter is not in his usual good form here despite excellent performances by James Woods and the rest of the cast. Woods is Jack Crow, a mercenary vampire hunter who leads a team of fellow hunters out to find and exterminate vampires.

Crow, who comes across as an atheist, is in the payroll of the Catholic church and is driven by his own demons that are more based on revenge rather than anything else.

The film shows the battle between the hunters and a very powerful vampire (Valek) who attempts to create a new order of invincible vampires that can rule the earth.

Despite the excess of gore and blood the film does not have the tense moments of other better Carpenter films (Escape from New York, Assault on Precinct 13). Nonetheless, Valek is a formidable foe that creates a number of scary moments. Perhaps a film only for the loyal Carpenter fans (myself included).

John Carpenter's Vampires is a flawed film, that's for sure. It is not really terrifying, despite being billed as a horror film. It is rather brutal, and the film's humor and the actions of the characters have been accused in some quarters of having a misogynistic bent. So why is this film so much fun? Two words: James Woods. An extremely underrated actor, Woods is nearly perfect in the role of cocky Jack Crow, a renowned vampire hunter. He chews scenery with relish, handles his character's off-color humor with panache, and never lets up his colorful performance for one minute. Is John Carpenter's Vampires art? No. Is it great filmmaking? No. Is it a good time at the movies with a central performance that will put a smile on your face? You bet. And, occasionally, that is enough. Who says the B-picture is dead?