Vampier Movies

[foot loose]

underworld wat happened same old same old

boy meets girl
lots of guns
matrix effects

please!!!!

what about blade 3 in 2004/2005 will it be any different i think not

please can somone make a total new action film that ant an old one that has had a make over :angry: :angry: :angry:

[{I}{K}{E}]

Queen of the Damned (2002)
Dracula (1992)

[RedRival]

What's the purpose of this post? I don't even get what you are trying to say. :D

[asmithz]

Originally posted by RedRival@30 September 2003 - 04:30
What's the purpose of this post? I don't even get what you are trying to say. :D
I think he is vinting. :lol:

[foot loose]

STOP MAKING VAMPIER MOVIES THEY R GETTIN BORING

in underworld the woman shalein or wat ever her name is, looks in da mirror and say forgive me my lord just be 4 she awakins the old vampire.

but i thought vampires cannot c there own reflections :angry:

its thing like this dat makes me :angry: coz every film they make about vampires they always change da rules to suit da film

Queen of da damed akasher(aalliyah) can go out in da day light and not die :angry:

[thacowboy3]

i agree about the changing the rules part. but them movies are fun dude. i am a big fan of goth myself.

i think the fact that they can go around changing the rules so easily without much resistance is why they keep coming back to it for more. i mean look what happened when kevin smith bent the rules in dogma. lol..God is a black woman...lol. that still cracks me up.

but i agree with you, some rules should be made constant, they can go to heaven or hell with the others. like the mirror reflection, the garlic, the silver, the sunlight. and count dracula should always make a cameo in every vampire movie :D

[foot loose]

o yeh also on underworld if vampiers cannot come out durin da day and licans (warewolves) can, y don't da licans wait till its day time and go 2 da vampiers house and open up da blinds/windows and let in some light and kill dem all?, that way they will have a big advantage over da vapiers. u c wat i meen vampier moives r gettin silly :(

[ck-uk]

Exactly mate,theres only some much they can re-invent with vampires etc...They have fang,drink blood,sleep in the day ,so on.If u havnt seen it already,u could give near dark a watch..A superb vampire movie imo..

[thacowboy3]

Originally posted by foot loose@30 September 2003 - 13:06
o yeh also on underworld if vampiers cannot come out durin da day and licans (warewolves) can,  y don't da licans wait till its day time and go 2 da vampiers house and open up da blinds/windows and let in some light and kill dem all?, that way they will have a big advantage over da vapiers.
call it honor among the undead ;)

btw, i thought the werewolves turn only during full moon and turn back human again at daybreak.

[MagicNakor]

They don't keep changing the rules. There's a large set of "rules" to choose from, given the history of vampires, so they just pick and choose what suits their stories. ;) I've never seen Underworld, and I really don't plan on it.

:ninja:

[thacowboy3]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@30 September 2003 - 13:10
There's a large set of "rules" to choose from, given the history of vampires, so they just pick and choose what suits their stories. ;)
that's silly man, some fundamental rules should be made constant.

like it just seems silly that a vampire can move into sunlight...the whole point is that they are dark beings lurking in the shadows.

[foot loose]

rules r rules and dont watch underworld its silly. saloms lot and peter cushon there r da real vampier moves and they follow da rules

in blade the woman cured here self when she was bitten its a joke.

Blade 3 is gonna be POO

[thacowboy3]

Originally posted by foot loose@30 September 2003 - 13:20
in blade the woman cured here self when she was bitten its a joke.
yeah that was silly. the movie was good but that was silly. and the hilarious part is she gets bitten twice and nothing happens. maybe cause it was blade and that don't count...lol

[foot loose]

yeh and in these so called ation vampier films underworld/blade queen of da damed, da vampires don&#39;t turn in 2 bat any more <_<

[ck-uk]

I may well be wrong here..I know vampires are just fictional,but i always though only dracula or head vampire could transform into a bat.But like i said i could be wrong and anthing goes in action/movies to look good on the screen.

[puk:))]

im abig vamp film fan & would hate for them to stop making them due to afew crap ones. your always get crap films weather they have vampires in or american teen girls... youve just gotta sift through all the shit. ;)


u could give near dark a watch..A superb vampire movie imo..

Near Dark totally rocks... anyone who hasnt seen it, well worth a watch..... its so good its nearly even worth buying..... nearly. :D

[MetroStars]

yeh and in these so called ation vampier films underworld/blade queen of da damed, da vampires don&#39;t turn in 2 bat any more

They r sum of the worst vampire movies ever, hollywood r trying 2 make Vampires into sum sort of cool hip figure... in my opinion that just spoils things...

The best type of Dracula is the, guy that lives on his own in a creepy castle, that type of Vampire...

That just my opinion tho :lol:


The worst dracula movie so far has 2 b Dracula 200, Wes Cravens version, wot a load of shit... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0219653/


They never make Dracula movies like this anymore...


Nosferatu :: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0013442/

Count Yorga, Vampire :: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066952/

Dracula (1931 :: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021814/

Dracula (1958) :: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051554/

Dracula (1992) :: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103874/

[Embracer Of Darkness]

Foot Loose, you&#39;re a complete dumbass, you know that? <_<

Vampire movies have always reflected the fears of society at the time, the old Dracula movies represented the inhibitied sexuality of the Victorians for example. :rolleyes:

As for newer vampire movies, vampirism is a virus. It represents exactly that, HIV. I won&#39;t even bother getting into the racial and gang-related sides of modern vampire films.

The reason vampires in older movies had no reflection was the Victorian avoidance of vanity. What good would that do now? Our society thrives on vanity, and we constantly see this in the way movie stars are constantly on our TVs and in our magazines.

Simply put, movie vampires today are exactly how they should be. A reflection of the fears of society. Who knows, in ten years, vampires might not even drink blood. <_<

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Embracer Of Darkness@30 September 2003 - 17:33
Foot Loose, you&#39;re a complete dumbass, you know that? <_<

Vampire movies have always reflected the fears of society at the time, the old Dracula movies represented the inhibitied sexuality of the Victorians for example. :rolleyes:

As for newer vampire movies, vampirism is a virus. It represents exactly that, HIV. I won&#39;t even bother getting into the racial and gang-related sides of modern vampire films.

The reason vampires in older movies had no reflection was the Victorian avoidance of vanity. What good would that do now? Our society thrives on vanity, and we constantly see this in the way movie stars are constantly on our TVs and in our magazines.

Simply put, movie vampires today are exactly how they should be. A reflection of the fears of society. Who knows, in ten years, vampires might not even drink blood. <_<
Well put.
The vampire disease is actually somewhat real. It&#39;s called Porphyria.
Person&#39;s with this cannot synthesize heme.
Their gums recede and the teeth darken.
Garlic worsens the symptoms.
There&#39;s extreme light sensitivity.
Lesions develop on the skin.

Back in the old days some folks with this disorder drank blood because their own couldn&#39;t synthesize heme.

footloose you crack me up.
Any vampire movie that&#39;s not in your "rulebook" is shitty.

Please.
Underworld was a good movie. That&#39;s why there talking of making a sequel and prequel. There was hardly ANY Matrix effects (no bullet time at all actually).

[Embracer Of Darkness]

Originally posted by Busyman@30 September 2003 - 18:28
Well put.

(snip)

footloose you crack me up.
Any vampire movie that&#39;s not in your "rulebook" is shitty.

Please.
Underworld was a good movie. That&#39;s why there talking of making a sequel and prequel. There was hardly ANY Matrix effects (no bullet time at all actually).
Thank you my good man. :) I completely agree with your points also. People need to fucking buy a clue, they can write their own movie if they think they can do better.

[Gre1]

But the girl in LXG is a vamp (sorry about the spoil) and she makes the movie good.

[zinc1]

Every now and then you get good Vampire movies like From Dusk Till Dawn or Blade.The movies are about Bloodsuckers but everytime they try to give them a new twist.
Don&#39;t forget plenty of people might not have seen the old vampire movies so to them it is something different,so unlikethe old movies just using stakes and crosses they&#39;re using guns with special bullets or some other new type of weapons.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Gre1@30 September 2003 - 20:40
But the girl in LXG is a vamp (sorry about the spoil) and she makes the movie good.
I never saw all of LXG (I actually walked out of the theatre). When I&#39;m tired I start thinking a movie is worse than it is. From what I saw of the vampire though she was cool. I left LXG right when Captain Nemo raised that super thin sub out of the water.

[thacowboy3]

ok...i m gonna try and tackle 2 people&#39;s long quotes at a time...here goes.


Vampire movies have always reflected the fears of society at the time, the old Dracula movies represented the inhibitied sexuality of the Victorians for example.

true...that&#39;s one thing i&#39;ll agree with.


Simply put, movie vampires today are exactly how they should be. A reflection of the fears of society. Who knows, in ten years, vampires might not even drink blood.

not really agreeing with the last part there. apart from the fears of society, the vampires are also dark creatures that are damned forever. there is a certain mythology, although fictional, to it and that should be adhered to. it goes against the grain of vampirism that they can suddenly lose their afinity for blood and start walking into daylight. the reason many such &#39;rules&#39; were created is cause they serve as deterants to the &#39;virus&#39;.

what if vampires could just walk into daylight and start biting people. say people turn as soon as they are bitten. the whole world would be full of vampires in days, hypothetically speaking. the whole point of fearing sunlight is the symbolism that they are creatures lurking in shadows at night, when a majority of the population is sleeping so that they can prey upon the few vulnerable souls that &#39;dared&#39; to venture out. these kinda people can be anyone from drug dealers to rapists, in real life.

the point of turning into a vampire after being bitten is also a symbolism that &#39;cause of society&#39;s inability to help the weak and listen to their needs, the victims themselves became anti-socials, losong all inhibitions that binded them to society. it seems silly that this should be removed in movies like blade, cause that&#39;s the one thing we see the most around the world, society with its inhibitions unable to help the needy, weak and vulnerable.

i don&#39;t agree with the reason for not able to see reflection. vampires cannot see their own reflection, imho, is cause they are damned creatures who have lost their soul. they have no identity and no existence of their own. their only purpose in life is to feed on other&#39;s insecurities. plus it serves as a means of differenciation, a means of identification that there is a leech among you who&#39;ll suck you dry the minute you let yur guard down. if only there was something like this to identify the real-life &#39;vampires&#39;.

they are blood suckers cause they feed on people when they are weak or vulnerable. as long as society exists, we&#39;ll have these blood suckers among us - drug dealers, pimps that lure young girls into prostitution, forced labor, or your next door fraudulent banker. in fact, the point of turning is that at first they seem like loving gentle people who are there to help you, and then they show their true face and suck you dry.

take all that out of the equation and there is no vampirism in the first place. it ceases to be symbolism of society&#39;s fears.


The vampire disease is actually somewhat real. It&#39;s called Porphyria.
Person&#39;s with this cannot synthesize heme.
Their gums recede and the teeth darken.
Garlic worsens the symptoms.
There&#39;s extreme light sensitivity.
Lesions develop on the skin.

at least stick to that when making movies...call it being scientific...lol :P


That&#39;s why there talking of making a sequel and prequel.

it&#39;s all about the money, honey ;)


edit - made some spelling corrections

[Embracer Of Darkness]

Originally posted by thacowboy3@1 October 2003 - 00:45
1: (snip)the whole point of fearing sunlight is the symbolism that they are creatures lurking in shadows at night, when a majority of the population is sleeping so that they can prey upon the few vulnerable souls that &#39;dared&#39; to venture out. these kinda people can be anyone from drug dealers to rapists, in real life.

2: the point of turning into a vampire after being bitten is also a symbolism that &#39;cause of society&#39;s inability to help the weak and listen to their needs, the victims themselves became anti-socials, losong all inhibitions that binded them to society. it seems silly that this should be removed in movies like blade, cause that&#39;s the one thing we see the most around the world, society with its inhibitions unable to help the needy, weak and vulnerable.

3: i don&#39;t agree with the reason for not able to see reflection. vampires cannot see their own reflection, imho, is cause they are damned creatures who have lost their soul. they have no identity and no existence of their own. their only purpose in life is to feed on other&#39;s insecurities. plus it serves as a means of differenciation, a means of identification that there is a leech among you who&#39;ll suck you dry the minute you let yur guard down. if only there was something like this to identify the real-life &#39;vampires&#39;.
1: Reflecting the fears of society, thank you for agreeing with me. If you re-read my post, you&#39;ll note that I purposely added other reasons but didn&#39;t bother getting into them.

2: Fears of society again. ;)

3: The mirror thing actually came to me as I was typing that. :D I prefer your explaination though.

[MagicNakor]

Yes, there is a certain mythology to vampires. However, it&#39;s not all Bram Stoker. He just chose which parts he liked best. ;) Depending on which culture&#39;s folklore you look at, vampires aren&#39;t "dark creatures that are damned forever." It&#39;s ridiculous to say vampires should be A, B, and C, when it doesn&#39;t take too much research into history to find D, E, and F.

:ninja:

[thacowboy3]

Depending on which culture&#39;s folklore you look at, vampires aren&#39;t "dark creatures that are damned forever

i have yet to come across a version that says they do not lose their soul and are not immortal, or that they are not evil.

i m not saying stick to bram stoker. that&#39;s just one aspect. some rules like holy water and cross are archaic cause those are from a time when the world was a closed place, the east or even america hadn&#39;t been discovered yet. it seems ridiculous that a vampire biting a buddhist will turn him into an anti-christ. :D

[MagicNakor]

There are many versions about that don&#39;t have vampires losing their souls, or being evil.

There&#39;s Lamia, who was cursed by Hera when it was revealed that Lamia and Zeus were lovers, although Hera cursing people is a pretty common thing with Greek mythology. ;)

There are the yara-ma-yha-who, who, although draining victims of their blood, take only enough to make them weak. Then later it&#39;d swallow the victim whole, have a drink, take a nap, and regurgitate them. The victim would return to the world still alive.

There&#39;s the bajang, which you can enslave and turn into a servant if you feed it eggs. The polong is another vampire servant, although it feeds briefly off the blood of the master&#39;s finger, rather than eggs. The danag are just another species, and worked in partnership with humans for some time.

There are a lot of vampires that come about as the result of terrible deaths or improper burials.

The lobishomen will turn women into nymphomaniacs, and the lugat is more of a parasite than anything else.

The moroii isn&#39;t dead, or undead, as is the obayifo. The ramanga also lives, and is a servant to its tribal elders.

Although the pisacha has been created by humanity&#39;s vices, and generally Not Nice, you can entice it to cure disease. Somehow.

The stregoni benefici is a vampire on the side of goodness, and the mortal enemy of all evil vampires. ;)

The ubour won&#39;t drink blood unless absolutely neccessary. It can eat normal food.
The upier rises at midday and sleeps at midnight. The upyr also is active during the day and sleeps at night, although this one would certainly be deemed "evil." The upir (the upier and the upir are two very distinct creatures, although they are both Polish in origin) eats only fish, and a lot of it. The ustrel will prey only on cattle.

Well, that&#39;s enough. I&#39;ve got to have supper.

:ninja:

[The Horror fanatic]

in the case of the vampires the movies will keep coming. But one film i did see actually had dracula turning into a bat and a wolf, which of course would contradict what has been in some vampire films that the werewolves and vampires are mortal enemies. I liked how dracula 2000 portrayed judas escariot as dracula, but that was yet another of the ideas movies came up with.
All we know is count dracula is the most powerful, and that he was cursed and was from transylvania and so on. It depends on what you believe a vampire to be.
In my theory the real look of a vampire would be the following. Very gothic with piercing eyes. Fear of garlic, cross and wooden stakes, immense strength and thirst for human blood. The count dracula would also live in his castle, but not necessarily have to sleep in a coffin, unless it was not wooden. Overall an unholy creature of the night, and no ability to go out in the day. the old day films for me are more to my belief of vampires.

[thacowboy3]

magicnakor, you are quoting from some game manuals aren&#39;t you? ;)

anyway, at least for me, it doesn&#39;t make sense that vampires are powerles beings that serve others. i agree with horror..a vampire is what you believe it to be. there are so many mutually contradicting theories. for me, vampires have the foloowing qualities - immortal, fear of sunlight, garlic. killed by stake, immolation or decapitation. powerful physically with good looks and clear skin [until it turns], and thisrt for human blood. the dracula is the most powerful and only he can turn into a bat. mortal enemies with werewolves [with no real avantage over them or vice versa, cause werewolves remain werewolves only for the full moon night]. it makes sense to have sub-species, like the intellectual ones, etc., but they ave to have the above featues too. all those slave vampires, and cattle lovers and fish eaters are not my cup of tea. also as i said earlier, the cross and holy water don&#39;t make sense in the modern world.

oh, and silver and no reflection :)

one thing i agree with horror is that the good ole vampire movies were the best in the way they made you feel, and the feel a vampire gave you when you looked at him - dark, silent, deadly, powerful, and evil lurking just under its skin.

[The Horror fanatic]

yes the old are the best, but although bela lugosi is seen as being better than christopher lee was, i still think christopher was slightly better, maybe it was because he had more menacing eyes, but bela definitelt had the voice for me, his voice as dracula was kind of creepy. I have seen loads of vampire films and seen all the portrayings of dracula. Some who have played the count are just not in bela lugosi or christopher lee&#39;s league. if you got a mix of the two, then you got the perfect dracula in my view.

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by thacowboy3@1 October 2003 - 04:56
magicnakor, you are quoting from some game manuals aren&#39;t you? ;) ...
No, I pulled out one of my history/folklore books. I&#39;ve got a lot of them. ;)

Edit: Actually, there&#39;s a Brazilian vampire that&#39;s also a werewolf. :D

:ninja:

[The Horror fanatic]

how can it be a vampire and werewolf. what is it an hybrid, that is a new one

[AngryChick]

Originally posted by foot loose@30 September 2003 - 12:55
STOP MAKING VAMPIER MOVIES THEY R GETTIN BORING

in underworld the woman shalein or wat ever her name is, looks in da mirror and say forgive me my lord just be 4 she awakins the old vampire.

but i thought vampires cannot c there own reflections :angry:

its thing like this dat makes me :angry: coz every film they make about vampires they always change da rules to suit da film

Queen of da damed akasher(aalliyah) can go out in da day light and not die :angry:
if you typed properly it would make it WAY more sense and it would also mask your ignorance a lot better.

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by The Horror fanatic@1 October 2003 - 05:31
how can it be a vampire and werewolf. what is it an hybrid, that is a new one
I&#39;m not sure how it works. It&#39;s always a female, though. ;) Understandably, there isn&#39;t too much in-depth documentation for folklore, at least folklore from tribal people with little to no written form of communication.

Edit: Clarity.

:ninja:

[phunugus]

your sig is uhh... distracting