People are voting emotionally.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

This off-beat vampire film is a superior presentation. In 1897, our blonde, ill-fated damsel is put to death as a vampire. A century and more later she is accidentally resurrected by a workman, part of a crew who are doing some work for the local church. She crawls out of her grave not only covered in mud and bloodied from her execution but struck dumb (initially) and with no memory of her misfortune, nor it appears of her previous life, and of course no idea how long she has been interred. Although a vampire, she walks in the sunlight, and is, as you would be if you hadn't eaten for 111 years, ravenously hungry. As slowly she adapts to traffic, aircraft, and not least, biros, things aren't looking at all bad for her. She scavenges some clothes aided by an ability to move only slightly less quickly than the Flash, and seeks out her former residence. She might have adapted to the 21st Century perhaps even without reverting to type, but unfortunately there is a vampire hunter in close pursuit who wants to save her soul in classical fashion. That is as much as you need to know apart from the film having a decent soundtrack; suffice it to say that even allowing for the development of the film-makers' craft, Bela Lugosi comes a poor second to the feisty Caitlin McIntosh.

Well I found "Shadowland" to be a rather enjoyable movie on one hand, but on the other hand there was just something crucial missing from it to make it great.The storyline was good enough, although you don't really get any chance or any real deep insight as to whom the characters are, and they come off as rather soulless, shallow characters, which is a shame. The story does, however, delve a bit into the background of Laura (played by Caitlin McIntosh), but it is nowhere near any point as being where it really establishes any real depth to her character. And as for the mysterious hunter Julian (played by Jason Contini), then we are given even less insight to his story and background.So for some odd reason, the movie is basically about an hour and forty minutes of watching a vampire lady trying to track back to her familiar places in the time where she was from, while a hunter is trying to track her down. This is basically the essential core of the movie and the entire feature concept. Sort of lacking depth and levels in which the audience can get immersed.The acting was actually good enough for a movie of this budget. And I personally do think that the people hired for the various roles were doing quite alright, and was at no point amateurish and pathetic at acting as you tend to experience in movies of this kind. So thumbs up on that aspect at least."Shadowland" doesn't make use of a lot of special effects, nor does it make a lot of use of CGI. The little that was used was used in moderation and worked out well enough to illustrate the points trying to be achieved. However, there was one thing that was really sort of anti-climatic; it was when Laura was screaming in the church and the windows had to be blown out. It looked like a small rock was just randomly tossed through the windows, taking out a small fragment of the glass only. It was hilarious, and it didn't work out on any level at all.Oddly enough, there is just something about "Shadowland" that makes you keep watching right up to the very end. There is some kind of strange lure to the movie, despite it not really having much aspect or depth. So the director did do something right after all.For a vampire movie, then "Shadowland" was somewhat of a rather tame experience. And personally, I didn't fully grasp the idea of having an extra set of fangs, and especially not have them placed where they were. It made the vampire look sort of retarded in a way. Kind of hard to take it serious when the mouth was widened by an extra set of fangs, and it would cause them to speak with an impediment."Shadowland" is a movie that doesn't offer much on most levels, but strangely enough manages to keep you lured in for the entire length of the feature. And because of this, I have to settle on giving "Shadowland" a 5/10 rating.

This is an interesting independent vampire movie that exchanges the gratuities of most modern vamp movies with a softly nuanced character-based story about a woman, staked as a newly-made vampire several centuries ago, who is accidentally awakened (via the old removal-of-the-stake-from-her-heart gag) in modern times, where she tries to find her old love while evading both police and a clerical vampire hunter seeking her demise – and continuing to deal with the tragic reality that she has been made a vampire. It's a very sympathetic story (without descending into saccharine TWILIGHT territory) that proffers an appealing side to the vampire movie, exchanging thoughtful insight instead of spectacle and carnage. Filmed in St Louis with local talent, the filmmakers tried to make a PG vampire movie that would be suitable for families (that opening staking scene evidently earned them their R-rating), and focuses on character interaction while telling an interesting story largely from the vampire lady's perspective. In the lead role, actress Caitlin McIntosh, who is strikingly beautiful to the point of distraction, plays Laura with expressiveness and sympathy. The other cast members are adequate if indistinctive. The film's low budget is wisely used to its best advantage by director Wyatt Weed in his first feature-length movie; production quality is quite good with limited use of very good CGI to render some of the environments (such as flashbacks to yesteryear) and to make vampire movements ultra-fast; props must go to young makeup artist Rachel Rieckenberg who does an amazing job with limited means to create convincing and creatures, wounds, and the like. Patrick Savage and Holeg Spies (having together scored THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE (FIRST SEQUENCE) and American MANIAC prior to this) provide a serviceable score that supports the duality of the film's heroine as both innocent victim and unwilling monster.

Although this movie kept me entertained to a level in which i wanted to see how far they would take it, it's not something i would consider watching again.The acting was weak at best but not so much that you couldn't watch it or turn away in disgust since it did have its moments, this will never win any awards but it is entertaining.The portrayal of vampires was indeed its weakest part considering what fiction dictates to be a correct form for vampires, you shall see what i mean if you decide to watch it, and although my rating is low, the story is sound and is defiantly worth a one time watch.