Thanks for the memories!

SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Some movies are not for everyone and this is the first one (I've seen) that isn't for anyone.I basically had to watch this because I lost a bet and no punishment could have been worse other than writing an essay on the film after the fact...(wait that's what this is...) Anyway, no words can describe how bad this was. The word bad is too short and over used, but any other forms of expression other than screaming in pain can't begin to describe this "thing".Honestly, whom ever would let this film maker go on must be into sick and twisted jokes (or has money to burn).I can't believe Artisan put their names on this product.Anyway, no sense in kicking a man while he's down (It appears many others before me have written about their anguish so I'll spare anyone else.) Buyer/Watcher beware.

This is one of those rare movies that has absolutely nothing to recommend it. From beginning to end there are no high points. There aren't even points high enough to be called low - it is unrelentingly abysmal.The acting is so bad you wonder if the cast members are even allowed to join Actors' Equity. I've seen better set design in high school plays. Continuity was awful, costumes were awful, everything was awful. Every possible detail was neglected or overlooked.It drew an R rating - ostensibly for violence and nudity - but if that's what you're looking for, don't bother. The violence is tame and so poorly choreographed and directed that you're more likely to yawn than gasp. And you can see as much nudity on prime time broadcast TV. The actors aren't even good looking. Not even the gratuitous nude (her whole part was gratuitous not just her nude scene).Do yourself a favor and leave this one alone.

Well, I'm not a frustrated (unsuccessful) filmmaker and I rather prefer movies that cross/blend/shatter stereotypical genre films, so I suppose that helps explain why I really enjoyed FROST. I suspect that the same people who don't like a combination of action and horror would call it "cliched" had FROST stayed in one realm or the other.FROST hearkens back to a day when films were made to entertain and not done just to show how clever or slick the producer/director/etc. are. And FROST is entertaining. Damned entertaining. Watch-it-again-and-again entertaining. Part "Night Stalker," part Robert Ludlum, this movie pays tribute to the respective traditions and then sets out to bend several rules within them. We span 10 years, two countries, and four vampires by movie's end. Not to mention several murders, an art theft, two explosive-laden skirmishes, all deftly paced and all superbly handled. The dialogue for the characters is unique, as VanHook and the individual actors quickly define the personalities of their respective characters.JACK FROST is the mercenary skeptic whose pragmatic world is rocked by the discovery that his best friend is now a vampire. And while Frost may not believe in vampires, he's also nobody's fool. Gary Busey is the wise blind Micah, Frost's friend and mentor in his battle against the undead. Based on the best-selling comic JACK FROST (written by writer/director/producer Kevin VanHook), the movie remains faithful to the source material while both expanding upon and updating the tale. VanHook also pays homage to such influences (and I'm speculating here) as the afore-mentioned "Night Stalker," Tod Browing's FREAKS, Richard Matheson's I AM LEGEND, perhaps THE TERMINATOR (and others, I'm sure) while keeping the very original storyline intact.The effects are believable, which isn't surprising as they were done by many of the same crew who did FX for DAREDEVIL, MISS CONGENIALITY and a host of other major motion pictures.Is FROST: PORTRAIT OF A VAMPIRE the next TRAINSPOTTING? Probably not, but it's a damned entertaining flick that will provide 92 minutes of fun and leave you wanting more. I look forward to more of Mr. VanHook's work. If more people made entertaining movies, instead of trying for the next "box office smash hit," we'd be better off. I hope to see more of VanHook's films soon. He is a highly talented creative force who should get more oppotunities to tell his unique brand of tales to ever-widening audiences. Here's to a sequel, or whatever the future might hold from him!

This movie was REALLY REALLY badly done. It's not worth really saying much about it other than that, but it was SO bad that I just had to write SOMETHING about it.There are no redeeming features in this movie. Why would Gary Busey do something like this? I don't understand.