Such a frustrating disappointment

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

Fresh and Exciting

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

An avenging vampire (David Gunn) stalks a king of the vampires (Jonathon Morris) in Eastern Europe, and slaughters anyone who gets in his way.The Subspecies series is one of those rare gems in the Full Moon arsenal. I don't know if it is the director, or the absence of Charlie Band, or what, but somehow they seem to come out alright. Not that they are great films, but the look and feel of them is still better than your average horror film, which is notable.This film is a spin off of the series, but till very much a part of it with that look and feel. And even with Radu gone, he is mentioned and factors in, at least sort of. It feels like this series could have kept going, even beyond part four... and yet, instead we get a dozen cruddy Puppet Masters.

I received this movie (along with 19 others in a set) as a gift from my sister. I decided to read some reviews and check the rating here, as I do with most movies I watch anymore. I thought; "Okay, not bad reviews. Let's try this!".I'm going to try and make this as short and simple as possible. This wasn't an awful movie. I'm keeping the year it was made in mind, so I wont mention the bad effects or camera. I WILL mention the bad acting. The character of Zachary seemed to be overplaying the "brooding" a bit. I'm not sure I'm using the right word. The character of Cassandra was a little awkward to me. I didn't understand the role of Dimitri in this film. Just to be shooed away like an annoying animal? The plot had potential, even if the vengeful vampire child storyline is overused. BloodRayne for instance. There were moments that I felt had just been tossed in as filler footage. There never really seemed to be much of a catch. Throughout the movie, it was the same pace. I also couldn't believe the ending. I highly doubt that a vampire "lord" would be killed so easily (and stupidly, mind you). So, needless to say, I was a little disappointed.

First the good news: Vampire journals is a surprisingly beautiful and elegant-looking movie. I say "surprisingly" because nowadays even big budget movies tend to look trash. Blade begins in a butcher's shop and a trashy club, features trashy vampires and has horribly, pretentiously cooler-than-thou-posing. Vampire Journals opens with the poetic shot of a wintery graveyard, with the Gothic letters and lovely music. All scenes are lit with rich, golden hue, and even though writer/director Ted Nicolaou clearly copies the flourishes of Interview with the Vampire and Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992, they at least he has some talent. AND taste to copy the classy, gorgeous-looking movies. Steal from the best! Bad news: Thick accents, at least to non-English watcher who had no subtitles available. Sometimes I had problems to find out what these people were saying! And sometimes I hope I would not have heard. Don't understand me wrong, I HATE Tarantino-like "cool" crap which pollutes the modern cinema. But these attempts from grandeur and poetry from bad actors with thick "exotic vampire" accents are surprisingly embarrassing. In the end: Surprisingly good, when you but use MUTE or FF button in the most ridiculous scenes.

This is my most favorite movie! I am in love with David Gunn as well. He is an exceptional actor. I only wish that he would do more movies. Plus, Ted Nicolaou is a genius. His writing is profound. You must overlook the fact that this movie was made by a low budget company. It is filmed in Romania and provides great visuals of their architecture and landscape. Plus, a lot of the people in it are from Romania, which gives this film a tremendous amount of credit. Zachary is perhaps the best vampire character ever written. His humanity and unending torture draw you in and make you love him. This story is classic and beautiful. It had me fascinated from beginning to end. It is a must see for any vampire fan.