REVIEW: Modern Vampires
Sometimes when you watch a film, you have to ask yourself, "Am I being fair to the movie?" As I've said before, I'm usually capable of finding something good about a movie, whether the rest of it stinks or not, and most of the time this involves a temporary lowering of my standards to match the standards of the film. In the case of "Modern Vampires," I had to go pretty low, but in the end admit that I did giggle a little at this horror-comedy. Just a little.
"Modern Vampires" concerns itself with the lives of modern vampires living the Paris Hilton lifestyle in Los Angeles -- sex and drugs, blood and nightclubs. Our "hero," Casper Van Dien's Dallas, is a vamp returning to L.A. to visit his old pals after being exiled by Robert Pastorelli's Count Dracula; in addition to his troubles with the Count, he's also got to deal with the Hollywood slasher Nico, a whoring vampire that he created years ago that's ended up drawing a lot of attention to their vampy lifestyle. On top of that, Professor Van Helsing is still on the trail, this time enlisting the Crips in his quest to avenge the vamping of his paralyzed son. All of this is played in a pretty goofy way, under the direction of Richard ("I'm Danny's Brother!") Elfman, who really seems like he wants the audience to be having a good time. For the record, I would have had a better time if he'd stayed with Oingo Boingo.
You can always tell that there are problems with a movie when reading a paragraph-long description of the events encompasses all the good stuff. Like "Hysterial," the stuff I liked in the movie was what you might call "conceptual humor." There are ideas that seem fun and interesting on the page, but they're just surrounded by dreck and poor execution. I would've really liked a movie about how an aging German man recruits inner-city gang members for his holy war against vampires! That would be funny. Somebody write that one! And I would have enjoyed a movie where a vampire's amnesia is broken by taking her to visit the family that she used to have before she was turned -- grounds for a tragedy, I say! And a revenge picture about a man who's forced to kill his own children after they've been transformed into the enemy! And....well, that's it. That's the good stuff. If you've enjoyed this paragraph, you don't need to watch the movie. I like to be a time-saver for those in need!
The movie's got those ideas, but it traps them in a goofy, stupid comedy that was born without a moral compass. It goes to great lengths to show us the vampire's hedonistic lifestyle: clubs where innocent people are stripped naked and tied up for the vampire's amusement, kidnapping and draining a victim via wrist-straws while the vampires read the newspaper, random murdering of retail saleswomen, and on and on and on. And these are the protagonists! Their behavior makes you feel more sympathy for Van Helsing's cause, which is strange because the script essentially makes him the enemy. Dallas' rationalization of giving Van Helsing's son a choice of dying from disease or becoming a vampire never confronts Van Helsing's more rational point of view that Dallas was turning his son into a serial murderer. Oh, and the vampire community is openly racist, and Van Helsing is a nazi. See what I'm saying?
As for lowering my standards, aside from ignoring the ethics alarm bells in my head, I had to downgrade my views on quality acting to "no one looks directly at the camera." Huzzah! That way I was able to ignore the fact that everyone's fangs prevented them from EVER closing their mouths. Unlike most vampire films where they have fangs that only extend when necessary, these vampires are sadly forced to grin like idiots for all eternity, making the same face as the people who sell things on infomercials. Or people that really want you to think that they're having a great time at your birthday party. Perhaps the actors just really wanted the director to think that they're happy being in this movie!
Another nagging question is: what's up with the casting? Casper Van Dien as Dallas I can understand. I bet he's really cheap since that Tarzan movie. Craig Ferguson (of "Drew Carey Show" fame) was probably on vacation or something, and had a few days to burn -- fine. But Kim Cattrall? I know this was before the whole "Sex in the City" thing heated up, but I thought she was better than the stupid accent and camped-out schtick that she's reduced to here. Robert Pastorelli couldn't be more miscast as Count Dracula, yes, the Count Dracula; perhaps this was the beginning of his drug abuse. Natasha Lyonne once had promise, and Natasha Gregson Wagner -- somehow, I'm not even sure why, but I thought she was a better actress. Maybe it was her breasts or something. The only two people in the whole movie that shouldn't have to cringe when resume-revising time comes are Rod Steiger, who actually acts in this film, and Gabriel Casseus, who is the only black character that's not a stereotype. Not that I'm suggesting that this be included on a resume, unless any of the above are applying for "Modern Vampires II."
I'd started out with the idea of writing a more positive review of the movie, but the more I think about it, the less worth watching it becomes. It did have some good points, and the whole style was 'stupid glee' which generally makes a movie more watchable; but if you're looking for a fun, hip vampire film, you're gonna have to look for something else.
ARE YOU ASTONISHED?
"Modern Vampires" concerns itself with the lives of modern vampires living the Paris Hilton lifestyle in Los Angeles -- sex and drugs, blood and nightclubs. Our "hero," Casper Van Dien's Dallas, is a vamp returning to L.A. to visit his old pals after being exiled by Robert Pastorelli's Count Dracula; in addition to his troubles with the Count, he's also got to deal with the Hollywood slasher Nico, a whoring vampire that he created years ago that's ended up drawing a lot of attention to their vampy lifestyle. On top of that, Professor Van Helsing is still on the trail, this time enlisting the Crips in his quest to avenge the vamping of his paralyzed son. All of this is played in a pretty goofy way, under the direction of Richard ("I'm Danny's Brother!") Elfman, who really seems like he wants the audience to be having a good time. For the record, I would have had a better time if he'd stayed with Oingo Boingo.
You can always tell that there are problems with a movie when reading a paragraph-long description of the events encompasses all the good stuff. Like "Hysterial," the stuff I liked in the movie was what you might call "conceptual humor." There are ideas that seem fun and interesting on the page, but they're just surrounded by dreck and poor execution. I would've really liked a movie about how an aging German man recruits inner-city gang members for his holy war against vampires! That would be funny. Somebody write that one! And I would have enjoyed a movie where a vampire's amnesia is broken by taking her to visit the family that she used to have before she was turned -- grounds for a tragedy, I say! And a revenge picture about a man who's forced to kill his own children after they've been transformed into the enemy! And....well, that's it. That's the good stuff. If you've enjoyed this paragraph, you don't need to watch the movie. I like to be a time-saver for those in need!
The movie's got those ideas, but it traps them in a goofy, stupid comedy that was born without a moral compass. It goes to great lengths to show us the vampire's hedonistic lifestyle: clubs where innocent people are stripped naked and tied up for the vampire's amusement, kidnapping and draining a victim via wrist-straws while the vampires read the newspaper, random murdering of retail saleswomen, and on and on and on. And these are the protagonists! Their behavior makes you feel more sympathy for Van Helsing's cause, which is strange because the script essentially makes him the enemy. Dallas' rationalization of giving Van Helsing's son a choice of dying from disease or becoming a vampire never confronts Van Helsing's more rational point of view that Dallas was turning his son into a serial murderer. Oh, and the vampire community is openly racist, and Van Helsing is a nazi. See what I'm saying?
As for lowering my standards, aside from ignoring the ethics alarm bells in my head, I had to downgrade my views on quality acting to "no one looks directly at the camera." Huzzah! That way I was able to ignore the fact that everyone's fangs prevented them from EVER closing their mouths. Unlike most vampire films where they have fangs that only extend when necessary, these vampires are sadly forced to grin like idiots for all eternity, making the same face as the people who sell things on infomercials. Or people that really want you to think that they're having a great time at your birthday party. Perhaps the actors just really wanted the director to think that they're happy being in this movie!
Another nagging question is: what's up with the casting? Casper Van Dien as Dallas I can understand. I bet he's really cheap since that Tarzan movie. Craig Ferguson (of "Drew Carey Show" fame) was probably on vacation or something, and had a few days to burn -- fine. But Kim Cattrall? I know this was before the whole "Sex in the City" thing heated up, but I thought she was better than the stupid accent and camped-out schtick that she's reduced to here. Robert Pastorelli couldn't be more miscast as Count Dracula, yes, the Count Dracula; perhaps this was the beginning of his drug abuse. Natasha Lyonne once had promise, and Natasha Gregson Wagner -- somehow, I'm not even sure why, but I thought she was a better actress. Maybe it was her breasts or something. The only two people in the whole movie that shouldn't have to cringe when resume-revising time comes are Rod Steiger, who actually acts in this film, and Gabriel Casseus, who is the only black character that's not a stereotype. Not that I'm suggesting that this be included on a resume, unless any of the above are applying for "Modern Vampires II."
I'd started out with the idea of writing a more positive review of the movie, but the more I think about it, the less worth watching it becomes. It did have some good points, and the whole style was 'stupid glee' which generally makes a movie more watchable; but if you're looking for a fun, hip vampire film, you're gonna have to look for something else.
ARE YOU ASTONISHED?
- I love the song that Wagner and van Dien were "listening to" when they first met. I loved how they were nodding their heads to completely separate beats. And neither of them matched the song that was playing.
- Why do you keep smiling at the end of the movie, Natasha Lyonne? What's so funny and joyful, Casper Van Dien? Why are your lower gums bleeding, Natasha Gregson-Wagner?
- Rod Steiger: "On the Waterfront," "Death of a Salesman," "Dr. Zhivago," "Modern Vampires." Which one of these is not like the others?
- Udo Kier: Taking movie roles because he can.
sent by The Retropolitan at 1:35 PM
...0 RESPONDO-GRAMS:
Post a Comment
<< Home