Skip to main content

We’re looking into a possible pattern of nationwide anti-Catholic hate crimes.

Vampires
aka John Carpenter’s Vampires
(1998)

(SPOILERS) John Carpenter limps less-than-boldly onward, his desiccated cadaver no longer attentive to the filmic basics of quality, taste, discernment, rhyme or reason. Apparently, he made his pre-penultimate picture to see if his enthusiasm for the process truly had drained away, and he only went and discovered he really enjoyed himself. It doesn’t show. Vampires is as flat, lifeless, shoddily shot, framed and edited as the majority of his ’90s output, only with a repellent veneer of macho bombast spread on top to boot.

Carpenter came to the project, written by Don Jakoby (Tobe Hooper’s Lifeforce and Invaders from Mars) and based on John Steakley’s novel’s Vampire$, off the back of the expensive – but bargain-basement-looking – flop Escape from L.A. Russell Mulcahy had left – his version was poised to feature Dolph Lundgren, so much as I carry goodwill towards Mulcahy’s work, I doubt that it would have been vastly better – and Carpenter saw the opportunity for a western tinged, Peckinpah-infused romp. When the budget was slashed, he combined his favourite bits from the Jakoby and Dan Mazur drafts, in collaboration with Michael de Luca (the one-time New Line head and writer of In the Mouth of Madness… but also of Freddy’s Dead and Judge Dredd).

The result is a ponderous New Mexico-set hunt-the-vampire yarn, as Jack Crow (James Woods) and his band (dwindling band) attempt to stop vampire master Valek (Thomas Ian Griffith) from completing a ritual that will enable him to walk in sunlight. You know, the kind of thing the same year’s Blade featured with much more inventiveness, exuberance and energy. Carpenter appears to have embraced the Peckinpah impulse of boorish, sweaty, hard-drinking, hard-whoring red-blooded bullshit in his characters – and in his overbearing Western synth metal score – and it isn’t a good look for the director, particularly in the twilight of his creative flow.

Woods comes on like a parody of himself; the director apparently allowed him a long leash to improvise, and on such grounds, one can safely affirm that more Woods is less. An interviewer, sucking up to Carpenter, suggested Woods was an unlikely choice for a hero: "That’s exactly why I cast him; I thought, 'We haven’t seen this.'" Except that this is exactly what we have seen from Woods, every goddamn time, but more often than not to positive ends.

Here, he’s just tiresome as he struts around in leather and shades, unsure what Carpenter is up to with all that cinemascope, and spews out lousy lines about how he’s going to “shove a stake right up his ass” (Valek’s) or teasing new cohort Father Guiteau (Tim Guinee, dreadful) by asking if the beating he just inflicted had masochistic allure (“Did I give you wood? A little mahogany?”) Jack has a dark backstory, of course (“My father kept a secret once. He’d been bitten by a vampire”), but all you remember is Woods being extra scuzzy and charmless, given too much of a free rein to be effective. And with zingers like “Come on padre. My nuts are on fire here”, I don’t think there was ever much chance for him to land upright.

He’s supported by Daniel Baldwin as Tony – not Inigo – Montoya, a role apparently passed on by brother Alec. So yeah, one immediately thinks of Daniel as the next best thing in terms of star wattage. But Carpenter doesn’t care about that kind of thing. Any old slop, or slob, will do. Hence Griffith as the lead villain. It’s like Carpenter wanted Michael Wincott but bottled it, and instead asked for any tall guy with long hair willing to wear white face cake. He wanted to get away from gothic vampires? So why did he dress Valek in the most generic goth-vampire metal-band outfit?

Also in the cast are the ubiquitous Mark Boone Junior – every other movie I watch seems to feature him at the moment – and a barely registering Maximillian Schell. The only one here deserving any laurels is poor Shery Lee. She’s a trooper, giving a performance of dedication and conviction as bitten prostitute Katrina, one that requires her to lie bare-ass naked on a bed for several minutes while Baldwin, barely able to believe his shlubby luck, drools over her. The movie might have been improved had it focussed on Katrina, as even Carpenter is unable to detract from her performance. He tries, though, with Tony giving her a good beating after she sinks her teeth into him (“Look what you did! You fucking bit me! Fucking bitch!”) and then falling in love with her (who wouldn’t want Daniel Baldwin falling for them? Tantamount to the jackpot of having little brother Billy sleaze all over them).

There can be no doubt Carpenter is scrupulously objectifying Katrina; one only need listen to his take on the shoot (“Yeah, it was a lot of fun. It’s a beautiful place, New Mexico. I love shooting there. They have great strip clubs there”). And cringe. His mind certainly doesn’t appear to have been on a polished production. There’s the occasionally glimmer of a good idea – the phosphorous burns as vamps go up in sunlight – but the visuals and action are mostly as underwhelming as we have come to expect by this point.

Carpenter apparently cut a lot more than normal, but it still seems like he’s barely there with his lacklustre compositions, stiff choreography and ponderous pacing. All highly unflattering, as actors (and extras) stand around waiting for whatever is supposed to happen to happen. There’s no illusory movie magic here; Vampires reeks of straight-to-video standards at their most unforgiving. He is, of course, aided and abetted by the guy who killed his career in much the way Janusz Kamiński did for Spielberg’s versatility: Gary Kibbe.

The suggestion that Kibbe was shortlisted for best cinematography Oscar is somehow left intact on Wiki, but with a telling citation needed. Even by Academy standards, the idea is absolute cobblers, and I can only assume whoever posted it did so purely to take the piss. It’s kind of implicit when the cited “great look” of the movie is rebuffed by the director (“A lot of that was in post-production. We shot it pretty straightforwardly and tinted it in post”).

The same interview attempts to make something of the director’s action choices, and again, he betrays his inadequacies. With regard to the motel massacre, any semblance of tension and coherence drains away through the use of dissolves (the interviewer suggests this is masterful). Carpenter advises “That was an editing room situation. I’m not sure that we knew exactly what was going to happen when we shot it, but we came across that idea in the editing and it seemed to work”. Not sure they knew exactly what was going to happen when they shot it? Yeah, I could tell.

There are a few nods to expanding vampire lore in the thematic content. The old virus parallel (“The less you eat, the faster the virus moves into your bloodstream” advises Tony, offering a day-old hamburger to Katrina). We are told that, in 1340, Valek was a priest and the first known case of vampirism, which makes for an interesting-enough notion, that of the church itself being responsible for this cannibalism and feeding on blood – the church being elite, and vampirism being an elite practice of the nobility – but it’s squandered when delivered in such a crass form. This is, after all, a movie that thinks a line like “How do you like your stake, bitch?” is the height of wit. And allows its seasoned-pro vamp hunter to remain oblivious to the obvious signs that his right-hand man is infected for most of the running time.

Frank Darabont cameos, which only serves to make you wonder what his vampire movie would have been like. While he was still working with Dean Cundey (most recently offering his lensing skills to The Book of Boba Fett), a Carpenter vampire movie might have been something to be savoured (the same with the touted The Creature from the Black Lagoon remake). But Carpenter was a victim of his DP’s success (Cundey going on to work with Zemeckis and Spielberg), and the quality of his productions quickly fell through the floor in the wake of Cundey’s departure. Vampires is near-enough the nadir of his big screen work. Although, if you’re looking for outright worst, you can always check out his Masters of Horror entries.


Popular posts from this blog

I’m smarter than a beaver.

Prey (2022) (SPOILERS) If nothing else, I have to respect Dan Trachtenberg’s cynical pragmatism. How do I not only get a project off the ground, but fast-tracked as well? I know, a woke Predator movie! Woke Disney won’t be able to resist! And so, it comes to pass. Luckily for Prey , it gets to bypass cinemas and so the same sorry fate of Lightyear . Less fortunately, it’s a patience-testing snook cocking at historicity (or at least, assumed historicity), in which a young, pint-sized Comanche girl who wishes to hunt and fish – and doubtless shoot to boot – with the big boys gets to take on a Predator and make mincemeat of him. Well, of course , she does. She’s a girl, innit?

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) (SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron ’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison. Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War , Infinity Wars I & II , Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok . It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions ( Iron Man II ), but there are points in Age of Ultron whe

I’m the famous comedian, Arnold Braunschweiger.

Last Action Hero (1993) (SPOILERS) Make no mistake, Last Action Hero is a mess. But even as a mess, it might be more interesting than any other movie Arnie made during that decade, perhaps even in his entire career. Hellzapoppin’ (after the 1941 picture, itself based on a Broadway revue) has virtually become an adjective to describe films that comment upon their own artifice, break the fourth wall, and generally disrespect the convention of suspending disbelief in the fictions we see parading across the screen. It was fairly audacious, some would say foolish, of Arnie to attempt something of that nature at this point in his career, which was at its peak, rather than playing it safe. That he stumbled profoundly, emphatically so since he went up against the behemoth that is Jurassic Park (slotted in after the fact to open first), should not blind one to the considerable merits of his ultimate, and final, really, attempt to experiment with the limits of his screen persona.

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) (SPOILERS) There’s something daringly perverse about the attempt to weave a serious-minded, generation-spanning saga from the hare-brained premise of The Place Beyond the Pines . When he learns he is a daddy, a fairground stunt biker turns bank robber in order to provide for his family. It’s the kind of “only-in-Hollywood” fantasy premise you might expect from a system that unleashed Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man and Point Break on the world. But this is an indie-minded movie from the director of the acclaimed Blue Valentine ; it demands respect and earnest appraisal. Unfortunately it never recovers from the abject silliness of the set-up. The picture is littered with piecemeal characters and scenarios. There’s a hope that maybe the big themes will even out the rocky terrain but in the end it’s because of this overreaching ambition that the film ends up so undernourished. The inspiration for the movie

Death to Bill and Ted!

Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) (SPOILERS) The game of how few sequels are actually better than the original is so well worn, it was old when Scream 2 made a major meta thing out of it (and it wasn’t). Bill & Ted Go to Hell , as Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey was originally called, is one such, not that Excellent Adventure is anything to be sneezed at, but this one’s more confident, even more playful, more assured and more smartly stupid. And in Peter Hewitt it has a director with a much more overt and fittingly cartoonish style than the amiably pedestrian Stephen Herrick. Evil Bill : First, we totally kill Bill and Ted. Evil Ted : Then we take over their lives. My recollection of the picture’s general consensus was that it surpassed the sleeper hit original, but Rotten Tomatoes’ review aggregator suggests a less universal response. And, while it didn’t rock any oceans at the box office, Bogus Journey and Point Break did quite nicely for Keanu Reev

I think it’s pretty clear whose side the Lord’s on, Barrington.

Monte Carlo or Bust aka  Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies (1969) (SPOILERS) Ken Annakin’s semi-sequel to Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines tends to be rather maligned, usually compared negatively to its more famous predecessor. Which makes me rather wonder if those expressing said opinion have ever taken the time to scrutinise them side by side. Or watch them back to back (which would be more sensible). Because Monte Carlo or Bust is by far the superior movie. Indeed, for all its imperfections and foibles (not least a performance from Tony Curtis requiring a taste for comic ham), I adore it. It’s probably the best wacky race movie there is, simply because each set of competitors, shamelessly exemplifying a different national stereotype (albeit there are two pairs of Brits, and a damsel in distress), are vibrant and cartoonish in the best sense. Albeit, it has to be admitted that, as far as said stereotypes go, Annakin’s home side win

This entire edifice you see around you, built on jute.

Jeeves and Wooster 3.3: Cyril and the Broadway Musical  (aka Introduction on Broadway) Well, that’s a relief. After a couple of middling episodes, the third season bounces right back, and that's despite Bertie continuing his transatlantic trip. Clive Exton once again plunders  Carry On, Jeeves  but this time blends it with a tale from  The Inimitable Jeeves  for the brightest spots, as Cyril Basington-Basington (a sublimely drippy Nicholas Hewetson) pursues his stage career against Aunt Agatha's wishes.

Poetry in translation is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

Paterson (2016) (SPOILERS) Spoiling a movie where nothing much happens is difficult, but I tend to put the tag on in a cautionary sense much of the time. Paterson is Jim Jarmusch at his most inert and ambient but also his most rewardingly meditative. Paterson (Adam Driver), a bus driver and modest poet living in Paterson, New Jersey, is a stoic in a fundamental sense, and if he has a character arc of any description, which he doesn’t really, it’s the realisation that is what he is. Jarmusch’s picture is absent major conflict or drama; the most significant episodes feature Paterson’s bus breaking down, the English bull terrier Marvin – whom Paterson doesn’t care for but girlfriend Laura (Golshifteh Farahani) dotes on – destroying his book of poetry, and an altercation at the local bar involving a gun that turns out to be a water pistol. And Paterson takes it all in his stride, genial to the last, even the ruination of his most earnest, devoted work (the only disappoint

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994) (SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction ’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump . And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.