I agree completely, I can't believe MovieBob actually like this, I'm no professional movie reviewer, but I can tell you that the script, plot (towards the later half of the movie at least), and execution was awful.Tootmania said:Hahahahahahahahaha!!... No.... no way....flaming_squirrel said:The vampire movie equivelant of District 9? This I must see.
In all seriousness though, this film kind of sucked. The "anti-Twilight"? Kind of ironic, considering that the ONLY really well done thing in this movie is that the vampires act like real vampires. Which is enough to cash in on all the people who spend their time hating Twilight, even though the acting, writing, and execution of pretty much the whole thing was terrible...
You OBVIOUSLY were blind the majority of the movie, you remember the scene when the guy just EXPLODES into blood? No, of course not, cause you probably NEVER BLOODY SAW IT. It's a great movie, might be a tad predictible but everything else is AWESOME without the need of giant, exaggerated explosions or blue people (Avatar)Xavier78 said:I am confused by this review and some of the comments. This movie was terrible. Tons of Gore? Unless you count the blood bags, bottles of "blood wine" and a few other scenes... hardly. It's a pretentious film that moves at a snails pace until the very end, which was predictable, boring, and almost as bad as any Twilight book. In no way did this movie make "Vampires Vampires again".
Willem Dafoe was terrible as usual too. Why is this crappy actor getting any kind of love on here? Isabel Lucas was decent, but of course what happens to her was a no surprise cliche just to make the "bad guy" look like more of a douche. Ethan Hawke was mediocre at best, but that's par for the course with him. Sam Neill and the rest of the supporting staff were hit and miss.
Anyways, just my opinion. No offense to any fans intended.