Review: The House With a Clock in Its Walls #MonsterMondays

Review: The House With a Clock in Its Walls

Rating: 12A

Cast:

Jack Black ... Jonathan Barnavelt

Cate Blanchett ... Florence Zimmerman

Owen Vaccaro ... Lewis Barnavelt

Kyle MacLachlan ... Isaac Izard

Summary: A young orphan named Lewis Barnavelt aids his magical uncle in locating a clock with the power to bring about the end of the world.

I wanted to see this film when I caught the trailer, and I can very much say, I was not disappointed.

Apart from the superb cast, this film has everything we could want from am urban fantasy film. There's action, adventure, peril and a great bad guy.

The film is set in the 1950s in a small town in the USA. It's a great place for such a plot because it's a little claustrophobic where lots of people know your business, but it's also the kind of place where people might whisper about the eccentric people, but they would never say anything to their face. In fact it is the perfect place for Lewis' (Owen Vaccaro) uncle Jonathan (Jack Black) and his closest friend Florence Zimmerman (Cate Blanchett).

Lewis is the slightly nerdy kid, with a very big brain, trying to fit in to a new school and deal with the tragedy of having lost his parents. He's the perfect protagonist for the strange magical world he is thrown into that starts to give him a place to belong and new things to learn.

Owen Vaccaro gives a great performance (mostly) and makes us believe every step he takes. There is one scene where he has to cry that felt like the worst stage school performance ever, but that was the only blip.

Jack Black is absolutely brilliant as Uncle Jonathan, eccentric, free spirited and in a superb game of who can insult the other better without being crude or horrible with Florence Zimmerman. He has a touch of the same self-doubt that Lewis carries with him too, and both of them overcome it together.

Cat Blanchett is as fabulous as always as Florence, with her penchant for purple and a spirit damaged almost beyond repair by the Nazis in WWII. She too has a journey to make from the beginning of the story to the end, which is nuanced and well conceived.

Then we have our baddie, Isaac Izard as played by Kyle MacLachlan, who is, in fact, dead at the beginning of the film. You would think this might cause issues with him being the big bad, but, like Voldemort, what is a little thing like death to a powerful warlock? He's evil and creepy and just as broken as most of the other characters, which makes him a sad character too.

This is a fill with layers. Every character carries something with them so they are far from perfect. Each could easily have swapped places and ended up with bad guy with what they have been through. The war broke some, tragedy and personal loss broke the others and they all put themselves back together in different ways, becoming more powerful within themselves as they do.

There is a lot of magical lore in this film, but it doesn't throw it at us like an encyclopedia, it does a great job of showing it instead. It leaves questions, but they are not troubling, annoying questions, they are spaces for the imagination to grow. The film has a great balance.

The only problem I had with it was some of the CGI. There is a bit at the end which just made me shudder, and not in a good way. I think they were going for freaky, but they mostly hit bad. I won't say more because it would be a spoiler, but it is very easy to spot. Given that the rest of the CGI is superb and it suggests it was a production decision mistake, not a reflection of the artists creating it.

So. all in all, a great movie. I have the blu-ray on pre-order and intend to watch it many more times. It is a film that is going to become one of my go to favourites I believe.

All images courtesy of IMDB.

Have you seen the film? What did you think? What was your favourite part? If you haven't seen it yet, have I convinced you to give it a try?

Childhood Memories - Fairy Tales #MonsterMonday

Childhood Memories - Fairy Tales

Welcome to the new year and a slight change of topic for Mondays - from now on Monster Mondays are going to be Monsters, Myths and Magic Mondays - but we'll still call them Monster Mondays for short.

Growing up I was very fond of fairy tales, and I have some treasured memories of reading them and having them read to me. However, as is always the case with memory, lots of bits are missing. I thought it might be fun for us to share our favourite fairy tales from memory and then see how much of what we remember is right.

So, what I'm going to do is:

• tell you everything I recall about the tale that has stuck in my head the most
• then look it up online and tell you the details of the real thing.

Anyone who want to play along can comment using the same format, or even do a post of their own and drop me a link in the comments. I'll add any links to the main post so they are easy to find for other surfers.

My Favourite Fairy Tale

The first thing I have to admit - I have no idea what it is called. Couldn't name the story or the author for the life of me.

What I remember is this:

• there is a princess and through a wish ( I can't remember whose) she ends up with fast growing hair
• every time her hair is cut, it grows twice as fast - which becomes more than problematic
• some bright spark has the idea that maybe if, rather than cutting her hair off, they were to cut her from her hair it would stop the problem
• unfortunately this ends up with the princess growing really fast instead
• eventually they use scales and cut her from her hair when they are exactly equal - this ends with happily ever after

Okay, back in a sec, going to look it up now.

Right, so the fairy tale is actually this one (click to see the full text):

Melisande

or,

Long and Short Division

by E. Nesbit

It is a very good story - every one should read it. I seem to have remembered what I recalled correctly, but the details are much better:

• The princess is cursed to be bald as a child because her parents did not have a christening party for fear of forgetting a fairy, but that annoyed them all.
• When she is old enough her father gives her a wish his fairy godmother gave him.
• Her mother whispers in her ear what to wish for, which is where the hair thing starts to go wrong.
• The fairy godmother suggests advertising for a prince.
• The only competent prince is the one who cuts her from her hair after asking her to marry him for his own merits, rather than as being a reward (I like this bit a lot).
• At one point she grows so big she can pick up the island her kingdom is on, and she does great things while large, but it lonely.
• Scales are the answer and do break the magic. Yay!

Okay, your go - tell me what you remember of your favourite fairy tale, then see if you remembered it correctly.

Trying - Sometimes the Only Way - #TipsTuesdays 33

Welcome to my blog, today I would like to talk about trying things, because sometimes it's the only way to know if you are going to like something. I hasten to add this does not apply to things that may endanger your health, more things that will open your mind in the intellectual sense :).

Trying - Sometimes the Only Way

This whole topic came about because of the film Pride and Prejudice with Zombies. I kid you not. I didn't think I was going to like it, then I watched it and it is awesome. I also though my mother might like it. Now what you have to realise is that my mother is a staunch Pride and Prejudice fan and would never in a million years have watched this film. However, because Soph and I recommended it, she actually tried it and she enjoyed it. The trick was pointing out that it's really Pride and Prejudice with a touch of historical war romance thrown in - the war just happens to be against zombies.

This illustrates to me completely that sometimes you cannot know if you will enjoy something without trying it first. This applies to books as well as films (you guessed where I was heading, didn't you ;)).

There are many ways to sample an author's work before we buy, because sometimes even the most fantastic cover and awesome description can't quite make us spend our hard earned cash.

1. Free Books

With the advent of the eBook era, there are many free books out there, especially from Indie authors. If a new author has caught our eye we can check out their Amazon (UK, US) or Smashwords profile and see if there are any free books on offer. Often there are.

Always check both because sometimes Amazon can be a little tricky on price matching.

For example, I have five free books out there, only four of which are price matched on Amazon (click images to visit book pages).

I have never been able to get them to price match Chip Off the Old Block? and I have no idea why - so it's free on Smashwords and everywhere they ship to, but not Amazon.

2. KDP Select Books

eBooks in the KDP Select program provide two ways for try before we buy:

• book free days - authors can put their books for free for five days in every 90, but you have to look out for these.
• Kindle Unlimited- the books are available free to read to  Kindle Unlimited members.

I have one book in KDP Select, because I object to the fact books have to be exclusive to Amazon, but it seems the only way to get Amazon algorithms to work for you.

Amazon : UK | US

3. The Look Inside Option

Most eBook sites have the equivilant the Amazon's look inside option. This allows us to see the first section of the book to see if it grabs us. I know I use it all the time, because, just occasionally, a perfect description and lovely cover hide terrible grammar or a writing style that does not grab me at all. We all have different tastes, so the look inside is a great option for dipping our toes in the water.

4. Author's Blogs

If we want to check out an author's writing style, their blog is often a good place to start. These are often links from their author profiles on Amazon and Smashwords - I know mine is.

Authors often post flash fiction to their blogs; just keep in mind that it might not be as polished as their published work :).

All of my posted fiction on this blog is here: Free Reads.

5. Mailing List/ Newsletters

If we look around, often we will find that authors give away a free book when we sign up for their mailing list or newsletter. Now this may sound like the wrong way round to be handling finding a new author, but it's very easy to unsubscribe if it turns out they are not the author for us.

Soph and I will give you two free eBooks for joining our newsletter :)

We'll send you details of book releases, competitions and other news from our authors, BUT we WON'T spam you, or pass your details on to anyone else.

Assassin's Blood
Natasha Duncan-Drake

Curse of a Banshee
Sophie Duncan

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

So there you have it, four ways we can try before we buy. There is also the option of buying the book and then returning it only partially read, but I have to say, this really, really frustrates authors, because it is a technique used by pirates and it's impossible to tell who is who. Please use the look inside option instead.

Many thanks for visiting.

[Addition] - 6. Wattpad

Thanks to Patricia Lynne for mentioning one that I had totally forgotten. Wattpad is a place where writers of all kinds give away fiction for free, so check it out for new indie authors too.

Do you have any other suggestions for trying out new authors? Do you have any author recs?

The Conjuring 2 - Sometimes Seeing the Monsters is Terrifying Too #MonsterMondays 40

Welcome to a new week, let's hope it's better than the last one. Now the other week I talked about how the hidden monster can be much more frightening than the seen one, but The Conjuring 2 has a monster you definitely see and it's terrifying :).

The Conjuring 2 - Sometimes Seeing the Monsters is Terrifying Too

It's somewhat ironic that I am talking about monsters that are seen when The Conjuring 2 is actually based on The Enfield Poltergeist, a phenomenon which is inherently not seen.

The film is focused on Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine (Vera Farmiga) Warren, who are/were real people. They really were at the Enfield incident for a few days in the 1970s, although the ending to the real thing is nowhere near as exciting as the ending to the film.

Patrick Wilson as Ed and Vera Fermiga as Lorraine

The film starts at Amityville, where Lorraine has a vision of a demonic entity dressed as a nun. You can see her in the trailer above. Now revealing one of the monsters so soon into the film could have been something of a let down, but, in this case, it is done so well. The vision is somewhat prophetic in nature and the way the camera angles are done is shocking and scary enough that the demonic nun is in no way diminished.

In fact the nun is in what I thought was the best scene of the entire film. The scene involves a painting and the Warren's study at home and it is so brilliantly done. It's all shadows and tricks of the eye and really it's mostly a quiet scene that builds and builds to the thrilling climax. The writers (James Wan, Chad Hayes, Carey Hayes, David Leslie Johnson) and director (James Wan) of The Conjuring 2, really knew what they were doing.

Vera Fermiga as Lorraine Warren

Then we have the Enfield part of the plot. Again it is handled so well because it keeps us on the edge of our seats. It's done with lighting and shadows and the camera just catching something until, suddenly it's not, and it scares the bejezus out of everyone watching.

The Enfield Poltergeist was focused on Janet Hodgson, age 11, who is played by Madison Wolfe and she brings everything to life. We feel her terror through the screen and her reaction to things that are not always there it what has us believing.

Madison Wolfe as Janet Hodgson

Many believe that the real haunting may have started as a prank, and then become a fully fledged hoax once the press became involved. The film deals with this really well too, using it to build tension because we, the audience, know it's a real haunting even when the characters in the film are doubting.

The ghost in Enfield is Bill Wilkins, the man who supposedly lived in the house before the Hodgsons. He is just as well done as the demonic nun. I thought the scene where Ed Warren talks to Bill through Janet (something that he did actually do in reality) was another of the best in the film. It's done with forward focus, leaving the background blurred, only giving hints of what may or may not really be there. It is so effective in bringing the monster to life.

I'm not going to say any more about the monsters because I don't want to spoil the film. Suffice to say this is a film that builds tension and gives some really good scares all the way through. It's not a gory horror movie, just a spooky one. I think it's a superior film to The Conjuring, which I liked as well, and it kept me hooked right through the closing credits. If you like a good scare, this is the film for you.

Have you seen The Conjuring 2 or The Conjuring? What did you think? Have you heard of the Enfield Poltergeist? Do you think it was a hoax?

Zombies! With a little Pride and a little Prejudice. #MonsterMondays 39

I have a film rec for you today, because I have finally seen Pride and Prejudice and Zombies and it is glorious :).

Zombies! With a little Pride and a little Prejudice.

Title: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies
Rating: 15
Cast:
Lily James ... Elizabeth Bennet
Sam Riley ... Colonel Fitzwilliam Darcy
Bella Heathcote ... Jane Bennet
Ellie Bamber ... Lydia Bennet
Millie Brady ... Mary Bennet
Suki Waterhouse ... Kitty Bennet
Douglas Booth ... Mr. Bingley
Sally Phillips ... Mrs. Bennet
Charles Dance ... Mr. Bennet
Jack Huston ... Lt. George Wickham
Lena Headey ... Lady Catherine de Bourgh
Matt Smith ... Parson Collins
Summary:
Exploration of the New World brought with it, not just wonders, but also a plague that turns the dead into brain craving monsters. All British young people of a certain social standing, be they male or female, train in the arts of the East, the rich in Japan, the wise in China. Thus prepared to deal with the undead, all young ladies must also worry about the most important thing: finding a husband.

I must admit, I tried reading the book that this film is based on and could no get on with it. I was bored out of my skull by page 20. Hence I was not sure I was going to enjoy the film. However, I take back all my doubts - this is a brilliant movie.

First of all I am going to talk about the zombies, because this is, after all, Monster Monday. I really like the thought behind the zombies in this film. When infected the victims do not simply turn into slathering, brain eating beasts. In fact a newly infected individual cannot be easily identified. They remain completely human looking and acting, just with an almost insatiable need for brains.

This means, if they can control the hunger, they can hide in plain sight until they want to attack.

Only once they have fed does the degeneration set in, making the craving for brains stronger and stronger, and the decay worse and worse.

This gives a whole new level to the monsters in the movie, because they are not simply animals. They are like vampires or werewolves who maintain their minds, making them that much harder to deal with. This makes them far more interesting.

The cast also do a magnificent job with what must be an interesting dichotomy. They are English ladies and gentlemen, but they can also kick some serious arse. They maintain the air of a Jane Austin story with all the romance and the pride and the misjudging, while fighting zombies in such a way that brain eating monsters do not destroy the atmosphere.

The girls magnificently rescue the boys, who gallantly rescue the girls, who intelligently rescue the boys, who .... well you get the picture.

Lily James as Elizabeth Bennet

Lily James is brilliant as Lizzy Bennet. She is a force to be reckoned with in all the ways you would expect a Jane Austin heroine to be, as well as being able to layout zombies left, right and centre. What is nice though is she's not invincible. She's no Alice (Resident Evil), but she is just as capable.

Sam Riley as Darcy

Then we have Sam Riley as Darcy, who is cold and aloof and terribly dashing, plus being a dab hand with a katana. He spends almost the entire film looking very serious, and if you were worried he wouldn't fit his breeches as well as Colin Firth, worry no longer - he definitely does ;).

The scene where Darcy first proposes to Lizzy and she rejects him is a stroke of complete genius. I will not give away any spoilers, but it is utterly brilliant. While having the air of English gentry, it uses the setting of the film so incredibly well.

Likewise, the way Lizzy and Lady Catherine de Bourgh sort out their differences of opinion over Mr Darcy is equally superb.

Bella Heathcote as Jane and Douglas Booth as Bingley

Then we have Bella Heathcote as Jane and Douglas Booth as Bingley, who are both as adorable as they should be, but quite willing to do battle when they have to. In fact Jane seems more willing and capable than Bingley, which is a nice touch.

All the rest of the Bennets are awesome, especially Charles Dance as Mr Bennet, who is more interested in keeping his daughters alive, rather than marrying them off. Sally Philips is also perfect as Mrs Bennet, just annoying enough :).

Special mentions must also go to Matt Smith as Parson Colins and Lena Headey as Lady Catherine de Bourgh, because they take their parts and run with them beautifully.

Then of course we have the villainous Wickham. He is played incredibly well by Jack Huston. We all know he's the cad, but the way he is woven into this plot is simply brilliant. I so love what they have done with his character.

In fact the whole plot is a stroke of genius. As I mentioned, I didn't get on with the book, but I think that's because I don't really get on with Jane Austen and the style is deliberately similar. However, in the film, the creators have captured the atmosphere, but with the excitement of a zombie film. This is a clever film. I have no idea why is only has 5.9 on IMDB, it should be an 8 or 9 easily. I suspect there are people looking down their nose at it because it's not pure literary and at the other end of the scale, fans who don't like romance with their zombies.

They also set it up beautifully for a sequel.

This film has:

• all the romance you can handle
• awesome fight scenes
• intelligent zombies
• a great plot
• a superb cast.

I have the urge to watch it again right now, but have instead pre-ordered the blu-ray, which comes out at the end of the month. If you can't wait it is available to rent on various services.

Have you seen the film? What did you think? Are you planing on seeing it at all?

Why the Unseen Monster is Often Scarier than the Seen One - #MonsterMondays 38

Good morning/afternoon/evening and welcome to my blog for another Monster Monday. Today I have a thought rather than a specific monster to talk about. I very much hope you enjoy the post.

Why the Unseen Monster is Often Scarier than the Seen One

Have you, like me, ever sat through a horror movie being really scared until, that it, the monster actually appears on screen? Up it pops with dripping fangs and snarls and all sorts of other effects the director decided to throw at it, but the whole package is rather underwhelming?

I don't believe this can always be blamed on cheap special effects either.

The fact is, the human mind can be an amazingly dark place. Giving a person hints about the monster and glimpses will fill their mind with imaginings far more sinister than are every likely to appear on a screen or in a book. If a monster is a little bit amorphous, a little bit mysterious people fill in the blanks with what really scares them.

One film/miniseries with a really disappointing monster is Stephen King's IT. IT is the story of The Losers Club, a group of kids who came together one summer when their town, Derry, was going through a terrible time where children were disappearing. They confronted the evil then, but as adults they are called back when the evil rises again.

Pennywise the clown is really, really scary, especially when we are given hints of his monstrousness underneath. We know he isn't really a clown, we know he's something worse and the clown is just what people see. He is terrifying with his balloons and his "we all float down here".

Then, however, comes the climax of the story, when we see Pennywise's true form and we get this:

Well I know which one is more likely to make me shudder and it's not the spider thing. Pennywise as an evil clown is far scarier than an alien spider thingy. I'm hoping they do a better job with the new version that is in the pipeline.

The reason I started thinking about this is because my husband and I sat down and watched The Babadook this weekend. Now I did find some of the film very slow and not overly engaging, but when it was scary - wow, it was really scary.

The Babadook is the story of a mother and her child. She used to be a writer of children's books before her husband died driving her to the hospital to have her son. Their house is invaded by Mr Babadook, an evil that could easily destroy them both.

What makes him so scary is, first of all, we see him as an illustration in a children's book:

After that he is mostly shadows, quick glimpses that are impossible to see without freeze frame and, at one point, a falling hat. This gives plenty of room for the imagination to build. I was hiding behind a cushion (yes, I do do that :)) not because of what I actually saw, but because of what I might have seen. My brain was conjuring up so many hideous possibilities that I was really scared.

It's a shame I found the beginning of the film quite deadly, because once it got going it was really frightening and Essie Davis was brilliant. The ending was also a little odd, but I thought it actually worked.

Both of these films work on the same premise: the monster we see isn't really what the monster is, but with The Babadook, we never really see it, our minds are left to imagine, whereas in IT the monster appears in the end and is simply meh.

IT is actually my favourite of the two - I watch it again and again. Pennywise is so scary that it's still brilliant, even if the ending is a little underwhelming. IT gets the monster right before it gets it wrong. The Babadook never gets the monster wrong, but it's a little dull in too many places.

IT gets 10/10 for Pennywise and 90% of the film and 3/10 for Pennywise revealed. The Babadook gets 10/10 for the monster and 6/10 for the film.

Some films do manage to get the monster reveal right, but I wish more would understand that it can, in fact, be the make or break moment. It can win or lose the audience in a breath. Getting is wrong is worse than leaving it to the audience's imagination.

I've also seen too many movies that think their monster is horrible when, in fact, it's really not and showing it right from the beginning just makes everything not scary at all. Even the original Doctor Who knew the value in hiding the monster some of the time.

Insidious is another one that got it so right at the beginning, but then went OTT at the end and completely lost it IMHO. I mean, didn't we all find this bit really, really scary?

It was done in a second and it was terrifying because of the shock. Then came the rest, however, and I didn't find it scary any more. It was as if the film went into overload and I lost interest.

Sometimes less really is more.

What do you think? Do you prefer just glimpses, or do you like to see the monster for what it is? Have you been disappointed by monster reveals? Do you know any absolutely brilliant monster reveals?

Back to the 80s - Ghoulies! #MonsterMondays 37

Hello and welcome to my blog, I'm sorry my post is late today, but it's a bank holiday here in the UK and so we had something of a lie in this morning. I hope you are all well.

Back to the 80s - Ghoulies!

Back in the 80s there was no CGI, but there were still some great monsters. Some of my favourites from the time is Ghoulies. The monsters are all people dressed up or models and they have their own charm.

Jonathan from The Ghouli

For those who have never seen Ghoulies, the plot is a simple one: Jonathan Graves [Peter Liapis] (the names were never subtle in these films :)) inherits a house and he and his girlfriend Rebecca [Lisa Pelikan] move in to start doing it up. Jonathan finds a book on magic and the ritual vestments and room left behind by his father Malcolm (Michael Des Barres), which he starts to use. He finds the creatures left behind in the grounds, the Ghoulies. Unfortunately, as he becomes addicted to magic, he also manages to raise his father from the dead. When he has a dinner party with his friends, bad things start to happen.

In the first film at least, the little monsters are kind of cute really, in that E.T. way - although these have way more teeth. When they are under Jonathan's control they looks nasty, but they aren't, however, under Malcolm's control they are horrible little whatsits. Hence we basically find that the only real monster in the movie is Malcolm himself.

Michael des Barres as Malcolm

As you can see in the picture he's a little bit undead, but by draining power from other people he almost gets over it.

Once again the real monster is not the beasts, but the human who uses them for his own ends. I mean you wouldn't want to sit down to dinner with the little critters, but they aren't all terrible.

There is only one that I would say is bad to the bone though, but that's probably my prejudice showing:

You're never going to convince me that a clown, especially one that bleed from the eyes is not totally evil.

Ghoulies manages to do what many 80s movies were incredibly good at - it mixes horror and comedy perfectly. Parts are truly horrific (points to the clown), but other sections are actually very funny.

If you want a light hearted horror film with little monsters and Michael Des Barres chewing the scenery, as he does so well, then this is the film for you. It's kind of silly, but highly entertaining.

Have you seen Ghoulies? How about any other movies from the 80s that use similar effects like Troll? Do you have a favourite 80s horror classic? Are all clowns evil?

Fangs, But No Thanks - 10 Terrible Vampire Films #MonsterMondays 36

So everyone who has read this blog for long knows I love vampires, right? Well today, rather than highlighting some great monster, I'm going to highlight some really bad one. These are the vampire movies I own or have owned in the past that are definitely worth a miss :). Enjoy!

Fangs, But No Thanks - 10 Terrible Vampire Films

Now I will forgive a vampire films many things: bad special effects, low budget, dodgy sets, bad acting. However all of these are so bad that I can never forgive them and they all have one thing in common - they make the vampire movie boring. For that there is no excuse!

Of course, this is just my opinion, you are most welcome to disagree with me :).

Mama Dracula (1980)

I used to have this on VHS and have never bothered to upgrade to DVD.

Reasons I really dislike this film:

• the vampire are ugly and I'm not sure it's intentional
• the plot is pedestrian and boring
• it's not funny and I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be.
• Even Louise Fletcher can't save it and she's usually good at pulling a bad film out of the mire.

Vampire Knights (1988)

This is another never upgraded to DVD movie, but then I'm not sure it has ever been released on DVD.

Reasons I have never rewatched this film:

• the effects are so cheap it looks like their fangs are about to fall out
• the budget is so low when they move from the living room into the kitchen the lighting completely changes because I think they're using the actual lights in the room
• there is no plot.

Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter (2001)

For my sins I actually have this one on blu-ray.

Reasons never to watch this film:

• the lead actor clearly hated his wig do much that the first thing Jesus does is get a hair cut
• there is a musical number that has to be seen to be believed
• the plot makes no sense and requires fast forward in several places
• there are absolutely no likeable characters in the whole thing.

Addicted to Muder 3: Blood Lust, Vampire Killer (2000)

I have this on DVD - I have only watched it once.

Reasons to avoid this at all costs:

• I couldn't figure out what the plot was supposed to be
• the acting defies belief
• the budget doesn't help
• it was just nasty.

Against the Dark (2009)

Another cheapy I picked up from Amazon and I didn't regret it as much as some of the others, but I'm never getting that hour and a half back.

There are simply two reasons to avoid this one:

• it's not entertaining
• Steven Seagal is pretentious and made me want to punch him.

The Bood Reich - BloodRayne 3 (2011)

Now I can take vampire Nazis as well as the next obsessive vampire fan, but this film just doesn't deliver. BloodRayne 1 & 2 are okay, 3 is not.

Reasons to give this a miss:

• the plot just isn't satisfying
• the acting is terrible
• it's just not very interesting.

Embrace of the Vampire (1995  & 2013)

Now both of these should be good films - the plot had great potential, but they aren't. The is only one reason:

• They are BORING!

Not even Victor Webster can save the remake and just looking at Victor should up the interest by at least half. :)

Fright Night (2011)

Considering that the original 1985 version of this film is one of my all time favourite vampire films, you'd think I'd like this one wouldn't you, but nope. I consider this film a travesty. I really wanted to love it and I didn't - at all!

Reasons I really don't like this film:

• they wrecked the best scene in the whole movie - Ed's big moment
• Jerry Dandrige should be sophisticated and suave, Colin Farrell plays a construction worker version of him
• not even David Tennant could make me like this film
• the 3D in the cinema made it impossible to watch.

Vampire's Kiss (1988)

There is one very good reason this is a bad vampire movie - that's because it isn't one.

DON'T BE FOOLED

Boring, boring, boring and not really about vampires.

Lost Boys II: The Tribe (2008)

I waited 20 years for the sequel to The Lost Boys and they completely screwed it up.

Reasons to avoid this film:

• the plot is just a rehash of the first one
• the rehash isn't as well written
• the vampires aren't remotely threatening
• Angus Sutherland is truly terrible as Shane
• even Edgar Frog (Corey Feldman) can save it.

However, if you are a Lost Boys fan - the third on The Thirst, is actually pretty good :)

Vampire Killer Barbys (1996)

This is possibly the worst vampire film I have ever seen, and as you can tell I have seen some really terrible ones. I did not even make it through this one on fast forward, I just turned it off.

Reasons to never, ever watch this film:

• it has no plot - it's just a vehicle for bad music
• the effects are terrible
• the music is worse.

Some of these are worse than others and I could easily have fitted in a couple more :). Save yourselves the pain!

Did you spot the deliberate mistake? Yep - there are actually 11 vampire films listed and I only noticed when I got to the end so you get one for free :).

Do you have any terrible vampire films you think should be avoided at all costs? :)