Haunt Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,511 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Here's the type of fight I would like to see a serious movie made of: Vampires vs. Werewolves. Yes, I know about Underworld but it wouldn't hurt to have a few more in this horrific category, would it? Monster fights are cool and this one would be no exception. Will John Landis' lycanthropic classic maul its opponent to bloody kibble in the Quarters, or will Francis Ford Coppola's Vampire saga whip this puppy's ass and send it with it's tail between its legs howling back to London. Let the massacre begin by getting your votes in.

An American Werewolf in London

vs.

Bram Stoker's Dracula
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
I'll give B.S.D two big props in it's favor:
1) Gary Oldman. The guy kicks ass in everything he does, and was great as Dracula.
2) It's a great adaption of Stokers novel.
Unfortunately, I hated the book.
As such, I hated the film. BORING.
I've said it time and time again. Vampires aren't sexy. They're undead corpses. They stink. They leak bodily fluids. They leave little pieces of themselves all over everything they touch. They rot. Not sexy. Not romantic.

A.W.I.L. on the other hand, is THE werewolf film as far as I'm concerned. THE single greatest werewolf transformation in film. And even beyond that, this is still a great film that's really fun to watch. It's even got a funny dead guy-rotting corpse for a sidekick! :D
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
376 Posts
An American Werewolf in London was an innovator. And you'll never hear me cite it's INFAMOUS tranformation sequence as part of the reason why I choose it over Dracula '92. Let it be known here and now I like The Howling's transformation better. So even without the transformation scene in my criteria for why AWIL is better, Dracula '92 is slick and gorgeous in certain scenes, I can't WAIT until it comes out in an honest-to-god special edition.

I vote American Werewolf.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,374 Posts
RAXL said:
A.W.I.L. on the other hand, is THE werewolf film as far as I'm concerned. THE single greatest werewolf transformation in film. :D
Two of the truest statements as far as werewolf pictures go. As much as I loved B. S.'s 'Dracula', I would have to vote for this classic lycanthrope as my choice. It just meant so much to me at fifteen years of age.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,511 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I have to roll with the lycanthrope for the reasons all posted as well. For all the roles in this movie, everyone was perfectly cast, whereas with the Francis Ford Coppola film, there was some miscasting of monstrous propotions, especially with Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder. Don't get me wrong, I'm not putting down the movie for that. Both Reeves and Ryder have done quite well in other that I praise highly (Beetlejuice, Constantine, The Devil's Advocate, Heathers) it's just they were not right for this particular genre piece. Oldman was great in his portrayal of Dracula, but I believe that Naughton as the doomed werewolf of the movies title inspired more sympathy than a romanticized Prince of Darkness. An American Werewolf in London for me.

An American Werewolf in London: 4 Bram Stokers Dracula: 0
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
376 Posts
I actually kind of agree with you, Sinister about the casting of Bram Stoker's Dracula. I'm still not very comfortable with Keanu Reeves in dramatic roles. He's kind of a boring actor. He did his best work in the Bill & Ted films, even though you couldn't pay me to watch one of them. He seemed more natural and at home. If only Winona Ryder had taken to her part like the actress who played Lucy in that film. I don't know what it is about her, I doubt she had the training or the experience that Winona had in dramatic roles, but she just owned that part. Something about her voice in olden times, is hard to accept. She seems like more of a hellian to me, not a quiet, shy, reserved little mousy thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,511 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I'm really just now beginning to accept Keanu Reeves as an actor. I liked The Devil's Advocate, Point Break and Constantine. That Matrix **** has really got to go though; too many damn movies emulating its style for no good reason other than they can't come up with their own ideas on how to make a friggin' movie. When there's all flash and no substance, the end product really isn't very satisfying.

As for Winona Ryder, I liked her earlier in her career. Sadly, since her shop-lifting spree, she hasn't done a whole lot that is notable. I think she just doesn't pick very good roles for herself is all and that has nothing to do with how good she is as an actress. I really liked the movie Alien Resurrection and very little of it had to do with her. She has talent that desperately needs to be utilized before it's allowed to go stale.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
160 Posts
Bram Stokers Dracula! This movie was unlike any of the others since Nosferatu, and Oldmans adaptation of the Dracula character was a timeless performance.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
376 Posts
Sinister said:
I'm really just now beginning to accept Keanu Reeves as an actor. I liked The Devil's Advocate, Point Break and Constantine. That Matrix **** has really got to go though; too many damn movies emulating its style for no good reason other than they can't come up with their own ideas on how to make a friggin' movie. When there's all flash and no substance, the end product really isn't very satisfying.

As for Winona Ryder, I liked her earlier in her career. Sadly, since her shop-lifting spree, she hasn't done a whole lot that is notable. I think she just doesn't pick very good roles for herself is all and that has nothing to do with how good she is as an actress. I really liked the movie Alien Resurrection and very little of it had to do with her. She has talent that desperately needs to be utilized before it's allowed to go stale.
I hate the Matrix, SO MUCH! I haven't seen the sequels, I haven't seen the entire first movie. What I saw was just so bad, I couldn't take another second. I think I saw about an hour and twenty minutes. Fearing I had at least another hour left to go, I said, "I'm ****in' out of here". I saw all I needed to see- it sucked big time! That's one of maybe 3 times in my life I've walked out of a movie. Thank god I didn't pay to see it. I think I might like Keanu after seeing Sweet November, which I'm going to see this year. They show it on TV all the time, it shouldn't be hard.

Winona is really working now, she has a half dozen films in either production or post-production, so I think she's really going to come back into prominence quite soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,374 Posts
Doctorthingit said:
Winona is really working now, she has a half dozen films in either production or post-production, so I think she's really going to come back into prominence quite soon.
I hope so! I adore Winona. She's my favorite young actress working today - my female Johnny Depp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,511 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
This is another instance where the movie that is behind is REALLY behind. I'm giving it a few more days so some others can get their votes in then we're moving on. If you want to drag Drac out of the icy lake he's sinking in, get to the polls and help drag him out, if not; push him deeper in by sending another vote David Kesslers way. By this weekend, we move onto the second match in the Quarter-Finals. :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,847 Posts
I gotta say, my vote goes with AAWiL. Dracula, while having a few awesome cast members, also has quite a few duds in there that just ruin it for me. Werewolf, on the other hand is perfectly cast.

I also think there's a lot of boring parts in Dracula that just put me to sleep, whereas Werewolf holds my interest start to finish, no matter how many time's I've seen it.

Add one vote to AAWiL courtesy of Zombie-F.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
376 Posts
The last time I watch BS Dracula (I really didn't mean it to sound like that, I really did mean Bram Stoker's, funny how that works out though), I was amazed at how short it seemed. It really is quite underrated among the majority of horror fans. Just because of a few mainstream actors. Forgetting of course that the only thing that made Winona Ryder mainstream before BSD was Mermaids. This film sure as hell stands up to Interview with the Vampire and makes it crumble (could that film be more mainstream? And at the time, BSD's stars commanded maybe 5 million a piece ((yeah right, Anthony Hopkins probably cost 2.5 million at the most)) and IwtV's were at least 15m a piece for Cruise and Pitt and another 5m for Slater and at least 2.5m for Banderas).

Dracula '92 sacrificed a little of the typical blood 'n gore sub-g. for the sake of a different kind of horror that hadn't been seen in awhile, a more Phantom of the Opera/Beauty and the Beast-style freak/moster loves a princess/fair maiden plot. And though personally I thought the succubi were a bad cliche and looked a little fake, as did Keanu's head when he screamed in that closeup when Oldman was feeding the vampladies that baby (I was expecting him to pull a Scanners on us), the film had a lot to offer because it wasn't typical. It had some really cool camera angles when they were appropriate and some especially fast-moving photography in certain scenes (hard to claim this movie not memorable), a surprisingly attention-getting opening sequence that I think a scene in Sleepy Hollow (the "hessian mercenary" flashback) ripped-off, a climax where all the important elements of the film wrapped themselves up very well, a really excellent scene when Van Helsing and Lucy's suitors are hunting for Lucy: the undead after finding her burial place is out of sorts, and a romanticised sense of doom that you can feel- it's that tangible (examples: 1- the green fog that slowly spreads out over the place outside that cemetery where I think expect to see Dracula but don't and ends up creeping into the asylum and into Mina's bedroom, 2- the scene where Jonathan travels to the castle of Count Dracula both after he reads the letter in a turbulent carriage ride with a sort of chalky/smokey-black fog and brilliant blue lightning piercing the foreground without touching anyone in the foreground, and after he reads the letter as Lucy's writing it fades out of the dissolving shot of the Transylvanian map and we fade up into a wide shot of the carriage as the sun sets red then a shot inside the carriage and a closeup of the letter both as the sky outside turns pinkish-purple and Dracula's eyes fade in and out slowly as it covers every shot, 3- Dracula's body sails in the ship ((I'm not sure what town but it's in the middle of the film)) and A. Hopkins is narrating the ship's journey as we hear mens' screams on the ship and we see Dracula shifting around inside his crate in the most disturbing manner)

This is truly in the style of a great classic horror film, with some very modern touches that melds both kinds of horror films together well. This is a modern classic of a horror film, and deserves a lot more attention for it's quality. Though of course I'm not trying to change my vote, after all this is the quarter finals and both films are obviously excellent. I still think AWIL is the quintessential modern werewolf film.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,511 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Both bloodsucker flicks that were in this outing have now been ace'd out of the contest by an overwhelming 5-1 vote. We now move on to the second match-up of this contest, sending An American Werewolf in London first to one of the four coveted spots in the Semi-Finals.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top