CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
3.9/10
1.2 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Agrega una trama en tu idiomaCarradine is an aged vampire who has a bevy of vampiric beauties who lure many of their customers back to his lair. A pair of virile young Navy sailors get mixed up in their shenanigans.Carradine is an aged vampire who has a bevy of vampiric beauties who lure many of their customers back to his lair. A pair of virile young Navy sailors get mixed up in their shenanigans.Carradine is an aged vampire who has a bevy of vampiric beauties who lure many of their customers back to his lair. A pair of virile young Navy sailors get mixed up in their shenanigans.
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Vampire Hookers shouldn't have tanlines...
should they?
They're VAMPIRES!
Vampires don't sunbathe!
should they?
They're VAMPIRES!
Vampires don't sunbathe!
Vampire Hookers is certainly a bad movie but that is part of its charm. If you are a fan of 70's T&A films, this one will should appeal to you. I first saw it at an old downtown theater that ran mostly B horror movies and soft core porn. That was many years ago so I guess something about this film impressed me as I have never quite forgotten it although some of the people in the cast would probably like to.
My main question is, what is John Carradine doing in this? I know he was at the end of a fine career (hey, the guy was in Stagecoach and The Grapes of Wrath for crying out loud) but Vampire Hookers?!? I can only guess that he either A. needed the money, B. wanted to help out a producer or director friend, or C. lost a bet in a poker game with this film's producer.
My main question is, what is John Carradine doing in this? I know he was at the end of a fine career (hey, the guy was in Stagecoach and The Grapes of Wrath for crying out loud) but Vampire Hookers?!? I can only guess that he either A. needed the money, B. wanted to help out a producer or director friend, or C. lost a bet in a poker game with this film's producer.
This film is almost never funny intentionally. All the laughs come from the rushed dialogue, the odd pauses and fast responses, the awkward cuts and the I don't really give a crap about this shot attitude present in 80% of the movie.
Is the acting bad?
The worst.
Is the Story bad?
It's Vampire Hookers, the story is the title, if you don't want a laugh at that idea don't watch this movie.
Fart Jokes Included.
Take one word from group A (Ninja, Robo, Samurai, Vigilante, Zombie, Vampire, Alien, Cyborg, Barbarian) and one from group B (Cop, Princess, Assassins, Hookers, Warriors, Strikeforce, Muthaf***kers) and you'll have yourself a movie title that sounds awesome. Get Ciro H. Santiago to direct it, and it'll be crap.
Vampire Hookers, for example, has the potential to be a hugely entertaining piece of bloody, sexy schlock horror; in the hands of Santiago, though, the idea becomes a dreadfully unfunny camp comedy/horror full of juvenile humour (bumbling 'Abbot & Costello' type sailors; a flatulent vampire; lady-boy gags), embarrassing performances (poor old John Carradine as a poetry spouting vamp), and cheap props (styrofoam 'stone' blocks), but zero gore.
About the only thing Cirio does right is to cast three absolute stunners as his titular ladies of the night and get them naked a lot—although, somehow, he even manages to botch a scene in which the lusty bloodsucking babes tag-team a lucky sailor: torturously long and amazingly unerotic, it's hard to believe that anyone can make a three-on-one sex session seem so boring!
Vampire Hookers, for example, has the potential to be a hugely entertaining piece of bloody, sexy schlock horror; in the hands of Santiago, though, the idea becomes a dreadfully unfunny camp comedy/horror full of juvenile humour (bumbling 'Abbot & Costello' type sailors; a flatulent vampire; lady-boy gags), embarrassing performances (poor old John Carradine as a poetry spouting vamp), and cheap props (styrofoam 'stone' blocks), but zero gore.
About the only thing Cirio does right is to cast three absolute stunners as his titular ladies of the night and get them naked a lot—although, somehow, he even manages to botch a scene in which the lusty bloodsucking babes tag-team a lucky sailor: torturously long and amazingly unerotic, it's hard to believe that anyone can make a three-on-one sex session seem so boring!
Oh man, this movie is worth watching just for the theme song!! If you are a collector of B horror movies or like to pop 'em late at night you must see this movie. Most John Carradine movies are bad and this is for sure no exception! This gem is complete with bad voice overs, bad acting and a Super Awesomely Bad orgy scene. This movie is pee your pants funny and it's one of the worst movies your little peepers will ever view. Seriously, this needs to go in any B Horror movie collection. Jeese, I can't believe they made this movie, but I'm glad they did. It's just too funny.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaJohn Carradine's character is named Richmond Reed, which is Carradine's actual first and middle names. He was born Richmond Reed Carradine.
- ErroresWhen Tom makes love with Cherish, Suzy and Marcy, the girls are wearing see-through nighties and underpants and Tom's hands are untied. It soon cuts to an overhead view in which the girls are only wearing underpants and now Tom's hands are tied to the bedposts. This is followed by various shots in which Tom helps each of the women take off their nighties, with his hands untied for the rest of the scene.
- Citas
Richmond Reed: Shakespeare was a vampire.
- ConexionesFeatured in Terror on Tape (1985)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Vampire Hookers?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was Vampire Hookers (1978) officially released in India in English?
Responda