Avis des utilisateurs

"Buffy the Vampire Slayer" follows sassy and unsuspecting cheerleader Buffy (Kristy Swanson), a simple L.A. girl who spends her free time shopping and socializing in the mall food court. But when she finds herself responsible with the taking down bloodsucking demons from hell under the eye of a newfound guardian (Donald Sutherland), her extracurricular activities take a serious hit.

Something of a cult film today, and the launching pad for a series of actors (including lead Kristy Swanson, and co-stars Hilary Swank and David Arquette)—as well as birthing the wildly popular series—"Buffy the Vampire Slayer" is a heady brew of teen comedy and vampire splatter-lite. I'll make it clear: this is definitely a corny flick, and Joss Whedon's script takes place in an alternate reality where vampires and Valley Girls can and do co-exist. In a lot of ways, it feels like an eighties movie, akin to something "Fright Night" but far less sinister.

Whedon's script is humorous in the right places, and Swanson plays the spunky titular character with an appropriate pep. A young Luke Perry is the high school bad boy/hunk and looks the part probably more than he plays it, but his performance is fine. The presence of Paul Reubens and Donald Sutherland lend the film more credibility than it probably deserves, although Sutherland does feel somewhat out of place here; regardless, you can't knock a film for having Donald Sutherland as a part of its cast.

All in all, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" is a fun and energetic offering of late eighties teen comedy with a splash of vampire blood and some fantastic one-liners; it's a ridiculous, alternate world fantasy, but a fun one at that. It does a fantastic job at meeting the crosshairs of horror and comedy without steering itself into too serious territory. 7/10.

Buffy (Kristy Swanson) is the quintessential valley girl cheerleader. She and her friends are all clueless. She is approached by Merrick (Donald Sutherland) and told that she is the Slayer. There are vampires in the world, and there is a slayer who fights them. When one slayer falls, another one takes her place. It is Buffy's turn to be the Slayer. She is joined by a slacker outcast Pike (Luke Perry) in a fight against the powerful Lothos (Rutger Hauer).

This is most notable for who wrote the script, Joss Whedon. Although he definitely has disowned this with all the changes to his script. It has a funny co-starring role from Paul Reubens. The style is lacking. Kristy Swanson has the looks but not quite the attitude of the valley girl exactly. She always seems a bit too bright and too serious for the clueless role. It is definitely a very light sarcastic take on the vampire movie.

Buffy the vampire slayer is not a terrific film. It is not the type of cinema that leaves you breathless and reeling, nor is it the type of cinema that idles at first creeps through your dreams with pervasive intensity. No, this is Time Capsule Cinema, a voyage to the neon panoply of early 90's California in the self described "Lite Age."

Kristy Swanson is lovely as the wise cracking eponymous star, nicely alternating between clinical sarcasm and tenderness in what is, essentially, a limited role. Donald Sutherland and Rutger Howard are hilarious as ancient figures who just happen to be hip to the slangy nature of late 20th century teen dialog. Luke Perry, David Arquette and Hillary Swank (far from her best role, but my favorite film of hers!) and a few others are fine as the assemblage of irreverent teenagers, eye rolling to the max! A highlight of the film is Stephen Root, playing the principal, regaling Buffy with a cautionary tale of his experiences with LSD in the 60's..."I was at a Doobie Brothers concert..."

Oh, and by the way, that's PEE WEE FREAKIN HERMAN as the fanged creep Lefty. Boy he got outta jail just soon enough. Paul Ruebens is phenomenal, of course, and it may be his presence that allows me to shamelessly enjoy the rest of the film through my rose colored glasses of guilty nostalgia!

Too many serious films reek of Los Angeles- you can almost taste the soy burgers and smog- when they take place elsewhere. This makes it difficult to differentiate the cast of actors from the characters they are paid to represent. This film revels in LA's lack of charm and sophistication. I half expected an In-N-Out Burger commercial to pop up half way through. Not enough comedies are as unselfconscious as this one, content to poke fun at themselves till the vampires come home!

7*/10 CAMPY FUN

I have to admit right now that I've never seen the TV series, so I don't know all the differences/improvements and whatever else that was done when the film was translated from the big screen to the small screen.

Why do I bring that up? Because I happen to like this movie as a bit of fun popcorn fluff, but reading the posts and other reviews you'd think some people were expecting a vampire genred "Citizen Kane". But, whatever.

The film is essentially a tongue in cheek vampire film with an action and role reversal twist. There's not much else here. We've got some marquis players in the thing starting with Donald Sutherland as the world weary trainer, Rutger Hauer as the upper crusted monster from Slovak nobility, to TV's then very popular Luke Perry, the guy who plays a little role reversal with Kristy Swanson's character.

It's essentially boy meets girl meets vampires kind of film. It's a bit of a coming of age film where the main characters either evolve and learn to deal with the hardships of real life monsters, or wind up being certifiable.

Beyond that it's just a fun film to watch. There's some adventure, some romance, a few laughs, some horror, and some action. Imagine the cheerleader you had a crush on in high school turning into Rambo for the paranormal. That's pretty much what Buffy's all about.

Pop it in to the old DVD player and enjoy!

Kristy Swanson is an underrated actress.

This was a fun romp Hanging with your friends in the Mall food court eating good junk food Bring back the 90s!

I'm glad to see that this movie has been defended by so many. I was never a regular viewer of the TV series, which seemed interesting enough, but many criticized the movie for not being properly dark and brooding and cynical. It seems that writer Joss Whedon had more that kind of atmosphere in mind when he began "Buffy," but I think the meddling that took place with his script is not without merit.

"Buffy the Vampire Slayer" is about a cute but vapid high school cheerleader who finds out that she is the one chosen to kill creatures from beyond the grave. This, I think is a pretty good premise for a comedy, and one that was successfully realized. It is a fun and funny movie that never takes itself seriously. Kristy Swanson is just right in the title role and Luke Perry is amusing as a wannabe hero who is also fine, it turns out, with being saved by his girlfriend.

I only give this 3 stars since the movie was not very well thought out but had so much potential. The cast is great though! Luke Perry-great actor, Donald, Hillary, Paul, and many others held this together but the stage combat, scenes, dialog and depth made this painful for me to watch. I feel there was too much missing, not enough effort put into the stage combat, too much silliness where more seriousness should be and too much seriousness where more silliness could be. It's cute but not very engaging. Luke is fantastic so no wonder he's in many other acting projects. I just wish this could have been a little better.

Just re watched this after 30 yrs, I forgot how wholesome and pretty Kristy Swanson was back in the day and how young Luke Perry was back then as well even though he was probably 30, this was his first movie after 90210, the whole cast was perfect from Pee Wee to Rutger and Sutherland, campy and fun and a refection of the times we had back then from the dialog to the fashion lol. I had a few laughs and it was nice to be 25 for a few minutes again, got it for $1 and it's a keeper lol.

Another reason not to trust FOX,ever.The script of the original Buffy movie is said to be a masterpiece,while the shot movie is horrible-that speaks for itself I think.Poor Joss Whedon to be have to go through this,but he managed to save his brainwave,didn't he;) I don't get the obsession of Hollywood about those "happy-endings".I, for myself,would take a movie with a dark ending,or at least a bittersweet one,over a bubble-gum pink,unrealistic,guy-gets-the-girl ending any day!But they always seem to shoot silly endings.Read the Buffy comic "The Origin".It tells the story of the movie,of course,without all of the disgusting changes of the script,the gym does burn down,Joyce is not that kind of a mother,Buffy shows far more character development,the Slayers do not have any hairy spots and Merrick does not get born over and over again,the Watchers are normal human and I can't believe the unrealistic,horrible acting of Donald Sutherland,who,normally,a great actor.(And FYI-Merrick shot himself not to reveal the identity of Buffy,dies nobly,not like in this silly movie.) Another thing-vampires usually don't act that way.Becoming one does not make you stupid,you know *rolls eyes* I advice you to watch the movie though,just to see Whedon's genius on how he managed to survive and create Buffy the Vampire Slayer(the real one,of course)Probably the nicest thing in the movie is the portrayal of Buffy's friends. I watched five Buffy episodes last night,after watching the movie.They enabled me to sleep soundly,the real Buffy.

First off I have to say my review of this movie may be somewhat coloured by my adoration of the television series. Despite sharing a few superficial elements - a character called Buffy who slays vampires and who has a watcher - the two are quite distinctive (even if Joss Whedon penned them both).

"Buffy" here is very much played with a tongue-in-cheek. It's Clueless meets Dracula. Buffy and her cohorts are shallower than an evaporated puddle and Buffy can only learn to grow up when heaped with the responsibility of being the Chosen One, destined to slay vampires. The vampires in question are just people with white faces played up in quite a camp manner and bare little resemblance to the sharp, wise, smart vampires favored by both the TV series and other movies.

There's no acting of any note and the plot is wet-paper thin. The direction isn't memorable... so what stops the movie getting a 0 or a 1? The humour. The movie is played for laughs, taking a bit of a dig at pop culture and vampire lore. There's some great lines in it - particularly the "kill him A LOT!" line. Watch the coach at the basketball game for similar humour, and there is an unforgettable vampire staking towards the movie end that's very amusing.

The movie looks like it was shot on a shoe-string budget (adding to the camp tongue-in-cheek parody feel) and has none of the production values we'd see Whedon employ later on. What it does have is a sometimes very amusing line in black humour offset somewhat by an irritating need to follow the "Clueless" mould of teenagers (which was, admittedly, the trend at the time). It's not an awfully bad movie but it's not really all that good. In the end it's a 5.5/10 from me.

I was very disappointed in this film and in Kristy Swanson's performance. She's a good actress and this role completely made her out to be just another dumb blonde, through she did make the most of it. Not just her but, David Arquette was at his worst here. Donald Sutherland was just awful! This movie makes some of the greatest actors look like complete amateurs.

It has a bad storyline, lame special effects and a whole bunch of corny lines.I give it a 4 because while it was a bad movie it was entertaining to a point. Although, it's not the masterpiece the TV series was. If you like cheesy, sugarcoated horror films this is the film for you!

This is one of my favorite movies. It's full of extremely clever one-liners that I never get tired of. "Oh, yeah? Clap!" The main character acts like a brainless bimbo but, if you pay attention, the movie gives you subtle hints she's a lot smarter than she lets on. Acting brainless is a little social camouflage so she fits in with her airhead friends.

It's fun to watch everyone playing it way over the top: Rutger Hauer is the perfect creepy head vampire, Paul Reubens seems to relish his role as the main vampire henchman, and Donald Sutherland delivers yet another quirky performance in a career full of quirky performances.

Oh, and watch for a fairly obvious continuity error about, maybe, halfway through.

I love a good vampire flick; who doesn't? But this one left me cold. It was, in a nutshell, stupid.

It didn't live up to its promises of comedy or horror, but chose to give viewers a lukewarm serving of both.

This film is definitely NOT worth seeing. Watch the TV show instead.

I first saw this movie back in 1992 when it was first released, and I thought it was good campy fun, nothing more. When I began watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer the TV series, and saw Joss Whedon's true vision for the story, I realize he must have been furious at how the studio basically rewrote his script. If you are a Buffy fan and you have never seen the movie, it is worthwhile from a historical standpoint to see all of the contrasts.

The movie's Buffy, played by Kristy Swanson, is a tall large girl as opposed to Sarah Michelle Gellar's petite Buffy. In the movie, Buffy's mother is a boozing socialite with little time or patience for Buffy and their family appears affluent, as opposed to TV's all-American middle-class mom Joyce. Also in the movie, all victims of vampires become vampires themselves and when vampires are "staked" they do not turn to dust as they do in the series, but leave behind a pesky corpse. Of course, the watcher who first tells Buffy of her calling is not the Giles of the series, but regardless of that, he does not have any of the characteristics of a watcher as we have come to know them on the series. Also, the lead vampire, played by Rutger Hauer, is not the least bit scary. Instead he is more like a villain out of the equally campy Batman TV series.

There is also no mention of vampires lacking a soul. There are a few moments in the movie, though, that have at least the ring of Whedon's brand of humor. What comes to my mind in that category is after Buffy has staked a large number of teen vampires that have invaded her high school dance, the principal is going around putting detention slips on all of the staked teen vampires' corpses as punishment for disrupting the event. This seems very much like something principal Snyder of Sunnydale high school would have done.

This really is the stupidest vampire film ever. It is not big and it is not clever. The actors are good but the film is terrible. It is too tame for a vampire film and it is too boring for a teen film. The series is much better than this shallow rubbish, stick to binge watching the series.

The movie, Buffy, is actually a creation of the popular series creator, Joss. But unlike the show the movie is campy, bubbly, and basically just fun. It takes a look at life as a vampire slayer from the point of view of a californian airhead in the early 90's. you really have to watch this with no expectations and it is a lot of fun.

Blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda, yadda... something about it being totally unfair to compare and contrast the film and television versions of this particular property because they are quite different beasts and aspire to meet different tones and aesthetics. Insert a comment about how the film was clearly going for a more campy, comedic riff that interpreted Joss Whedon's script in a more light-hearted fashion and should be allowed to stand on its own. Drone on a bit about how one can like both the film and the series, or even appreciate and prefer the film for its own unique take on the material. Yakkity-yak.

Well, I really don't agree. I think one can definitely compare the two forms that "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" appeared in during the 90's. And it goes without saying... the series was the better version. By quite a wide margin. It's a contemporary classic and not only one of the finest television franchises to emerge in the past twenty years... but arguably one of the best shows of all time. With a great self- aware but still spooky and tension-filled tone, ideal casting and top- notch writing for the most part, the series was about as perfect as can be.

The film? Well, it's a bit of an interesting failure. There's a lot to enjoy here, and it's fun to see a slightly more whimsical and campy variation of the iconic character. But it's far too uneven for its own good and ends up an entertaining but incredibly mediocre experience.

Buffy Summers (Kristy Swanson) is your typical snarky, privileged Los Angeles valley-girl high-school cheerleader. She loves shopping, talking back and her clique of preppy friends more than anything else. So you can imagine her surprise when a mysterious man called Merrick (Donald Sutherland) informs her that she is "The Slayer"- a chosen one gifted with superhuman strength and reflexes who is destined to do battle with the forces of darkness- most notably vampires. Now, she is forced to begin training to fight the hordes of evil that begin descending upon her town, including the vile and cruel Lothos (Rutger Hauer), a vampire king who seeks to destroy her.

Honestly, I didn't mind the casting and I felt for the most part they were great choices for their respective roles. Being the first person to tackle the role before it was later perfected, Swanson makes for an amusing if not sometimes grating lead in Buffy, and if you can get past the handful of moments where she's totally unlikable, you'll end up being invested enough to stick with her. Sutherland and Hauer both add a sense of class to the film and inject some much-needed elegance. I also quite enjoyed the key moments where Hauer is allowed to ham it up a bit. Given the film's more comedic leaning, it works adequately. And supporting roles by the likes of Luke Perry and Paul Reubens also round out the supporting cast quite nicely- especially Reuben's as Lothos' second- hand man Amilyn. He's flippin' brilliant in the part and has one stand-out scene that I won't spoil- but suffice to say will have you rolling on the floor with laughter.

Directorial duties are handled by Fran Rubel Kuzui, who does a fairly decent job visually, but can't quite find the right balance between humor, horror and drama. She does well enough with the action, but is perhaps a bit in over her head with the mythology that is being presented, playing it up a bit too much for laughs in moments that should be serious. Thought often the gags do land well enough to illicit a laugh at least. It's a competent shot, but aiming for the wrong target.

And this goes beyond direction. The film feels at odds with itself from time to time, and I can't help but feel key decisions were made that were to the detriment of the story and characters. Story goes that the film was repeatedly re-written during production by everyone from the producers to the director to the cast, and it kind of shows. There are hints of writer Joss Whedon here and there, but it feels watered- down and made all the more bland. Heck, at times it even seems contrary to itself- a prime example being the fact that the film tries to build- up Buffy as the opposite of the classic damsel, yet she has to be bailed out repeatedly by the men in her life during action set-pieces. It cheapens the whole experience. Sure, have it happen once, maybe twice... but I counted at least three times she had to be saved by men in the film. The story suffers because it feels quite fractured by the muddled tone and some issues with the pacing and structuring that I can only assume is from the re-writes and subsequent re-edits to play up the laughs. It's just pretty darned sloppy, and comes across as incredibly and irritatingly uneven far too often. They took it too far towards the light and took away too much of the darkness. It lacks purpose and impact.

Still, it got a few laughs out of me. And I can see people enjoying it to one extent or another. Does it match the ideal quality of the television series that followed five short years later? No. It doesn't even come close. But is it a terrible film? Not really. It's pretty much mediocre by any stretch, but watchable and fun in a campy way. My suggestion? Watch the show first. And then check out the film if you're interested in seeing the character done in a completely different manner.

I give the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" movie a middle-of-the-road 5 out of 10.

This is a refreshing film that pokes fun at the horror genre on many levels. The title is the first clue that this is something different. A girly girl name for someone who slays vampires as The Chosen One. Heavy stuff. lol. Females are usually the fodder in the horror genre, but not here. Empowering a female to try and save the world from the forces of darkness while she tries to maintain her keen fashion sense is both groundbreaking and hilarious. And who says a little comedy can't be interjected amidst the gore and death? Humor, after all, keeps all of us sane and this film has it in spades; whether it be in the form of a quick quip or a sight gag or an over-the-top performance, it all undercuts the seriousness perfectly.

The cast is, for the most part, great- especially Rutger Hauer and Paul Reubens. Kristy Swanson carries off the title role with aplomb. Easily her best role, in my humble opinion. After having immensely enjoyed the seven seasons of the TV series, I still find myself watching this film and appreciating it even though it did not end up the way the creator, Joss Whedon, originally envisioned. I believe were it not for his strong reaction to the changes made from his original script that 4 years later, he would not have been so gung-ho to take Buffy to the little screen. Thank The Master.

FYI, the trivia posted here regarding Buffy having burned down the gym in the original script version penned by Joss Whedon does not appear to be correct. I have read what looks to be the original script(found on the internet movie script database) and the ending is pretty much like how it happened in the film. The gym remains mostly intact, as the vampires all skedaddled after Buffy killed Lothos. The script is definitely darker than the film and you can see a much more direct correlation between it and the TV series.

P.S. This film predates Clueless not the other way around so the references should be attributed as such. BtVS was the influence.

This movie would've probably been long forgotten were it not for the 'Buffy' series and obviously it's fine cast. Among the supporters of Kristy Swanson we find Hilary Swank, Rutger Hauer, Donald Sutherland and Pee-Wee Herman!

The story itself is nothing special. Swanson is Buffy (who looks and acts like she's starring in 'Clueless'), who is chosen to kill off the vampires ruled by uber-vampire Hauer. There's a surprising lack of blood/gore and the action sequences are only so-and-so. The film is pretty amusing though, and the acting is above average.

You should certainly watch this if you're a fan of the series, but otherwise... 5/10.

My dad hates this movie. I watched it so much as a child he literally gets angry when I bring it up. I love this movie. Everything about it. Will forever be my all time number one.

Joss had to have a past. This was it. Kirsty Swanson plays her part well enough, but she simply goes from being an annoying type extra from "Clueless" into an annoying Slayer...

The TV series is without question one of the best shows out there. When you consider what a mess was made of Highlander, and even Timecop on the TV series, side, Joss has progressed from an imaginative director hamstrung by a pathetic cast (even Donald Sutherland & Rutger Hauer struggle here) to someone who is making stars of the characters in his series.

Only the Superman series has managed to come close to building young actors careers. Stargate SG1 is pretty good too...

If you are planning on watching a prequel to a well loved tv series, stick with Superman and Stargate though...

Buffy, I remember avoiding in the video store well before they made the tv series. It was on TV last night here in the UK, and the only satisfaction it gave me, was how accurate my instincts were, before I had the benefit of utilising this forum to select good films...

One to avoid. Joss needs to remake this (ala Sam Raimi) now he has more money, and put Sarah Michelle Gellar in place as the young slayer, before moving school....