Shadowland

This is an interesting independent vampire movie that exchanges the gratuities of most modern vamp movies with a softly nuanced character-based story about a woman, staked as a newly-made vampire several centuries ago, who is accidentally awakened (via the old removal-of-the-stake-from-her-heart gag) in modern times, where she tries to find her old love while evading both police and a clerical vampire hunter seeking her demise – and continuing to deal with the tragic reality that she has been made a vampire. It's a very sympathetic story (without descending into saccharine TWILIGHT territory) that proffers an appealing side to the vampire movie, exchanging thoughtful insight instead of spectacle and carnage. Filmed in St Louis with local talent, the filmmakers tried to make a PG vampire movie that would be suitable for families (that opening staking scene evidently earned them their R-rating), and focuses on character interaction while telling an interesting story largely from the vampire lady's perspective. In the lead role, actress Caitlin McIntosh, who is strikingly beautiful to the point of distraction, plays Laura with expressiveness and sympathy. The other cast members are adequate if indistinctive. The film's low budget is wisely used to its best advantage by director Wyatt Weed in his first feature-length movie; production quality is quite good with limited use of very good CGI to render some of the environments (such as flashbacks to yesteryear) and to make vampire movements ultra-fast; props must go to young makeup artist Rachel Rieckenberg who does an amazing job with limited means to create convincing and creatures, wounds, and the like. Patrick Savage and Holeg Spies (having together scored THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE (FIRST SEQUENCE) and American MANIAC prior to this) provide a serviceable score that supports the duality of the film's heroine as both innocent victim and unwilling monster.

Sometimes an actor is cast and maybe their voice is not entirely ... maybe it doesn't fit or maybe it is better to leave them without anything to say. Not sure if it is a gimmick here or if the lead actress was not considered good enough an actress to have a talking part .. whatever the case, she is looking good .. not just for a Vampire.

Having said that, the movie and its pace are really something you have to get used to. B-movie if you are being nice and if you are into that. The ending is weird too ... not sure if I would consider it in a good sense.

This off-beat vampire film is a superior presentation. In 1897, our blonde, ill-fated damsel is put to death as a vampire. A century and more later she is accidentally resurrected by a workman, part of a crew who are doing some work for the local church. She crawls out of her grave not only covered in mud and bloodied from her execution but struck dumb (initially) and with no memory of her misfortune, nor it appears of her previous life, and of course no idea how long she has been interred.

Although a vampire, she walks in the sunlight, and is, as you would be if you hadn't eaten for 111 years, ravenously hungry. As slowly she adapts to traffic, aircraft, and not least, biros, things aren't looking at all bad for her. She scavenges some clothes aided by an ability to move only slightly less quickly than the Flash, and seeks out her former residence. She might have adapted to the 21st Century perhaps even without reverting to type, but unfortunately there is a vampire hunter in close pursuit who wants to save her soul in classical fashion.

That is as much as you need to know apart from the film having a decent soundtrack; suffice it to say that even allowing for the development of the film-makers' craft, Bela Lugosi comes a poor second to the feisty Caitlin McIntosh.

I just watched this movie the other day and I thought I should write a comment about it. It's sad that some people have decided to trash it for the sake of it instead of making a smart assessment of the movie and, most of all, praise the work of the independent filmmakers. You can thank the internet for it. A new breed of bullies has developed behind the computer's screen. It's like the new way to be a thug. A cyber-thug. In my opinion, the movie is very clever in presenting the Vampire genre from a different perspective: the female one. Tons of vampire movies are about the always dark-mysterious seductive male vampire. Not this one. Although there is a dark, seductive and sexy male vampire in Shadowland, it's the female lead who carries the torch. Many elements are similar to other vampire movies but hey! it's the same genre, right? so there should be similarities. However, shadowland gives an alternative to the otherwise always-gore-slashy vampire films. This one focuses on the humane part of the vampire. The acting was good for the most part, particularly the leads. Some of the supporting actors, in my opinion, were more theatrical and that's probably what people refer to when criticizing the acting. It's different to act on stage where actors tend to exaggerate movements, voices, gestures, etc than to act on film, and the viewers can pick on that. I once saw Meryl Streep on an interview where she said that acting on film should be like "not acting at all" because the camera multiplies all you do in front of it. The special effects were very good taking into consideration that the movie is independent and XF are very expensive. Kudos on that. The color of the film gives it a very Gothic feeling. I love that! I think the movie has great locations that blend perfectly with vampirism and gives a Gothic sense to the movie. The flashbacks are great also. Good way to explain what happened in the past. The end almost need a "to be continued..." because it's very clear that they are leaving the door open for a continuation. In summary, I liked it very much and I would recommend it to all those individuals who, like me, love the vampire world.

Although this movie kept me entertained to a level in which i wanted to see how far they would take it, it's not something i would consider watching again.

The acting was weak at best but not so much that you couldn't watch it or turn away in disgust since it did have its moments, this will never win any awards but it is entertaining.

The portrayal of vampires was indeed its weakest part considering what fiction dictates to be a correct form for vampires, you shall see what i mean if you decide to watch it, and although my rating is low, the story is sound and is defiantly worth a one time watch.