Vampire Diary

Vampire Diary is a great movie considering what it is--the story of a group of 'weekend vampires' and a woman with a habit of recording everything who meet a female vampire by pure chance. Prepare for an unexpected love quadrangle, some interesting lore on vampires, and great use of found footage.

My only complaint lies in a scene towards the end during which one of the weekend vampires' lines were corny (writing) and poorly delivered (acting, directing).

One thing I especially like about Vampire Diary is that the first thirty minutes make a wonderful short story. I almost wished it ended at the water scene simply because of how great the movie was by that point. So, there you go. Give the first thirty minutes a shot. If you find yourself caring about the characters or interested in seeing what happens next, continue on for the remaining hour.

So, there has been this vampire thing going on for some time. Vampire clubs, vampire clothes, vampire movies, vampire this, vampire that. Largely drawn to by young people apparently between the age of fascination and hero worship. After watching this movie I found it so sad that so much of this seems to be nothing but the product of 90 plus years of intense and evolving entertainment. Radio, books, movies, television... all growing increasingly more sophisticated as the decades pass. Couple that with an era in human history never before experienced, at least as far as the industrialized western world is concerned where wealth, modernization, and more time to entertain ourselves and in almost any way we can imagine has done more to stunt our evolution than help it. People so lost, bored, confused, over-comfortable, and with far more choices of everything imaginable than any generation has ever had.

How does a phenomenon such as this where people begin to idolize, romanticize and fantasize about being vampires? Worse yet, of all things to be drawn to, the human spirit is drawn to the cruelest and most based creatures. Are they evil, or are they just surviving like any other animal? Does that question even matter? Are we really thinking existentially about the basic necessity of survival on such an animalistic level? As if it is required still? Or is it all the drama, the fantasy of preternaturalism that goes along with it. The anti-superhero fetish.

Why, after so long the idea of striving to evolve along the paths of compassion, generosity, kindness, etc., do we still romanticize ruthless killing for survival wrapped up in an aura of darkness, evil, cruelty, demons, etc? Why is that so big a draw to people? So much so, that even in this era to try to be kind or compassionate or even sincerely happy is too often seen as weakness, goody two-shoes, or a sign of mental deficiency.

It really makes me wonder just how much time we have left as a species, so bent on our own destruction that we are taking the whole lot down with us. For all those centuries of philosophical and religious arguing in favor of the idea that the basic nature of man is good... I've come to the conclusion that argument is piffle. Sure, there are those out there who do strive for such things, but just like the wise, they are few and far between. The vast number of us, the whole of humanity is nothing more than barely more than animals, except that animals kill to survive not by choice, we do it entirely by choice. Worse is that we don't have to. Whether it is actual killing, or doing anything to achieve, or gain, or draw to us whatever our cold little hearts desire and doing so in any way possible. Sometimes choosing the cruel ways entirely when it isn't even necessary. Call that mental illness if you need an excuse. Then think about your own actions, who you vote for, your willingness to cut the feet out from someone else if necessary to keep your house, your cars, your clothes, your toys. Then tell me how pious even you are.

After seeing this ridiculous excuse for what some consider deep, or experimental, I am certain now more than ever than we as a species are indeed no better than a virus. Vampires in our own right, except with out all the glamor, black clothes, and eye liner. And no matter how sophisticated our toys may seem, no matter how they may give us the illusion we are an evolved and evolving species, they're nothing but just that. An illusion. It's all just stuff. With them, we're still animals bent on our own wants and needs over others. Without them, we would revert to killing each-other wantonly for just the basics in a heartbeat.

It's true, it's true, this film IS truly remarkable. Rarely can an independantly made film be utterly devoid of original content in every single facet. To make films takes time, care patiance, love and commitmant, and I have no doubt to make this the filmmakers had all these things. Sadly they left talent at the door.

Cheesy, trite, lacking in pace and drama. I am genuinely struggling to think of any part of this movie that deserves praise- and i have sat through Manos: The Hands Of Fate. I would add this though; I paid to see a preview screening of this film last year. It was at midnight in an independent cinema. Anyone there must love horror films to go so out of their way to see this thing. The audience laughed at the 'serious' moments and coughed at the end rather than applaud.... and all of this whils the director and some of the cast were present. Being English, it really says something when we can't even be bothered to be polite.

The words "lesbian vampire" bring to mind either the incoherently stylish Jess Franco/Jean Rollin 70's stuff or the modern softcore associated with Misty Mundae, Darian Caine, et al. But it would be unfair to categorize "Vampire Diary" as either, because the sexual orientation of the leads is not the main point of the film, but the intense passion that develops between them, and the lengths a person will go to in order to protect a loved one. Sure, it's not a perfect film (even at eighty-something minutes it drags at some points), but much to my surprise, "Vampire Diary" turned out to be a thoughtful, well-acted drama with supernatural overtones that might go the usual "vampirism as addiction" route we've seen before, but does it with a raw and sincere emotion, intensified by the DIY photography (videography?), that will undoubtedly be compared with the recent wave of mockumentary shot-on-video horror films (from the awesome "Cloverfield" to the genuinely terrifying Spanish flick "REC"). Granted, this pseudo-verité style is not for all tastes, but for those tired of the same direct-to-DVD zombie drivel, "Vampire Diary" will be a welcome relief and a cool breath of fresh air for the genre. I'm an avid fan of direct-to-DVD horror films (for better or for worse), and this is exactly the kind of film that feels like a reward after plowing through release after release of mercenary independent films done without passion or vision, just scraping for some loose change associated with the latest film trend. So, believe me when I tell you that there are _lots_ of worse movies in which you could invest an hour and a half, and not find even a fraction of the artistry, drama or just plain coolness of "Vampire Diary". And, goes without saying, the movie will be especially relevant to those "Goth" kids that take the role playing game "Vampire - The Masquerade" way too seriously.

The concept is promising. As soon as it begins, the film is not.

Even putting aside the "found footage" framing, the stylization is frankly obnoxious. This includes the shoddy camerawork, the editing, and the direction; the insistence on extra close-up shots is especially aggravating and comes off as amateurish. Dialogue and characters are at best bland if not outright annoying, and the pace is brusque and rushed. Within the first fifteen minutes we're informed of the death of "Eddie" but are given no reason to care about him, and the beat is forced onto us so quickly that other characters' mourning doesn't even feel real. To be blunt, so it goes for pretty much everything else that is to follow in the next 75 minutes: scenes that should be inspiring or titillating fall flat owing to emphatically poor and overzealous execution. 'Vampire diary' is a broadly unlikable mess.

Would I like the cast more if I saw them in another feature? Would filmmaker Phil O'Shea, or co-director Mark James, demonstrate their capabilities elsewhere if I looked for other instances of their work? I'd like to think so. This specific movie, however, is irritating on almost every level, in almost every regard. I like the music, at least; though it's a tad overdone, I appreciate the work put in by the hair and makeup artists, and costume design. Yet these are not elements that can remotely begin to carry a picture. There are good ideas scattered throughout the length, but they feel plainly insufficient.

So what do we have, then, in terms of value? Good ideas that aren't done well, and passable rounding details that are inconsequential in the grand scheme of things? I think I tend to be very generous and open-minded when it comes to cinema, but even I struggle to describe 'Vampire diary' as something more than Rock Bottom. The plot and scene writing somewhat improve as the length progresses, but also feel haphazard at times; in any case, it's not enough to substantively make a difference, and the title is overlong regardless. Whether you're looking for a lesbian romance, a vampire flick, or a found-footage romp, there are many more much better films you can watch, and unless you're desperate, this sadly isn't particularly worth your time. I want to say that I like it more than I do, but style overshadows substance, and the style is awful.