Avaliações de usuários

In 1889 London, Christian (Robert Knepper) mourns the loss of his wife and takes up an offer from vampire Nina (Diana Frank) to live another 1000 years as her slave so he can search for the reincarnation of his lost love. Over 100 years later in L.A., he finds his wife in the form of a compassionate nurse named Katherine (Kathleen Kinmont). Christian is relieved, as he's having a miserable time stalking seedy nightclubs with Nina for (mostly female) victims to take home for kinky sex and a quick meal. Police investigate as the bodies pile up, one officer also getting the hots for Katherine.

Knepper and Kinmont do what they can in their roles and if Karen Kelly's script piles on way too much mumbo jumbo, at least it attempts to be mature and romantic, which means it will appeal to a certain kind of audience who don't want to watch another vampire gorefest. That said this Playboy production is dull and dreary much of the time. Not exactly a good time at the movies unless you're looking for a plethora of naked chicks.

I am a great fan of vampire movies. When I saw the cover of this VHS, I immediately bought it without reading the reviews of IMDB. The storyline of `Dead of Night' is not bad: about a hundred years ago, a man loses the great love of his life. He becomes a vampire, expecting to find her reincarnation in future lives. Along the years, he stays with his sire looking for his former passion, and they feed every fifteen days with the blood of a lonely woman. In the present days, a detective is investigating their crimes, assuming the existence of a serial killer, and he meets a nurse, who is the reincarnation of the vampire's love. There are some good dialogs along the story. The problem is that the objective of this Playboy's production is not to be a vampire movie, but only an argument to show nude women. Therefore, there is no blood, no fangs, but lots of naked women. Fortunately there is no silicone also, and the naked bodies are indeed very beautiful. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): `Sangue nas Trevas' (`Blood in the Darkness')

12-8-03 I can't figure out why the first comment I read was so negative. Don't people have open minds anymore? I've learned not to take critics so seriously and form my own opinion instead. Since I'm not really into horror flicks, I half expected to see someone running around with a black cape, biting random people on the neck and drinking their blood. Instead, the storyline was updated to modern times and quite interesting. JOHN ENOS who is my favorite actor did a really good job as the detective. He followed thru re the 17 year old hooker and I loved the way it ended where he honestly submitted his report to the police dept. Thank goodness for a backup partner to corroborate his findings. Kate Winslet's love scene was tastefully done. It WAS a lovestory, afterall. The only thing I would've changed was Mike asking her out to dinner, not just a burger, of course, that's just ME. Great Job JOHN ENOS. Gloria Milwaukee

The director and writer do a good job in portraying the vampires. Young, attractive immortals --- the mesmerizing quality of supernatural powers. Yet they suffer emotionally because at one time they were mortals, and they have a hard time moving on from their past. I do recommend the movie.

I found the movie to be very romantic and sad. Here are these two people, well not exactly people, one is a vampire and the other is human. The reason why they can't be together is because of the choice that he made centuries ago. In a previous life she was his love, and then she died in childbirth and he was lost without her, and then came this vampire seductress promising that he will find her if he became one of the undead. Then centuries later he finds the modern incarnation of his lady love, and he almost feels human. He can't go on with the killing that his vampire master tricked him into after seeing his true love. He was able to save his true from his evil master, then had the cop kill him, and promised his love that one day they would be together the way they were meant to, as humans living a normal life. They would be reincarnated one day and find each other in their next life that was his promise to her, because of the fact that they were able to find each other in this one

This is not a particularly original take on the vampire theme but is nevertheless not a bad film. Our doomed soul marries in 1888, his wife dies in childbirth the following year, and he swears he will be reunited with her someday. Then, surprise, surprise, a lady vampire steps out of the shadows and offers to grant his wish.

Fast forward from Victorian London to 1990s California, and he finds her reincarnated in a nurse. There are complications though, his mistress is still with him, and shortly she recruits another disciple. Three may be a crowd, but four...

Not only that, but the nurse has another potential love interest in a homicide detective who is following a hunch looking for missing girls. Guess who is responsible for their disappearing? Obviously, most police officers being level-headed, they don't jump to conclusions even when a mugger who attacked the nurse is found dead drained of all his blood, but when they confront him in her apartment and he vanishes like The Flash, they realise the shocking truth. What will happen next, will they all die happily ever after? The only thing that need be said is that this is one vampire who for all his dreadful deeds does not appear to have lost his soul.