The Thirst

This film had a fair amount of nudity in it (I have nothing against that :) ) and some very bizarre/bloody scenes. If you are rating this movie for plot, acting, special effects, etc, and overall entertainment value amongst mainstream movies, this film is a failure. If you are looking for weirdness, blood, and nudity (almost all female), then perhaps this movie is for you... but even from that perspective it isn't that great.

Plot: C-, Nothing new. There are not really any amazing twists to the story. It's vampires. Most people have seen a vampire movie or two, and this one is not overly unique in terms of plot.

Acting: D+, It's pretty terrible. I think the best acting performance is done by the main female character, and she was nothing that great. The main dude was a bad actor. He got better towards the end of the movie, but a 100% improvement wouldn't even be saying much. Most everyone else was bad. Some of the actors were even annoying. I am not sure if this was the role they were given or their acting skill.

Special effects: C-, The most prominent effect in this movie was obviously the blood. It seems like every 10 minutes it's a bloodbath. To say it looked fake gives a summary of the quality, but specifically, it looked like anytime someone was injured a pipe of red water just exploded and sprayed all over the place. Ridiculous. The other effects in the movie were pretty crappy too.

Character development: D+, There was clearly an attempt at this, as some characters do undergo radical change in this movie, and so one could argue that this movie aspect is better than what I'm indicating. I think the poor acting really killed it for me. A good movie conveys characters in such a way that you understand what they are all about, and you either identify with them or you have some strong opinion about them. In this movie, it's hard to really care.

*BEST aspect of this movie: The nudity, cause not much else was worthwhile.

*WORST aspect of this movie: You don't care about the characters. Their strangeness combined with the bad acting and some other factors prevent you from really identifying with or at least having a strong opinion of the characters.

*OVERALL: I really like vampire movies, and that's why I rented this one, but it was bad. It was annoying in many parts. The characters sucked. The effects were bad. Besides a few redeeming scenes and the aspect I marked as the best movie aspect, it had little to offer.

Plot is about a terminal ill woman's last ditched attempt to keep alive, thanks to a late night visit from a vampiric nurse, only set back being she didn't tell her boyfriend her plans, so when he finds her months later dancing in a seedy nightclub after being supposedly dead, he gets roped into joining her new found vampire family. Then they decide to try kick the vampire urge by going cold turkey.

The "Requiem For A Dream Meets Near Dark" tagline for this was always going to be hard for it to live upto. And sadly though pretty obviously this doesn't come close to either.

But that said its a very entertaining horror film once it picks up, has bucket loads of blood, heaps of throw away laughs and enough twisted off the wall madness to keep even the most hard to please horror fan happy.

Great to see Fireflys Jayne aka Adam Baldwin turn up in a horror movie but even he's outdone by the thin white duke English vampire played by Neil Jackson (Duke is also in The Thirst (2006) by Tom Shell).

Director Jeremy Kasten is slowly but surely rising to the top tier of new American horror genre directors, hopefully this is a sign of things to come specially as his next feature is a remake of HG Lewis's Wizard Of Gore. One I'm sure horrorheads don't want to see messed up.

The Thirst gets a very respectful 7/10 from me, leaving me thirsty for more of the same.

A woman seemingly dies of cancer. But her boyfriend soon discovers her at a goth club where she has joined a cult of vampires led by Jeremy Sisto. Of course, the boyfriend joins the cult and then the fun begins...

I had my worries about this one. A low budget film, with "Starz" mentioned about eight times before the film even begins (okay, Starz, I get it... just chill out). And a vampire story, which is one of the more overdone horror branches exploited today. On top of this all, the case claims it's "Requiem For a Dream" meets "Near Dark" and we should always be aware these sorts of comparisons are never accurate (except with "The Hunt" -- see separate review).

In all fairness, this film did have some elements of "Requiem", though I wouldn't say it was quite on that level. And it was a really good movie once it got going. I particularly need to say the makeup and special effects crew did a wonderful job. The lead actress (Clare Kramer of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer") transformed radiantly fro ma dumpy cancer patient to a glorious stunning vampire. And the blood! Oh my, the blood! This film sets a new standard on blood spray. Without being over the top like "Kill Bill", this film has more blood spray than you'll ever see in a movie. Maybe that's the only thing the special effects guy does, but he does it so well it hurts.

And I can't sell the cast short. Jeremy Sisto, as I say, is wonderful as always. He may have played Jesus Christ, but his best roles remain his Satanic horror roles. Clare Kramer was great, all of the supporting cast was great. I'd like to spotlight Tom Lenk (another "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" veteran), whose part was much too small in this film -- though he had enough time to make a gay reference about himself, which seems to be a running theme with Lenk.

Who picked out the soundtrack? Science bless that individual! A few Rasputina favorites (a remix of "State Fair" and "antique-high-heel-red-doll-shoes") and some other goth and industrial blends. I couldn't have down any better myself (the only man who does a better job with his soundtracks is director Gregg Araki). I now own the DVD, but would gladly purchase the soundtrack so I could listen to this film in my car and be reminded of the great dance club scenes and blood-spraying massacres.

Despite hundreds of vampire films flooding the market every year (okay, a slight exaggeration) this one is not derivative but actually offers a good story. What is more important? Love? Eternal life? Friendship? These issues are explored... that, and the whole idea of overcoming addiction (remember the "Requiem for a Dream" comparison). I highly recommend this film. Next to the other films I've watched recently ("The Hunt", "Heartstopper", "Dark Ride" and "The Odd Couple II"....) this is a panacea for my cinematic ills. Thank you, Starz!

This film is really awful.

The acting is bad, ... the writing is bad, ... the directing is bad, ... even the cutting/editing is bad. And it does take a lot for a film to be so dismally bad that even as a layman you can literally witness each and every one of the bad editing decisions.

I like vampire films; and I do know that there are some films that can be good even though they are bad.

But this film here has absolutely no redeeming features.

It isn't trashy cult, ... it isn't unintentionally funny, ... nothing of the sort.

--> It is just plain bad.

As an artist, I have a great deal of respect for the process of movie making. I realize that for some people involved, this hypothetical movie that I may be watching, even though it may not be to my tastes, may represent their life's work for some involved in the process. I can see how it is the work product of creative people, and I appreciate their efforts, even if not the end product. For this reason I almost never rate a movie lower than a "5".

Then we come to "The Thirst"...... This is a movie that, at the end, makes me want to stand and scream "I WANT MY 2 HOURS BACK!" For the first time (not that it should have been my first perhaps) I sat there as the credits rolled and thought to myself, "that person should be fired by the studio, and that person, and ....." It was brutal. The plot was weak, the camera work was really bad, and the acting was lousy too (in large part to the weak plot). Unless you are conduction a film study or in a class that requires you to see how bad a movie really can be, I would recommend you steer clear of this disaster.