Metamorphosis

I've seen films shot using phome cameras that are better than this. This was just a BAD movie. The acting was terrible. What was Christopher Lambert thinking. Not that he's a critically accalaimed actor or anything. The writing was terrible. Scenes were stitched together with some not making any sense in sequence of events. I love vampire movies and some of them are pretty cheesy but entertaining at least. Not this film.

OK, this is a fairly low budget vampire flick but you might want to check it out. It begins rather slowly, everything seems predictable and unoriginal. However, you keep watching due to the amazingly SEXY leading lady who plays the female vampire and love interest. She is >>>>HOT<<<<< It also helps that the film is pretty well produced, it looks good, very good sometimes. Things really pick up and it gets rocking though when Christopher Lambert takes the stage as a really rotten chief vampire dude. He really brings a lot of energy and his dialogue is zany as heck. I enjoyed his performance and there is some nicely staged action sequences. Also the effects when a vampire gets killed are pretty cool. They sorta turn into this black husk and then flake away like a burning newspaper. Cool. Then, towards the end of the movie it delves into some metaphysical, spiritual, pseudo madness that is kind of dumb but brings some more zany nuttiness to the fun. Maybe it was just me but here is a strong undercurrent of tongue in cheek at work here. The last scene kinda caps it all off and sends you away with a bit of a smile on your face. The Russian couple and a really annoying sidekick steal a few scenes. Other than Lambert and the dude playing the Russian jerk the acting is kinda stiff.

The bottom line is a mildly entertaining semi farce that might help you waste some time. There are some really interesting tidbits throw in like a iron cross at a monastery that trembles when a vampire is on the property, a vampire who says the lord's prayer and declares the bible to be the best selling work of fiction ever. Then there is a creepy grave robbing scene and vampires that bit each other on the neck. Not to bad.

Being a big fan of Christopher Lambert and of "traditional" type Vampires, I was delighted to hear a couple of years ago that 'Metamorphosis' was happening.

Although the writers of 'Metamorphosis' were enthusiastic to portray an "original" take on Vampirism like most modern movies featuring our fanged friends do, they are still beautiful, genteel ladies and gentlemen and not a street-gang speaking in "cool" Buffy-type slang.

Mostly shot in Hungary straight after Lambert's 'Day of Wrath,' Christopher clearly enjoys playing the bad guy here, and gives us a performance that I would describe as Lord Rayden in a nastier mood. As usual, his character is a mix of dark and light, but I wish the script had allowed a bit more of an insight into his character as the write-up on the official site indicated there might be.

Irena A. Hoffman is everything you could want in a seductive Vampire, and I look forward to seeing her in other things. Scenes with her or Lambert as the main focus are certainly the most enjoyable in the movie, as the three American tourists (in real life, one Canadian, and two English) aren't very interesting.

Corey Sevier is adequate as Keith, but Jennifer Higham and particularly Charlie Hollway are stuck playing irritating, unfunny characters.

The rest of the cast is filled out by some suitable looking Hungarians, and the production is assisted by the use of genuine medieval locations.

Metamorphosis is a little light on blood and Vampire action, and struggles a bit to keep it's plot moving, but I enjoyed it.

Abysmal. Horrible. Plain awful. These are just a few words that come to my mind when I think of this movie.

Let's take a closer look:

ACTING - practically non-existent, wooden,amateurish overacting;

ACTORS - horrible 1990s choice of actors and characters (three utterly annoying American tourists) and Christopher Lambert. Yes, that Christopher Lambert, who once was a big star (don't ask me how he ended up in this piece of junk);

PLOT - makes little or no sense (not to mention the terrible distortion of historical reality and truth);

SETTING - probably the only positive think in the whole film;

ENDING - clear and predictable after some 30 minutes into the film; etc.

I could go on and on, but there's no point to. It's simply one horrible horrible film which should never have been made. And Mr. Lambert should fire his agent ASAP and start making decent films again.

If I could have given negative stars, I would have. WHY, Mr. Lambert, did you choose to do this?!? Please, fire your agent.

I won't bother detailing any of the story line, because I fear that some poor soul might decide it was worth watching. Suffice to say that a high school creative fiction writing class could have come up with a better story. The AV club could have made a better attempt at filming it, in fact.

There should be a law against movies this bad. Or, at least stiff penalties for having the gall to call this "entertainment."

The acting was HORRIBLE. The plot was AWFUL. There was NOTHING redeemable about this waste of time at all.

I think I'd rather have a root canal. Or chew glass.