Review of Near Dark (1987) by Kristen S — 07 Nov 2009

With all the shitty fang-toothed films in recent years, I can't help but look back to the old classics. Hollywood's got a fetish for vampire films right now, lame vamp films at that. It's like an epidemic that cannot be stopped. It's never about the integrity of the film anymore, it's all about the money. Why can't it be both? As the way they should be.

What I love about this movie is that it follows the traditional vampire lore that they are vulnerable to direct sunlight. Sure, there is nothing original about that but it was utilized effectively for the story. They are also immune to gunshots but it slows them down. They can summon incredible strength as again follows the lore. They are deadly at night but they are almost powerless in broad daylight. In the film, it shows exactly what would happen with the characters in those time period. Yes, a vampire would combust to sunlight exposure, not sparkle.LOL.Great composition all the way to the end. The no cure once bitten rule gets bend which was a nice touch. The cast is such a powerhouse: Paxton, Goldstein and Henriksen -- Aliens reunion anyone? What also separates the vampires in this film from most traditional vampire films; They are not wealthy, they do not dress to impress but certainly dressed to kill in Western-esque sense. The entire bar scene was probably the best part. This is a full-blown vampire film at it's finest.