vampires
- Thread starter timothy
- Start date
Hellsing.
David Tennant is spelled correctly, and I'd make sure to capitalize the first D in David and the first T in Tennant. Also I would capitalize the first letter of Fright Night and Reboot
I hadn't heard about a David Tennant Fright Night. I'd be interested in seeing a Trailer, to see how he plays a non-Doctor character nowadays, if he's still turned up to 11.5 or if he's dialed it back a bit.
What character or archetype does he play?
I have no objection to you starting one, I start few threads, mostly obscure stuff that's not already going on.
Tennant is playing a Las Vegas stage magician who gets enlisted to help the teenage hero fight the vampire. It's basically the Roddy McDowall part from the original, but they're reinterpreted the part to make him a more of a hip, modern show-biz type than an aging late-night horror movie host.
Probably not a bad idea, since, sadly, "Chiller Theater"-type hosts aren't really part of popular culture anymore.
I just re-watched Bram Stoker's Dracula tonight.
I haven't seen it since it was out in theatres. I thought it was rubbish then, but my Goth-girl friends all loved it.
Sometimes I enjoy a film better on second viewing, once I know what to expect. But that was not the case this time. If anything, I liked it even less.
To be fair, it had some really striking visuals, the music was good, and Anthony Hopkins was fun to watch as Van Helsing. But overall--blech.
I haven't seen it since it was out in theatres. I thought it was rubbish then, but my Goth-girl friends all loved it.
Sometimes I enjoy a film better on second viewing, once I know what to expect. But that was not the case this time. If anything, I liked it even less.
To be fair, it had some really striking visuals, the music was good, and Anthony Hopkins was fun to watch as Van Helsing. But overall--blech.
I didn't really mind Coppola's version. The one big-budget version of Dracula that really disappointed me was Frank Langella's in '79. I thought his portrayal of the Count was lifeless (no pun intended); he seemed to be phoning in his performance. This was all the more disappointing because I'd seen him do the role on Broadway and thought he did a wonderful job in the play.
Here's an interview with Marti Noxon, who wrote the screenplay: http://collider.com/marti-noxon-interview-fright-night-buffy-reboot/91076/
I love that version, and granted, I haven't seen it in a long time, but I thought Langella was great. He completely nailed the seductive, suave version of Dracula.
Coppola's film has a lot of problems, but Oldman is another great Dracula.
It isn't a masterpiece but its still of one the more enjoyable Dracula big screen interpretations. Oldman and Hopkins really make the film, the others...not so much.
Enjoyed Salem's Lot and Fright Night for tension; Daughters of Darkness, The Addiction, Blood-Spattered Bride and Martin for weirdness. Saw the Louis Jourdan Dracula once and thought was pretty good for a TV production. Has anyone seen the Jack Palance version? Can't imagine him as the Count...
All of Jack Palance's Dracula I've seen is the clip of him saying: "So, you play your wits against mine. Me, who commanded armies hundreds of years before you were born. Fools!" in a low dramatic voice - which was played in Buffy season 2 episode "Lie to Me".
But a search just showed that the entire film is on Youtube, so I might watch it one of these days.
The Vampire Diaries by L.J. Smith.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vampire_Diaries_(novel_series)
I like the show and hear the books aren't too bad.
I like the show, too.... but only because of Damon.He's super awesome.
His brother is a cry baby, and there is no chance in hell that a real Elena would ever pick him.
The books are okay, but nothing spectacular.
Haven't seen the show, but if you're going to read the books, stop after the first 4 (The Awakening, The Struggle, The Fury, Dark Reunion) or possibly even after just the first 3. The ones that Smith has been putting out lately are beyond godawful, to the point where the publisher has actually taken the series away from her and is having the remainder of the books ghostwritten.
If you like Smith's work and vampires, though, I'd check out her Night World series. It's uneven and only some of them have vamps, but I prefer the Night World books to Vampire Diaries. (But warning: she's never put out the last book in the Night World series, Strange Fate, and the release date keeps getting pushed farther and farther back. Not to mention, with the drop in quality of her recent work, I don't think the series is going to end on a well-written note. OTOH, even the worst of the Night World stuff is much, much better than Twilight.)
As for the Anita Blake novels, they've gradually been turning into porn without plot. Would not recommend (or would recommend stopping long before current point.)
I agree about LJ Smith's books becoming terrible! It's like she forgot how to write. I mean the first books weren't anything spectacular, but the reboot books are horrible. And now I see that all the new books are co-written by her. Yeah, I bet she doesn't do anything. They just have to give her credit.
I agree about Night World. I looooved Night World! I wish she would've finished it back in the day. I don't know that I want her to finish it now that she can't write! Maybe she should have a ghostwriter finish it for her. Because I don't understand why she stopped! When I first heard an LJ Smith book was becoming a tv show, I was like OMG I HOPE IT'S NIGHT WORLD! but it wasn't. Now I think another of her books is becoming a show on the CW. The Secret Circle. I saw a commercial and recognized the name because I've had the book on my shelf for like 4 years. I should read it before the show starts!
Oh and about the Anita Blake books: Yeah, I knew there had to be a reason that I stopped reading them. I was super into them and then my attention just drifted. Probably the whole porn thing...
The Vampire Diaries is Twilight x Dark Shadows. I've learned how to recognize and zap the Twilight part and watch the Dark Shadows part, which is good enough to keep me watching indefinitely. Almost thru S1 now.
I have this theory about TVD: the producers pulled a bait-and-switch on the CW. The first five or six episodes, which CW would have bought the series based on, are pure Twilight. Then the show suddenly starts becoming more Dark Shadowsy- which is probably the show the producers want to make. By that time, the audience was locked in and the ratings were secure. Launching with a more Dark Shadowsy show from the start might have gotten it cancelled, or not picked up by the CW to begin with. Clever.
I have this theory about TVD: the producers pulled a bait-and-switch on the CW. The first five or six episodes, which CW would have bought the series based on, are pure Twilight. Then the show suddenly starts becoming more Dark Shadowsy- which is probably the show the producers want to make. By that time, the audience was locked in and the ratings were secure. Launching with a more Dark Shadowsy show from the start might have gotten it cancelled, or not picked up by the CW to begin with. Clever.
