It probably is not a good sign for a film if, while watching it, you are reminded of other, better films. And yet, that was exactly what happened when I sat down to watch Richard Wenk's terribly dated vampire film, Vamp. For example, the plot is eerily similar to Robert Rodriguez' homage to vampire films of the 1980s, From Dusk Till Dawn (1996), and aesthetically, Vamp's style and camera work seem derivative of other, better horror films. In the former case, it is understandable that From Dusk Till Dawn's story and structure feels similar to Vamp's, as Robert Rodriguez is deliberately picking things from cheesy vampire films from the 1980s and mocking them. I would not be surprised if I heard that he did pinch story elements from Vamp, especially since both films feature a Queen Vampire who strips to lure her prey.
So, what is the story of Vamp, I hear you ask? Well, it concerns two college students, Keith (Chris Makepeace) and AJ (Robert Rusler), who want to hire a stripper for their fraternity initiation party. Unfortunately, Keith and AJ have no car, so they manage to convince Duncan (Gedde Watanabe), a college loner with no friends, to loan them his car. However, he insists that as compensation, they must pretend to be his friends for a week and take him with them. So, the three of them travel to the seediest club in the neighbourhood, the After Dark Nightclub, in search for a suitable candidate. It is there where they meet the lead vampire, Queen Katrina (Grace Jones), and realise that everyone there, including the staff and strippers, are ruthless bloodsuckers out to feast on all those who enter through the strip club doors.
I imagine several of you are drawing parallels between the two films, if only if it is because both films use a strip club and erotic dancers to attract their prey. However, while Vamp seems to still be able to inspire filmmakers to this day, I do believe that, in terms of its appearance, it owes a debt to Dario Argento's Suspiria (1977). I would go as far to say that Vamp is derivative to the point where the filmmakers cannot claim this is just an "inspiration". Cinematographers Elliott Davis and Douglas F. O'Neons bathe the screen with a neon green and pink look, which is suitable considering the seedy nightclub is the main set piece of the film. However, Suspiria had this exact same style, albeit in blue and red, and in all honesty, Dario Argento used it far more effectively.
Below are two stills from Suspira, and below that are two stills from Vamp.
I should say that the photography is well accomplished, and photographers Douglas F. O'Neons and Elliott Davis went on to have lucrative careers in Hollywood. I do not blame them, or director Richard Wenk, for being derivative. They were starting out in their filmmaking careers and they wanted to give their film a distinct look, which is understandable. It is no different to Martin Scorsese using a lot of red in his films' photography because Michael Powell used a lot of red. I just feel that it is distracting to the point where I could not concentrate on the film.
If I seem to be talking about Vamp only in superficial terms, such as what it inspired and how it looks, it is because there is nothing remotely interesting about the film other than what it inspired and how it looks. It is a terribly dated piece of work, in both its attitudes to women and its costumes. For example, the fact that every female character is a stripper, and a ferocious she-beast at that, is simply insulting. This is spookily similar to contemporary horror films from England, Doghouse and Lesbian Vampire Killers, where all the monsters are women who are sexually provocative. Whichever way you look at it, the filmmakers seem to be judging these women for the fact that they are strippers. In feminist terms this is referred to as "slut-shaming", and this film reeks of it. Surely, if Richard Wenk wanted to be progressive, he would make AJ and Keith the vampires, as their attempt to hire a woman to strip for their fraternity brothers is more akin to bloodsucking than the woman stripping. The fact that AJ and Keith look like they could be members of Huey Lewis and the News and that the lead antagonist is played by Grace Jones makes it a time capsule to the mid-1980s.
Despite this, the film's greatest sin is that it is boring; sleep enduringly boring. As a horror, it is not scary, despite a few jump scares, and as a comedy it is not funny, other than a couple of mild chuckles towards the beginning. In terms of the acting, the majority of the cast are simply dull, however there are a two notably awful performances; namely Gedde Watanabe as Duncan and Grace Jones as Queen Katrina. Most people will remember Gedde Watanabe as Long Duk Dong in Sixteen Candles (1984), perhaps the most annoying character in teen movie history and certainly the most racially insensitive. While he is slightly less grating here, he is still utterly awful. Grace Jones, however, seems embarrassed to be showing up in this turkey. She does not have a single line of dialogue in the film, and one imagines she must have requested this, much like Maila "Vampira" Nurmi in Ed Wood's Plan 9 From Outer Space (1959), in a vein attempt for people not to associate her with this film.
However, given its budget was merely one point nine million dollars, it never looks cheap, and the grotesquely monstrous vampire effects look excellent. Also, going back to the photography, many of the shots look as if they should have cost a lot of money to pull off. The fact that they did not cost that much, and they were able to accomplish those shots for such little money is very impressive.
4/10
No comments:
Post a Comment