I saw John Carpenter's Escape From LA. It was one of the worst movies I had ever seen. I should have learned from my mistakes. But I didn't. Luckily, Vampires wasn't nearly as bad as Kurt Russel's horrible movie, but it was damn close. Not only was Vampires cheesy, but it was also lame, stupid, and incredibly predictable. Vampires might be worth it at a party, when everyone is already stoned.

The good side: The art direction is good. The music set a good mood, and the way the scenes flashed in and out was interesting. The movie on a whole was directed with a sense of suspense or upcoming action ... Unfortunately, the action sucked. Basically, the vampires either take one sweep with a hand and split a guy in two, bite them, or whack them around a bit. Of course, they just whack the main characters around; they kill everybody else right off.

The acting was pretty crumby, and the script, storyline, and characters were even worse. The slayers, which are supposed to be Vatican mercenaries, carry around these cumbersome spikes, smoke cigars, and swear the entire time. And then, after the first vampire killings, they are in a hotel room with a bunch of prostitutes, and the Priest is there drinking and having a good time. What kind of reality is this? None of the characters are believable; Daniel Baldwin's character becomes sentimental towards a vampire prostitute, even though he knows how deadly she will become. James Woods is a bad ass kind of dude, and he has no problem beating around Priests or hitting women. The only semi-decent performance was from Sheryl Lee, and she didn't have a big enough role to do anything.

The bad side: Oops, I already listed some of the problems.

John Carpenter's Vampires was a predictable and lame movie, and the superb art direction is squat when everything else sucks.

Review by Erik Samdahl. Erik is a marketing and technology executive by day, avid movie lover by night. He is a member of the Seattle Film Critics Society.