JOHN CARPENTER’S VAMPIRES (1998) – Halloween Month rolls along with this look at John Carpenter directing James Woods as Vatican-sanctioned vampire hunter Jack Crow. As always, James Woods is like a force of nature. When he’s on the screen he virtually blows away most of the people with whom he shares that screen.
Years before the movie Van Helsing came this flick about a team of vampire hunters secretly working with the Vatican to safeguard the world from a threat the public believes doesn’t exist. Carpenter made a perfect choice in casting volatile genius Woods as the leader of the vampire slayers. Jack Crow’s hatred of the bloodsuckers and the suffering they cause is like a thing alive.
Jack, his right-hand man Anthony Montoya (Daniel Baldwin) and the rest of their team wipe out a vampire coven in Mexico only to have its elusive leader Jan Valek (Thomas Ian Griffith) come after them for revenge.
THE Maximilian Schell portrays Cardinal Alba, the Vatican man who gives Woods’ team its missions, Tim Guinee plays Father Adam Guiteau and Gregory Sierra appears as Father Giovanni. Sheryl “Laura Palmer” Lee is terrific as Katrina, a prostitute bitten by Valek and who thus shares a telepathic link to him like Mina Harker in the novel Dracula.
Jack and his team try to stop Jan Valek and other vampires from obtaining the Black Cross, a relic which can be used to make vampires immune to sunlight.
Yes, parts of the story are derivative, but Vampires is more than worth watching for James Woods’ quirky take on a traditional action hero role and, since it’s rated R, for the blood, gore and other special effects, which are NOT done with CGI.
FOR MY REVIEW OF MY TOP HERSCHELL GORDON LEWIS HORROR FILMS CLICK HERE.
Balladeer's Blog 
💯
Thank you!
Well…I like it
So do I!
Fun, underrated movie.
Yes it is!
We saw this movie in the theatre and shockingly enough my wife enjoyed it despite the blood. (She liked the plot twist at the end.) James Woods did utterly dominate the screen but his priest sidekick was also quite good. Some time after seeing the movie I read the book on which it was based (“Vampire$”) and MAN was it different …
Wow! How was it different?
Oh geez, in so many ways! I read “Vampire$” a long time ago so I may be missing something. Spoilers follow (obviously) … So for one thing, there was a major character in the book, Felix, a gunslinger, who wasn’t even in the movie. In fact I would say Felix turned out to be the main character of the book, not Jack. In the book, Jack’s main sidekick is named Cherry Cat and does not get bitten. Also, in the book, the Cardinal is not trying to cut a deal with the vampires to avoid dying from cancer. Finally … Did I mention spoilers??? … the book ends with a vampire attack on Jack’s office (yes, in the book, Jack has an office) which does NOT go well for the heroes. A bunch of Jack’s office staff are killed (yes, in the book, Jack also has office staff) after which Jack himself essentially commits suicide by vampire, and at the very end, a now-vampirized Jack attacks THE POPE, who, as it turns out, can destroy vampires just by touching them. So that doesn’t go well for Vampire Jack. After that Felix takes over the Vatican’s vampire-hunting team. So, yeah. Aside from the “Vatican-Authorized Vampire Hunting Team”, they’re not really the same at all.
Anyway, I liked both, but I liked the movie more, which is not something I say very often for movies based on books. A lot of that has to do with James Woods of course! 😁
Holy cow! Those are major differences, like you said. Thanks for the break down on that!
I’m addicted to horror but have never seen this. CGI ain’t scary, ever. Just give me real people and objects. And preferably film, not digital.
I feel the same way!