It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

MUST BE TWILIGHT PREQUEL as both stories contain feuding vampires and bad actors. Why do vampires only go after chicks that look like Denise Richards? Seems to me a fat chick would be easier to bag and would contain a few extra more days of blood. In this movie the bad vampire rips open the girl's top before he bites her neck, whereas the good vampire allows the victim to remove it. I also noticed the bad vampire got to sleep with two topless chicks. They didn't have sex, it was I bite you, you bite me, fake an orgasm then roll over and go to sleep. I guess when you get to be a few hundred years old, women don't expect too much. As far as movie ratings go, if you were to take away the nudity, subtract a star.This feature is also available as a William Shatner Fright Night DVD and as part of an 8-pack (recommended) Echo Bridge collection "The Midnight Horror Collection."

"Vampire Journals" pulls off a neat trick - it's elegant and trashy at the same time. The opening credits set the scene nicely with images of snow-covered tombs and statues, accompanied by a lovely Gothic theme. Then we get the first scene, which features an in-your-face exposed breast and a gory beheading. That's what I mean by elegance and trash going hand-in-hand.Thankfully, the film's tacky excesses don't detract too much from what is, on the whole, a superior example of horror. It's a low-budget enterprise, of course, but I'm impressed by how lavish it is. The Romanian locations are beautiful, and perfectly lit - the film's "look," as director Ted Nicolau puts it in the making-of special, is like that of an old painting. The special effects are sparse but effective; I admire the nifty "shadow" trick used for the vampires' teleportation, and they decay into dust by means of decent CGI.The cast is another pretty strong point. Jonathon Morris is a standout as Ash, the decadent vampire master. On a first viewing, I thought David Gunn's Zachery a bit weak, but now I don't mind him; he's almost laughably sincere, but that's pretty much what the part demands.The film hits a lull in the second act, when the action is confined to Ash's lair. There's also a bit too much sadism on display for my liking; in scene after scene, attractive semi-nude girls get their various limbs chomped on by Ash and his minions. It's repetitive and somewhat gross. Frankly, I enjoy Ted Nicolau's "Subspecies" films more, even if they aren't as well made. Radu and Mummy camping it up like loons is closer to my idea of entertainment than watching a nice character like Sophia suffer at length in a vampire brothel.That said, this is very well done. The sad piano music alone puts "Vampire Journals" above par for the genre. But, if you're looking for so-bad-it's-funny horror, steer clear; this is a most serious effort. Probably too serious for its own good, but I do appreciate any film that treats vampires with respect.

I have seen a lot of vampire flicks in my day. This was on the edge of being a good story. I love the Victorian flair of the inside of the mansion, the four poster beds, etc. That's apparently where the budget ended.The master vampire, Ash is the only real actor in the film. His lines are delivered believably. The only time our hero, Zachary actually acts is when Sofia catches him drinking blood from the psychofant and screams her name and throws himself at the door. The one thing that really brought the film down a notch was the deadpan monologue from Zachary. It was clumsily read, with no feeling, no passion. Granted, Zach was a depressed vampire.. but you can be passionately depressed.I think it would have been better to have had a third party read the monologue. Perhaps someone found the 'Vampire Journal' and was reading it... with a bit more pizzaz than it's writer.Watch the film, rescue the elements that are good and marvel at them. There is some good camera work, their corpses reconstituting themselves every evening was a nice touch, knowing the master was a once a vampire hunter... nice.

...and I've seen some pretty bad ones ! Bad acting, annoying music, ridiculous dialogues, boring plot, awfully slow, really laughable when it's supposed to be scary and the list could go on and on. I don't know which character I disliked the most: Zachary is so whiny he makes "Interview With The Vampire"'s Louis look like a happy-go-lucky guy and Ash must be the cheesiest movie vampire ever.I'm a big fan of vampire movies and this is the only one I truly disliked from beginning to end. I kept watching it just to see how bad it could get.