The Special Effects broke my heart
And my eyes. Good lord in 2012...they were awful! When Sigourney got her head lopped off and then the skeleton scene...gah no! Bleach!
http://twitter.com/#!/TilderAsgrave
http://flamingpurdies.blogspot.com/
And my eyes. Good lord in 2012...they were awful! When Sigourney got her head lopped off and then the skeleton scene...gah no! Bleach!
http://twitter.com/#!/TilderAsgrave
http://flamingpurdies.blogspot.com/
Oh God yes. The worst was when Ritter was crawling down the wall and mouths "call me" to her boyfriend. Yikes. I've honestly seen more convincing SFX in films from the 70's...
shareI don't think you guys get it. Its supposed to look the way they did things back in the olden days of cinema. Remember all the references and intercut scenes of the old silent movies and such. The bodies look stop motion and the heads were stuck on with CGI.
if it was intentional, which i can believe, it was a very foolish choice, because it detracts from the film. not that the film was doing great to beign with, but really, it couldn't afford the negative points for jarringly bad sfx, even if it was intentional
shareI agree. But all the special effects were crap. Even when their mouths opened wide it looks rubbish. But a 16 milion dollar budget??? Come off it. I honestly could have done better in adobe after effets. Just saying :-)
shareI thought it added rather than retracted lol. I thought it was pretty hilarious how bad the CGI was! I agree with you that it was an intentional thing.
-----
"I'm worth twelve of you, Malfoy" - Neville Longbottom
Yea and it was really funny when Kristen Ritters body was clearly stop motion runnung down the wall (and that part was taken straight out of Dracula) then she turns her head and does the call me thing. That really made me laugh it was so meant to look that way and if people didn't get it they should see more Vampire things then rewatch this movie.
I too thought they added to the film! The cheesy effects were great, I wouldn't have it any other way for this particular movie.
shareOh, I got it! It was a terrible film with terrible effects. Was the writing intentionally bad, too, as some kind of allusive technique? Was the acting woeful as a callback to bad acting of the past? Don't try to justify this turd, it is worth no one's time.
shareYeah the effects in the movie were pretty bad. Heck this whole movie was bad.
Gimbos The Name & Horror Is My Thing!
so the name Vamps or the trailer didn't tell you this was going to be an 80's B movie tribute?
i think some of you in this thread have the wrong impression what this movie was suppose to be parodying. i'm amazed when you still don't realize it after that jacket with the huge shoulderpads on Ritter was shown on screen.
--anti-dubber.
Thank you
shareI think the bad effects were intentional.
MovieKid100's mom is a prostitute. One Direction sucks. You're Next failed. What else is new?
Some of the CGI was not too good, whilst other special effects looked to have paid homage to Ray Harryhausen.
Its that man again!!
That some what cheesy effects help the movie
share