Finished _Midnight Mass_ last night (cuz I'm impatient and couldn't wait for the Cemetery Dance copy). Excellent book! It was terrific to read a vampire book that depicted the bloodsuckers the way they should be. There wasn't any "I'm so tormented and beautiful, woe is me, why don't you love me, and why can't I view the sun as the lucky mortals can" crapola. The characters were fantastic, and the ending unexpected. Thanks for another great story Paul!

Tim Hatch

There wasn't any "I'm so tormented and beautiful, woe is me, why don't you love me, and why can't I view the sun as the lucky mortals can" crapola.

This is the problem with Bram Stoker's Dracula the movie: "I just want to be loved. I'm not such a bad guy, just misunderstood." Whatever!!! Gimme Bad-Ass M.F. vampires any day. (though Golden's Shadow saga is still pretty good)

I may be wrong here but isn't Bram Stoker sort of the father of the current vampire mythos? It was always my impression that dracula (and vampires in general) were originally written as much more erotic creatures. Am I mistaken?

I may be wrong here but isn't Bram Stoker sort of the father of the current vampire mythos? It was always my impression that dracula (and vampires in general) were originally written as much more erotic creatures. Am I mistaken?

JimBow was referring to the Coppola movie, which romantized the Dracula figure, something the Stoker novel DIDN'T do. The movie blurred the lines of good and evil (look at Van Helsing and is cohorts in that one) which many filmmakers like to think of as a novel twist I guess...but its not, really. Another example of this is a comparison of CAPE FEAR and it's remake......same problem, blurring the lines and it really made what could have been a very good film a pretty muddled and distasteful one.

JimBow was refering to the Coppola movie, which romantized the Dracula figure, something the Stoker novel DIDN'T do. The movie blurred the lines of good and evil (look at Van Helsing and is cohorts in that one) which many filmmakers like to think of as a novel twist I guess...but its not, really. Another example of this is a comparison of CAPE FEAR and it's remake......same problem, blurring the lines and it really made what could have been a very good film a pretty muddled and distasteful one.

Yes, I was referring to the way the movie romanticized Dracula. And Van Helsing in the movie was horrible. They tried to imply that he may be a vampire (or vampire-like). That movie had such GREAT potential and fell so short. The visuals are stunning and the soundtrack is phenomenal. All of these things contribute to me wanting to love that movie so much (I keep watching it every once in a while) and yet finding myself so disappointed.

But Jim it had keeanu reeves in it (excellent) i mean that just ruined it especially seeing as how he couldnt act his way out of a paper bag. And also u better still like the Shadow Saga or i will have to beat ya because that series just plain kicks a$$.

ALowerDeep

But Jim it had keeanu reeves in it (excellent) i mean that just ruined it especially seeing as how he couldnt act his way out of a paper bag.
ALowerDeep

Yeah, but you expect Keanu Reeves to suck going into it. You don't expect Anthony Hopkins to suck, which is why it was such a travesty. Like the book, Quincy Morris stole the show. (well, besides Gary Oldman - who is awesome).

And did anyone notice? What's with the "We're gonna go cut off their head" joke? I think AH says that about 10 times in the movie. It may have been funny the first time......

I just started "Midnight Mass" and I read the opening comments about vampires and vampire novels, and I had to stick up for the only novel I have read about vampires that I actually liked...

Vampire$...

The vampires are not romantic. They kill you. You know you will die if you fight them, because they are powerful, strong, and fast. You don't fight them for the money, but you do get paid. And the Pope does know what you're doing...

...but you're still going to die.

Vampire$, by John Steakley

I just started "Midnight Mass" and I read the opening comments about vampires and vampire novels, and I had to stick up for the only novel I have read about vampires that I actually liked...

Vampire$, by John Steakley

Vampire$ was good (better than the movie) but an anomaly -- which is probably why Carpenter wanted to film it. I understand Steakley was on the set a lot but not in any condition to influence the film (if you know what I'm saying and I think you do).