Vampires Suck

2009 may not have been a spectacular year in cinema, but at least Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer didn’t add to the pile of disappointment with another one of their stupid spoof movies. Unfortunately, they didn’t go away for good, and the best thing that can be said about their new film, “Vampires Suck,” is that it’s not as bad as their previous efforts. At the very least, it’s a lot more focused, using the first two “Twilight” movies as the backbone of the story, almost to the point of copyright infringement. Stephanie Meyer’s teen angst-filled universe is certainly a place that’s ripe for comedy, but Friedberg and Seltzer seem content with just throwing a bunch of lazy, half-baked jokes at the wall and praying that some of them stick.

Most of the jokes fall well short of their mark, but there are a few smirk-worthy moments thanks to stars Jenn Proske and Matt Lanter, both of whom do spot-on impressions of the actors they’re parodying. The film also has a surprisingly high production value compared to the directors’ previous work, which often looked like they were shot in someone’s backyard. But the problem with spoofing a phenomenon like “Twilight” is that only people who’ve seen the movies will understand a majority of the jokes, and they’re probably the last group that would want to watch “Vampires Suck.” It’s definitely a step forward for Friedberg and Seltzer, but it’s a small step, because the movie is still so terrible that it’s difficult to put into words. Let’s just say vampires aren’t the only thing that sucks.

Click to buy “Vampires Suck”

  

You can follow us on Twitter @moviebuffs and on Facebook as well.

Related Posts

Box office preview: “The Expendables” likely to fend of a mob led by an ugly nanny, unfunny vampires, and flesh-loving fishies

The ExpendablesIt’s very late as I start this and with five new wide releases this week, I’m not going to even attempt to try and describe all of them in any detail. In fact, I’m going to try and make this post as short as possible. Basically, the story is that the prognosticators like Ben Fritz and jolly Carl DiOrio seem to agree that last weekend’s megamacho winner, The Expendables, is the most likely winner of this week’s box office derby. That’s because none of the five movies is seen as being that strong.

Personally, as a geek who adores humorous, old school exploitation horror movies but who is also a gross-out negative gorephobe in no mood to have a bloody penis (!) thrown at me or throw-up thrown in my lap, I honestly don’t know whether to be happy or sad that the apparently rather effective “Piranha 3D” is not expected to do very well for the Weinstein Company. That’s despite what should be a successful formula of blood and breasts. It’s always worked before. The movie has been kept away from most critics but — bad sign — most of the ones who have seen it actually like it.

Expected to do better is the English family comedy sequel from Working Title, “Nanny McPhee Returns,” starring and written by the wondrous Emma Thompson as the anti-Poppins. The film, already a success overseas, is seen as having the best shot at kicking the arse of the ass-kicking “Expendables” septet, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Actually, I wouldn’t bet on anything because with so many movies out, it’s really just kind of a mess and anything can happen. I wouldn’t expect an upset, however, from the Warners “‘hood comedy” “Lottery Ticket” or the PG-13 Jason BatemanJennifer Aniston rom-com involving a “baster baby,” the aptly titled “The Switch” from possibly soon-to-be-moribund Miramax.

Jason Batemen and Jennifer Aniston in

On the other hand, there is another movie that’s actually expected to do rather well and, oh god, I have no goddamn clue why that should be. I mean, if I was eight years old, I might find the title of Fox’s spoof film “Vampires Suck” promising. However, there is an emerging and near universal consensus that, whatever stereotypes might be out there about us Jewish guys being as inherently funny as, say, Canadians, they are more than disapproved by the past work of Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer. These are the guys who foisted “Disaster Movie,” “Meet the Spartans” and “Date Movie” upon an unsuspecting world. IMDb users are not loving it too much either, although there are nine women 45 and over I really wonder about. Hmm. Both guys have to have mothers, right? That’s two. Grandmothers? Aunts? Great grandmothers? Second cousins?

“Suck” is, I’m sure, the worst reviewed major movie of our not-so-young year. Indeed, the alleged comedy was on the precipice of achieving a rare 0% on Rotten Tomatoes when a lone contrary opinion saved it and got it all the way to a mighty 3%. No, it wasn’t the nefarious and attention-hogging Armond White who found something to not hate in a spoof movie seemingly dripping in the not-funny, but newcomer Michael Ordona of the L.A. Times. Or at least Rotten Tomatoes says it was him. The actual review, at least here, has no name on it. Is somebody ashamed?

The really sad part of this story is that the suck movie was actually released on Wednesday and had a surprisingly okay first day. In theory, it could win the weekend, and that would really suck.

Stay tuned — though it’s looking like my Sunday box office report will likely be delayed to Monday. Can you stand the suspense that long? I know I can.

  

Related Posts