MovieChat Forums > Near Dark (1988) Discussion > I really wanted to like this movie...

I really wanted to like this movie...

posted 15 years ago by collins0302
16 replies | jump to latest

I didnt come hear to be a troll but its just that I rewatched this movie with friends and I hadnt seen it in like 10 years. I realized the movie was kind of a mess. It had little to no character development and slow pacing. The editing was also poor but the cinema tography was impressive. I liked the whole concept and believed it had potential but it just didnt live up to what I remembered. Im sure im in the minority in this opinion.

Well, you seen much combat?

Ive seen a little on TV.

[–] Phrosty 15 years ago

I feel virtually the exact same. I really wanted to be like, "Z0Mg! This film iz awesomesauce!" The basic premise of the vampires was a great idea. No fangs. No cheesy transformations. Live as nomadic derelicts. Plus Bill Paxton and Lance Henriksen's parts were amazing. Alas, poor (as you stated) character development, editing, soundtrack, director, and the horrible garbage of an ending killed it for me. I agree, it had potential; it just needed a few rewrites, a few actor replacements, and a more visionary director. I'm not trying to get anyone riled up, I just don't think this is anywhere as good as some people seem to think it is. At least it's better than Twilight, but then again, what isn't.

Favourite vampire films: Shadow of the Vampire, Interview with the Vampire, Blade, 30 Days of Night, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Fright Night, Perfect Creature, Salem's Lot.

No trees were killed via this post, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

[–] crazyivanova 15 years ago

Since neither of you came across trollish and both raised valid points and because I also like some of the movies on your list I feel like I can voice my disagreement with you in the same spirit.

The movie had its problems but overall I really enjoyed it. I felt the slower pace gave a perfect atmosphere for the story. I loved the chemistry between the characters and I loved how understated everything about the movie is. The pluses far outweighed the minuses for me.

Just my $.02. :)

"I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate."

[–] collins0302 15 years ago

I felt light the making of this movie was filmed well but was ruined in the diting room. I just felt there needed more development with the characters in the beginning. Some small things did bother me like how when the sister is taken into the motel room, it is like midnight but when the dad opens the door a couple of minutes later, it is day. Plus having a cop with a sniper rifle, right next to the house?

Well, you seen much combat?

Ive seen a little on TV.

[–] crazyivanova 15 years ago

The only real problem I had with the movie was the transfusion ending. I always sort-of wanted a sequel to address that. Maybe years later when Caleb and Mae are living happily ever after something starts to change in one or both of them and maybe they even have had a child by then and s/he is born normal enough but with the onset of puberty comes some vampire tendencies. Or maybe when Loy disposes of the vampire blood he's taken from Caleb and Mae it somehow curses the ground where he throws it out.

Just a couple of thoughts.

Anyway yeah the kind of problems you mentioned were numerous but minor. They were the kind of problems I only really caught on later viewings. That only means it was good enough for me to see it multiple times. The story was solid enough and the concept was unique in vampire lore and the fact they never once mentioned the word "vampire" in a vampire movie I thought was great. The best thing about the movie, to me, was the characters.

"I can only conclude I'm paying off karma at a vastly accelerated rate."

[–] eeleyebrown 15 years ago

It's always been a classic for me. I remember seeing it at a local movie marathon in '90 and I still love it. I found it very original and despite it's few editing flaws and lack of character history, was very effective.

As for the transfusion scene, I agree it was kind of hokey. On the audio commentary, director Kathryn Bigelow says they took the transfusion scene from Bram Stoker's Dracula where a transfusion is performed for the same reason. Kind of an homage to the creator of fictional vampires.

[–] draftdubya-274-182961 11 years ago

I thought it was b grade also. When the girl came into the room it was 5am I think Jesse said 'What kind of father let their kid up at 5am'

[–] britwrit 15 years ago

It's weird. I agree with pretty much everything you've said. Yet I saw this movie a few months ago and for some reason, I remembered it being an almost classic. (Then I watched it again tonight and thought... Oh, yeah, not that good.)

Maybe the concept was just so strong, and the cinematography so striking, that all the rest falls by the wayside?

[–] zurichpoet 15 years ago

The concept held my interest; but they could have done much more with it.
Yet, I liked it as it was "in the vein" of a Southern Gothic like story; but missing the humor. Still. Good film.

[–] jleslie48 15 years ago

the plot holes/plot vehicles were just too big to ignore. the leader has been a vampire for some 150 years and every night is a near death escape? He doesn't have any better plans than day by day/ 10 minutes ahead of the law? It doesn't make sense. The man doesn't even have a decent watch.

I don't get the suicide run in the station wagon at the end, and the blood transfusion thing as previously mentioned, is just lazy writing.

I too wanted to like this movie, but it's only 75% of a movie and is sorely missing the other 25%.

[–] crazyhellboy 15 years ago

It was Kathryn Bigelow's FIRST film. Also it went up against Lost Boys with was more big budget (Warner Bros) with big stars. So it didn't really do well initially.

I shall call him Squishy and he shall be mine and he shall be my Squishy.

[–] bornskeptic 11 years ago

I thought it was pretty good and can see why it had, and still has appeal. But i personally don't get the 'cult classic' praise that other people see it as.
At the same time, if i had first seen it in the 80's when it came out...i might have been more into it. Even with all their cheesiness, bad effects, and general 80'ness...there are a lot of 80's movies i still love to this day. So i can appreciate how some people might have gotten attached to this one.

And any movie using Tangerine Dream automatically gets my attention.

[–] gargarie 10 years ago

I re-watched it recently and it did seem more flawed than I remembered. The basic plot is solid, and there are a lot of individually excellent scenes, but overall the pacing is way off and most characters end up pretty thinly drawn. In particular I think the raw elements around Homer, Caleb, Mae, and Sarah are compelling but they don't have time to develop.

I didn't understand why, in the end, Jesse and Diamondback let themselves burn up. With Homer, Severen, and Mae lost, why didn't they just cut their losses, cover up the windows of their van, seek shelter and start building a new clan? Between that and the transfusion, seemed like the film was too eager to tie up the tragedy and kill all its monsters.

[–] Drooch (5333) 4 years ago

I see it kinda like Blade Runner - a nice dark mood piece to have in the background over a spliff but doesn’t enormously grab the attention.