I dont get why it got bad ratings ?
I think it was kind of cute .........:) Just watched it and it wasn't perfect but it was really bad . I liked it :)
shareFrom a reader's standpoint: Because it didn't follow the book correctly, was more of a parody rather than treated more seriously like the book and way too rushed.
From a movie goer's standpoint: Because of bad acting, terrible script, cheap effects and pretty much being cliche.
But mostly because the Vampire craze is over and people will bash it moreso.
I would always rather be happy than dignified.
on a scale between Twilight and blade where does this film stand?
Dear Eminem, Not only did you steal our name but we 're both black on the inside too
M&Ms
Frankly, I think this replaces Twilight on that scale. Even the worst Twilight movie is still better than this.
I would always rather be happy than dignified.
Thank you FatalxKrystal I definitely will not be watching this. I hate these teen vampire movies.
Vampires were born from Vlad the impaler aka Dracula not from Casanova.
Dear Eminem, Not only did you steal our name but we 're both black on the inside too
M&Ms
Do not listen to haters. Vampire academy has a nice mythology, the author was inspired by eastern european folklore. Yes this movie has teens in it but it's not cheesy at all, not soppy, vamps do not sparkle (if I remember correctly this is one of the 1st things Rose says when the movie starts)... There are 2 types of vampires in VA, Moiroi and Strigoi, and both are from Romanian folklore.
The movie also has a lot of humour. Most people who hate it are just bashing it because they bash all films they think are related to Twilight. Probably think it makes them look smart.
If you like fantasy with humour and aren't expecting something very deep (this corresponds to the 1st book out of 6 so the story isn't that well developed yet), watch Vampire Academy. Did you like Buffy? If so I'd say you'll like this movie. Lots of common points.
Becateuse it didn't follow the book correctly, was more of a parody rather than treated more seriously like the book and way too rushed.
I agree with this for the most part. I thought the movie did follow the book quite closely, but that was also why the movie failed to impress even most of the book fans. Trying to be true to the book means nothing when the movie is horribly edited.
I know I'm a vampire, Snookie. share
I disagree. Yes, they did follow the gist of the story but there was pointless filler and changes throughout, especially making the whole Ms. Karp thing a bigger mystery plot than it needed to be. The editing was downright horrendous, regardless and I'm honestly surprised that they actually kept some of the scenes they filmed, The scenes when Rose tried to overthrow Dimitri were so fake, I don't know how anyone could think they were even remotely good shots.
I would always rather be happy than dignified.
Yeah, it sounds like we're pretty much agreeing with each other. I was impressed with how much they tried to tried to make the movie like the first book, but ultimately their efforts in that regard didn't matter. The movie suffered from horrible editing and it looked too low-budget for an action movie which probably explains why some of the scenes looked fake like you said. I don't think I've ever been so disappointed in a movie as I was when I watched this at the theater.
I know I'm a vampire, Snookie.