The Vampire Film: From Nosferatu to True Blood (Limelight)
Category: Books,Humor & Entertainment,Movies
The Vampire Film: From Nosferatu to True Blood (Limelight) Details
Review [Silver and Ursini] know how to write about movies... this book must be considered essential reading for the devotee of fantasy film. --Robert C. Cumbow, Movietone News Read more From the Author This newest edition of The Vampire Film, now called The Vampire Film from Nosferatu to True Blood, has been updated and the typos from the earlier edition corrected. Professor Lampley, who wrote a review of the earlier edition (The Vampire Film from Nosferatu to Twilight) was of great help in correcting those typos. Read more See all Editorial Reviews
Reviews
I had been waiting years for this fourth printing. The 3rd edition helped me survey the older films, but I was itching to see a listing and discussion of newer works such as Underworld. I am mostly satisfied with the results, but I do have a couple suggestions re: areas for improvement.The chapters include: Sources of Vampire Lore in Film, The Male Vampire, The Female Vampire, Dracula A.D. 1992, Countess Dracula A.D. 1992, Stylistic Variations, The Vampire at the Millennium, and Vampiress Rising. This is followed by a hundred-page Filmography.The authors state in the beginning: "The cost, the aims of the filmmakers, the color of a vampire's eyes--none of these are criteria for us as film critics." Sounds good. They go on to say, "Free of the constraints of merely appending to the existing text, we have been permitted to reposition, reillustrate in full color, and reconsider as we see fit." Right on!However, they also state that "we have allocated space to little-known titles that evidence a novel approach over lengthier discussions of accepted classics." If only this were true, it would be a 5-star book. How about less on Bram Stoker's Dracula, and more on the BBC's 5-series "Being Human," which was highly original and spoke volumes about the contemporary vampire, despite Mitchell being only 1 of the 3 supernatural protagonists. I realize that it's a subjective topic, but I feel the authors missed the mark on pointing out some of the newer masterpieces.PROs✔ Comprehensive in scope✔ Impressive selection of movie posters, stills from films, and other fitting images✔ At times provides valuable insight into certain works✔ Much appreciated that the book isn't confined to cinema, as television has been the source of some of best vampire stories in the past 15 years or soCONs✘ In an age where you can go online and find out the plot summary for just about anything, I'd rather have discussion of allegory, social commentary, etc. than a plot summary✘ The scholarly approach is inconsistent (I'd prefer more analysis and less simple spoiling of the film)✘ There's more than enough about the Twilight saga, yet the outstanding 5-season Angel gets one anemic paragraph and isn't even in the index of the book? (at least "Boreanaz" is)✘ How about more than a paragraph about the 3-season Forever Knight, which established methodology used by subsequent vampire TV serials, including the contextual motif of flashbacks to previous centuries. While Forever Knight is not good television by today's standards, subsequent shows (like Angel) borrowed from or paid homage to Forever Knight, e.g., is it a coincidence that Nick Knight, Angel, and Mick (Moonlight) all chose to drive convertibles?Overall, I am grateful that they put out the 4th addition, and I'm quite glad it's on my bookshelf next to the 3rd ed.
