Alicia I love this movie so much

ThiefHott Too much of everything

Mjeteconer Just perfect...

Pluskylang Great Film overall

Other View *****Note: No Significant Spoilers. Safe to Read. "Spoilers" Claimed for CYA reasons*****I just wrote a nice, detailed review. However one of IMDb's MANY algorithms decided to dump it in its entirety as I used a repeated word to denote the end of a paragraph or maybe it just timed out. In any case I'm tired but I'll give it another shot.I won't waste words on the thick folks who, lacking sex, non-stop violence and gore in this movie, didn't "get" it and rated it poorly. There were also POSSIBLE shill reviews I found a bit too praise-heavy and dropping names like the gut remains of food poisoning. Generally, I will slam a film that contains shill reviews as they are insultingly stupid and obvious attempts to generate revenue by lying about a film so people will buy it, carrying home a real stinker to their unsuspecting family. It's FRAUD!!!! But in this ONE case, said shill BS will be ignored. Without a doubt this film had a low, low, budget. But what they accomplished with those pennies was impressive. Apparently, a good director/producer/editor can do a lot with very little! Though I have to say this film could have been a first class indie with a few more bucks. It is still very a worthwhile.This movie was unique, interesting and refreshing. The characterization was, overall, quite good. I like the lead character and cared about what happened to her. She was a convincing actress and played her character well. I didn't care for the lead male but that was obviously intended as his acting was mostly good. The lead male vampire did little acting and what he did do didn't appear up to snuff. That noted, I may have been excessively distracted by his ill-fitting suit, awful, fake and bizarrely waxed mustache and precariously perched, a too large for his smallish head, immense top-hat which looked about to flop or drop to his narrow shoulders! The poor fellow never had a chance. Hardly the tall, dark and handsome, rakish playboy he was purported to be!The actors/actresses with small roles varied from believable and good to unbelievable and bad. The owner of the diner with a largish minor role was quite good, likable and believable. The prime wino gets an honorable mention. Overall, the actors playing the police were pretty bad. They were stiff and sounded as though they were reading their lines from cue cards.The story was engrossing. The plot, while not brand new, has not been done excessively and this film gave it an unexpected twist. The female lead vampire was strangely convincing despite the odd (by then vampire standards) and notably different than expected, quirky parallel of the film's distinctiveness. Overall, the movie had quite decent production values for such a tiny budget. Photography was professional with well-framed action, close-ups and environs. Sound was clear and consistent with no background music covering the actor's dialogue. Which I admit infuriates me and will cause me to slam a picture. With today's technology, there is NO excuse for blaring background music, sound levels precariously dropping then shooting up, hurting ears and damaging speakers! Audio should be heard and not seen. Seeing my wife constantly adjusting the sound controls is a death knell for a movie! Happily, not the case here!This will not be the "movie of the year". Nonetheless, it drew me in and kept me interested and entertained. It had nice visuals like the contrast between the pastoral green and wooded rolling hills surrounding the restored red brick and painted wood old town. An unusual setting for a vampire movie which again added to the distinctive story. Watch this keeping in mind: it's extremely modest budget, the newness of the cast and production team, an apparent first or at least very early film for the director: and you will be pleasantly surprised.

a_baron This off-beat vampire film is a superior presentation. In 1897, our blonde, ill-fated damsel is put to death as a vampire. A century and more later she is accidentally resurrected by a workman, part of a crew who are doing some work for the local church. She crawls out of her grave not only covered in mud and bloodied from her execution but struck dumb (initially) and with no memory of her misfortune, nor it appears of her previous life, and of course no idea how long she has been interred. Although a vampire, she walks in the sunlight, and is, as you would be if you hadn't eaten for 111 years, ravenously hungry. As slowly she adapts to traffic, aircraft, and not least, biros, things aren't looking at all bad for her. She scavenges some clothes aided by an ability to move only slightly less quickly than the Flash, and seeks out her former residence. She might have adapted to the 21st Century perhaps even without reverting to type, but unfortunately there is a vampire hunter in close pursuit who wants to save her soul in classical fashion. That is as much as you need to know apart from the film having a decent soundtrack; suffice it to say that even allowing for the development of the film-makers' craft, Bela Lugosi comes a poor second to the feisty Caitlin McIntosh.

AlanaLO I just watched this movie the other day and I thought I should write a comment about it. It's sad that some people have decided to trash it for the sake of it instead of making a smart assessment of the movie and, most of all, praise the work of the independent filmmakers. You can thank the internet for it. A new breed of bullies has developed behind the computer's screen. It's like the new way to be a thug. A cyber-thug. In my opinion, the movie is very clever in presenting the Vampire genre from a different perspective: the female one. Tons of vampire movies are about the always dark-mysterious seductive male vampire. Not this one. Although there is a dark, seductive and sexy male vampire in Shadowland, it's the female lead who carries the torch. Many elements are similar to other vampire movies but hey! it's the same genre, right? so there should be similarities. However, shadowland gives an alternative to the otherwise always-gore-slashy vampire films. This one focuses on the humane part of the vampire. The acting was good for the most part, particularly the leads. Some of the supporting actors, in my opinion, were more theatrical and that's probably what people refer to when criticizing the acting. It's different to act on stage where actors tend to exaggerate movements, voices, gestures, etc than to act on film, and the viewers can pick on that. I once saw Meryl Streep on an interview where she said that acting on film should be like "not acting at all" because the camera multiplies all you do in front of it. The special effects were very good taking into consideration that the movie is independent and XF are very expensive. Kudos on that. The color of the film gives it a very Gothic feeling. I love that! I think the movie has great locations that blend perfectly with vampirism and gives a Gothic sense to the movie. The flashbacks are great also. Good way to explain what happened in the past. The end almost need a "to be continued..." because it's very clear that they are leaving the door open for a continuation. In summary, I liked it very much and I would recommend it to all those individuals who, like me, love the vampire world.

kevin-cr Although this movie kept me entertained to a level in which i wanted to see how far they would take it, it's not something i would consider watching again.The acting was weak at best but not so much that you couldn't watch it or turn away in disgust since it did have its moments, this will never win any awards but it is entertaining.The portrayal of vampires was indeed its weakest part considering what fiction dictates to be a correct form for vampires, you shall see what i mean if you decide to watch it, and although my rating is low, the story is sound and is defiantly worth a one time watch.