Subspecies

As a major horror fan, for some reason, vampire flicks never really appealed to me entirely. I may enjoy the old classics from time to time, like, Tod Browning's "Dracula" (1931) or "Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens" (1922), but that is mostly because I enjoy the old cinematographic style and the declamatory acting. However, I grew up in a time where vampires were mostly portrayed as cool, elegant, interesting, charismatic, sexy and even fun. Not necessarily a bad thing per se, but I feel that this new wave of vampires tends to draw away from the horror genre and leans towards a more approachable, romantic and even comedic tone. Of course, vampires have been always described as charming and captivating to a certain degree, and while many films succeed in making them attractive, they fail to portray them as remotely scary (because they don't even try). In "Subspecies", Charles Band (who wrote it) and Ted Nicolau (who directed it) give us two very different types of vampires in the same film, cleverly aiming to a broader audience: on the one hand, we have Stefan, a vampire that is not at all intimidating and, on the contrary, is portrayed as sweet, loving, delicate and, as one would expect, very good looking. On the other hand, we have Radu... ah, the unapologetic, depraved Radu, with his beast-like features, the gigantic claws, drooling blood and craving for power throughout the entire film. See? Everyone can be happy and, even though the film mostly focuses on the kind-hearted Stefan, Radu surreptitiously steals his place in the later installments, where he becomes the main attraction. And trust me, while Stefan is a necessary character for the story, his presence is probably more appealing to "Twilight" fans, rather than real horror lovers.

In "Subspecies", the story opens in a Romanian castle, with an intense confrontation between Radu, a horribly grotesque vampire and his father, King Vladislav (portrayed by Angus Scrimm from the "Phantasm" franchise). Ra...

Transylvanian castles, torches, villages, superstitious locals and… vampires

Two college gals meet their friend in Romania to study the region’s culture and folklore (Laura Tate, Michelle McBride and Irina Movila). They are forced to reside at an ancient fortress due to a busy festival wherein they meet a handsome man researching nocturnal creatures (Michael Watson). Unfortunately, an evil vampire is on the loose at a nearby castle and takes interest in the women (Anders Hove).

"Subspecies” (1991) is gothic horror in the modern-day that’s similar to Dracula flicks, just with a different antagonist. It was the first American film to be shot in Romania after the breakdown of the Iron Curtain. Romania, incidentally, was the sole country in Eastern Europe to overthrow its socialist government with violence.

Beating “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” to the theaters by over a year, “Subspecies” is like a low budget take on similar vampire happenings in Transylvania, except that Coppola’s flick was shot in the studio in Los Angeles whereas this one used actual ancient ruins, castles and woodland areas of Romania. In short, this is a great Gothic flick for authentic Carpathian atmosphere.

The setting, ambiance and festival are similar to “Howling II: Your Sister Is a Werewolf” (1985), which was shot in the Czech Republic, minus the campy humor. This one’s totally serious and the revolting vampire is like a meshing of “Nosferatu” (1922/1979) mixed with Marvel’s Morbius.

As far as the women go, Irina Movila stands out as Mara. Meanwhile main protagonist Laura Tate as Michelle is reminiscent of Nastassja Kinski, albeit nowhere near as stimulating. There are tasteful bits of top nudity, but zero sleaze; just a heads up.

The colorful stop-motion puppet-effects are quaint and kinda cheesy. Just roll with ’em.

There would be three sequels in the next seven years, plus one spin-off flick.

The film runs 1 hour, 24 minutes, and was shot entirely in Romania, incl...