The tyranist's thoughts
So you have a decent, kick-ass kind of vampire flick set in the Southwest that made a decent amount of money. Seems like the thing to do would be sequelize the hell out of it. Right? And who better than one of your own proteges to carry on the effort?
Vampire hunting has apparently become enough of a profession to attract Jon Bon Jovi to its munificent labors. A particularly juicy contract comes up and, wouldn't you know it, it involves hunting down a vampire who's after the black cross and a reverse exorcism. Well, gather up a team aging rock star, and lets kick some vampire ass.
When all is said and done, the film, which is firmly entrenched in the sub-sub-genre of the Western/Vampire flick, is pretty mediocre. The plot is pretty predictable and follows along with the first movie evenly. The acting is okay, it's too bad they couldn't get any of the actors from the first movie to return. The end of the movie is telling of how I felt about the whole thing: it was neither as sweet nor as sad as the first one. Now maybe time has made me think Vampires was a better film than it really is, but I am positive that it is a better film than this one.
Vampire lovers might like this one, although the main vampire doesn't have a line of dialogue until the last ten minutes of the movie, and Carpenter fans might find a little more of the same as what was in Vampires. They may also find less. It's always just so hard to talk about these mediocre movies. You can't praise them much and you can't knock them down to far. All you can say is that you saw it.