REVIEW: Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Picture copyright 20th Century Fox and Dune Entertainment
So, I had promised you two reviews, and this is a promise I plan on delivering on. So, to manage that I went out today, and braved the cheap-ass tickets at the local Rave, to see a piece of vampire fiction, tied loosely to the life of a man widely considered to be one of the best presidents this country ever had. And, to make the movie even MORE interesting, I spent the whole drive to the theater, following four grown men, in a tiny Mazda, with a back windshield covered in My Little Pony stickers, and a single Pedobear sticker... I was truly disturbed. Even more so, when they ended up parked next to me, and sat two rows in front of me in the theater. The sad thing is? They may have been more interesting than the film itself... Find out more, after the jump.

Four score, and seven minutes ago, I saw that into every generation a Slayer is born. But I was reminded too, that not all Slayers are created equal. While I appreciate the concept of slaying vampires, I can't much abide by this schlock.

Once again, we are "treated" to a glorious triumph of style over substance. The film offers nothing much in the lines of story, but it offers slick visuals that are almost guaranteed to win over the masses who value CG effects over a story that is worth being told. I will grant you, that there is a time and a place for mindless movies, and I have enjoyed my fair share of them, but this one was just not my cup of tea. I kid you not, at one point there was actually what seemed like a 2 minute long montage of Abe twirling an ax around... The types of filler that this film uses boggles the mind.

I will grant you, that the visuals offered up were indeed fun, the story that backed them up was just pretty lackluster. The thing that I worry about, when looking at this movie, though... was my opinion of this film swayed by my absolute love of Brave a few days prior? Would I have enjoyed this film more if I had seen it first? I don't think that would have a huge effect on my views, but I can not help but ponder these things.

I really wanted to come to you today, and sing the praises of a second good film, but in the end, this is at best, a passable summer flick, and at worst, it is a waste of money. There is plenty of fun things to see, and some effects that are simply artistic master strokes, but with no substance to support it, the style just doesn't hold up.

Recomendation: I think this would have been a pretty decent direct to disc effort. Or better yet, a decent flick to watch on Netflix, but as a film on the big screen, I think it is pretty much a horrible failure.

Is it theater-worthy: In a total break with everything I have said thus far... I'm going to say a very definite... Maybe? I think that others would be happy with it, and will appreciate the visuals. Don't waste your money on the 3D though...

Final Thoughts: The movie is fun to look at, not particularly stimulating, but in the end, it has a decent enough visceral feel to appeal to younger folk. This is one of those films that is perfect for people that wouldn't know a practical effect if it got up and punched them in the face, and think that digital is the end all of cinema.

Frank's Final Score: 6 out of 10


  1. Thank you for the warning. I will disagree with your last sentence. Digital isn't the death of cinema. Digital in the wrong hands will be the death of cinema. Ditching the DV tapes and switching to DSLR changed our goals substantially. But we are still huge fans of practical effects. Maybe it comes from having a theater background. But I believe that if you don't have a concept of how an effect should be done practically, or at least how it should look practically, you have no business doing it digitally. (Certain unrealistic scifi scenarios excluded as long as some science is there. Science!) I digress. Thanks for the heads up. I'll find my visual stimulation with a side of substance elsewhere. :)

    1. I suppose I should clarify, based on this comment. It isn't the concept of digital MEDIUMS that I think will destroy cinema, but rather the propensity for Digital Effects over practical effects. I come from a school of thought that absolutely adores the artistry of the likes of Tom Savini, Dick Smith, Rick Baker, Greg Nicotero, and even Cleve Hall. You look back at the movies of yesteryear, "Alien", "The Exorcist" and the like, and you see just how much could be done with practical effects.

      Am I saying "Down with Digital completely"? Not at all. I'm saying that CGI effects should be used to AUGMENT practical effects, not REPLACE them...

      Thanks for the comment, Amber. Although I'm shocked that this review got more hits than the Brave review. weeeeeeeird.

  2. People love negativity. Also, I shared it on Facebook. Anyway, I agree with you on all points. Especially about Savini and Nicotero. Oh, Greg. My crush on Greg Nicotero came after watching Full Tilt Boogie. Not only is he a ridiculously talented individual, he looks like he should be playing lead guitar next to Dave Mustane. Those gorgeou curly locks. Okay, I'm getting off topic. Yes, After Effects should be used as an enhancement, not in place of practical effects, or cinematography or a plot in many cases.

    1. *Mustaine. Sorry, androids and antihistamines don't mix. Sorry everyone!