Vampires

A

Anonymous

Guest
#1
:confused: I'm a bit confused on the subject of vampires. I mean, I've read some things and half of them say that (1) vampires are not affected by crosses and holy water (2) if they go into the sun they wont start to really burn as in on fire burn for about three hours in the sun (3) that they have assistants that are half vampires (4) they do have reflections but you cant get a good photo (5) they can be killed other than stakes throught the heart, like bullets and (6) they aren't immortal, but full vampires age a 1/10 the human rate and their assistants age at 1/5 the human rate. The other half says the normal vampire stuff, stakes, sunlight, crosses and holy water, knots and grain, that sorta thing. And also what about the face issue? I mean I believe they probly could exist because I believe that all things are possible.
 

SmirnoffMule

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
448
Likes
9
Points
49
#2
I think the simple answer is that vampires are so widely and variously used by so many different traditional worldwide, that there's no one thing than can be said to be true of vampires the world over.
Our western idea of vampires is mostly influenced by Bram Stoker's Dracula: From him sprang Anne Rice novels and Buffy and all our modern images of vampires. And of course, vampires are widely used in fiction, and writers of fiction happily twist folklore to suit their plotlines.
Most of the things you listed are probably thought true in one culture, but not in another.

I'm sure there's some very good books about global vampire beliefs, and someone else can recommend one, because it's not my particular area of expertise :)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#4
Psychic vampires are the only life suckers out there! Whilst the romanticism of the Hammer-type vampires is atmospheric, I think more time should be spent studying astral forms which are able to draw energy. Some have connected such spectres to the 'old hag' syndrome although science will have us believe that mere sleep paralysis is the explanation, although many people have been 'drawn' whilst awake!
As always, it comes down to the cultures, who depict these forms in their own monstrous ways. It is a bit daft to believe in the undead rising from tombs, but for me psychic forms will exist as wisps of energy which is why many vampire films show the blood-suckers as swirling mists able to creep under doors etc. And I think we all like to think we can repell these 'demons' whether by way of crucifix, prayer, holy water, silver bullet etc.
Read Kostantinoc VAMPIRES:OCCULT TRUTH for true astral horror!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#6
Yeah, what we know of vampires from Hollywood is just mixing and matching different beleifs. I beleive the whole killing them with silver was a Latvian belief and some other culture must of had a killing them by shooting them through the heart and somewhere along the line it got changed into killing them with a silver bullet through the heart.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#7
Vampire clinic is open

Chrestomanci said:
:confused: I'm a bit confused on the subject of vampires. I mean, I've read some things and half of them say that...
If you get hold of a vampire, you can verify the following:

(1) False. Some of them burst into tears and start going on and on about what a rotten time they had when they were at Catholic school.

(2) Depends on their sunscreen.

(3) True. The other half are Armenians.

(4) (a) True. They each carry around a little spiral bound notebook in which they jot them down. (b) True. They insist on pulling faces.

(5) Woodchippers. How many live vampires do you see in "Fargo"? That's right.

(6) False. But after they turn 35, they will drop the odd year, especially at parties.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#8
I like Buffy cus I find it a laugh. The Anne Rice books, well, I tried to read them, but I found them dull, boring, maudlin, and just plain bad. Each to their own. I watched a Biography Channel programme about her last night, which just confirmed my opinion, although she has had some terrible misfortune. It did lead me to wonder whether vampires, like faeries, are pretty much a 'personal' thing these days, hence why some saddos think they all look like the ones in Buffy, and some think it's all Louis and Lestat. Personally, I'm a little old fashioned in my views of vampires.

Anyway, traditionally, IIRC, vampires can't cross running water; don't cast a shadow; are rather boring demonic entities, pretty much like Hollywood zombies; all the 'cross hating, see sunlight and burn' stuff; far more like Nosferatu than Christopher Lee; are hypnotic; only come in when invited - you know, all the usual stuff. Which leads you to wonder what's so interesting about them at all when there's so much they can't do.

Which leads me to another, patently obvious, question - if vampires are repelled by crosses and consecrated stuff, why do they rise from graves? I mean, surely the crosses, holy water sprinkling, hallowed ground stuff would be enough to keep the buggers down:(

Mind you, that would make for the world's shortest horror film. Vamp rises from grave - vamp sees cross above own grave - vamp mutters 'bugger' between pointy teeth - vamp crawls back beneath soil and promptly starves to undeath. The End.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#9
Chrestomanci, you,ve been reading those Darren Shan books havent you. My nephew read out those passages from his copy so don't claim the credit for coming up with that.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#10
my take on vampires is that they are etheric beings, not physical ones like buffy. they attack people at night, and look like dark shadows, but they are very strong and have red eyes. they cant cross running water as that is an etheric eraser as well as sunlight. i suppose that is what i believe in. i think this is what most occultists believe vampires to really be, but im unsure.


xander
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#11
The Thing, I'm not "claiming the credit" for that I said I had read some things I just wondered what other people thought on the subject of vampires
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#12
i was always under the impression that traditional vampires where more like zombies that drunk human blood more so than that of a charming man from romania that seduces girls and shags them then kills them.
Perhaps theree is a link between zombies and vampires. Has anyone ever seen the picture of that guy from jamaca or some place that was suppost to be a zombie? if he wasnt he sure was messed up, perhaps a medical condition could explain him also. I have heard cases of dead people moving around and even sitting up after they have passed on.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#14
Slight tangent here, but has anyone seen Blade II yet? I loved the original Blade, so I'm looking forward to seeing this.

Back on track for a sec, yep, traditionally vamps were mindless undead in search of blood. Nothing remotely pleasant about it at all.

Don't forget Samuel Taylor Coleridge Christabel. Isn't that about a vampire?
 

JamesWhitehead

Piffle Prospector
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
12,140
Likes
8,884
Points
309
#15
Christabel is a teasing fragment and the lady of that name is certainly
a Gothic type, though I don't think she literally sucks anyone's neck.

If she did, it would be a female one, for she is usually regarded
as a touch Sapphic in her preferences! :eek:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#16
James Whitehead said:
Christabel is a teasing fragment and the lady of that name is certainly
a Gothic type, though I don't think she literally sucks anyone's neck.

If she did, it would be a female one, for she is usually regarded
as a touch Sapphic in her preferences! :eek:
My personal interpretation was that she drew on the daughter's life force, but as Sapphic is a word I am not familiar with, and which doesn't appear in my dictionaries, I shall draw my own conclusions and agree with you:) Whatisface the minstrel should have been allowed to sing at her.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#19
Helen said:
Slight tangent here, but has anyone seen Blade II yet? I loved the original Blade, so I'm looking forward to seeing this.
Blade 2 was awesome
Much better than the first one and the special effects where great, altho they were a bit dodgy in one scene, the scene where blade fights the girl ninja type vampire. The effects put me in mind of the jason and the argonaughts claymation.
Apart from that one scene it was good. Ive seen it twice.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#21
The original Blade was better, Helen.
Blade 2 was a sloppy attempt to make the first more meaningful,to make more money for the producers,and for the fans.

I found the first richly original in it's design and meaning as well as the concepts introduced.
The second was a sham,tyring to perpetuate the sucess of the first,disembowling the authenticity of the original in it's own grasping attempts for reconstruction.

They tried to stand on top of what they had already built to drag the money from fans pockets,trying to capitialize on a whimsical sensation. They ursurped the original clumsily when they fumbled in the dark, trying to recreate a masterpiece.

And for what?
For they money and the ratings, for fame and the one in one hundred chance that they could make in a moment of planned enterprise what had only been before a heartfelt dream of someone's imagination-created strikingly ingenous in its brilliance.

You can't plan chance,the chance that the second would be likened unto the first.
Inspiration cannot be recreated.It is not a conveinent money tree.

The second is a hopless failure.
I found it sickening.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#22
I disagree, anyone who just wants to be entertained by a movie about vampires with lots of fighting and special effects will be happy with this movie, the story line was cool (lets not forget that the movie is based on a comic book!). I also wouldnt go as far to say that Blade was a masterpiece!! its just a movie about vampires! god! get a grip

I found the first richly original in it's design and meaning as well as the concepts introduced.
Ok its a vampire movie! original? no i dont think so. What concepts where original? what the silver bullets? yeah id never heard that before also id hardly say a movie based on a comic is original

They tried to stand on top of what they had already built to drag the money from fans pockets,trying to capitialize on a whimsical sensation.
This is how you usually make a sequal, you build on what has already been shown, what did u expect? A totally different concept and story line? you should of went to see in the bedroom instead. Also was the whimsical sensation they tried to capitialize on the originality of the first movie?

to make more money for the producers,and for the fans.
please explain to me how it would make more money for the fans? when i went to see it with my girlfriend it cost me 25 bucks for 2 tickets and drinks, should i have stayed behind afterwards and got a refund or something?
Yes blade 2 was made just for money but then again what movies arent? It cost lots to make this movie and obviously they want to profit from the work that went into it, the film crew dont put themselves thru that for the fun of it

Helen, go see the movie youll love it! aslong as your not a movie critic that is obviously expecting something that your never going to get youll have a great time. Let me know what you thought.

TM
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#23
Tang, you're my boy and all, but I've gotta disagree with you on the Blade stuff. I think the first film was fresh because it drew on so many different genres (chop-sockey, horror, and blacksploitation), it came out as an interestingly crafted amalgam. Plus, it had Tracy Lords and that dude from The Tao of Steve.

I also think an attempt to follow a formula comes off lame. For intance, look at Star Wars, Episode One: The Phantom Menace. A poor boy from Tatooine (Luke/Anakin) with zilch training saves the day. A beautiful royal in distress (Leia/Amidala). An older Jedi trying to aid the girl finds the boy (Obi-Wan [Alec Guiness]/Qui-Gon). Adorable alien sidekick (Chewbacca/Jar-Jar :(). Smart ass hunk (Han Solo/Obi-Wan [Ewan McGregor]) looks after the kid after the mentor dies. Senator Palpatine (later Emperor Palpatine) has his personal hit man (Maul/Vader) after the girl. And the beat goes on....

The original Blade might've well been he best comic movie ever made, IMHO. Of course, Billy Zane's version of The Phantom was practically so true to the source, the film was redundant. Liked it, anyway.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#24
Torgos, How dare you disagree with me! we are no longer friends :rolleyes: heh The way you compare the 2 starwars films is true but the same could be said with blade and batman, blade is batman, whistler is alfred, the vampires are the crooks with the striped t-shirts and deacon frost is cat woman, I just wished Tracy Lords made a more familiar appearance in the film :D . Yes there are differences but the same goes with the two star wars movies, jar jar and chewie? r u mad?
Im not saying i didnt like blade, i actually bought the DVD, all im saying is id hardly call it a classic or breakthru in cinematography. Same goes with Blade 2, its a good movie aslong as your looking for a fun action filled science ficton movie and your not going to read into it too much. If everyone in the world thought that way we would never of had such films as Robocop 2, Critters 2 and the amazing friday the 13ths movies lol

You seen Blade 2 yet Torgos? I have it on vcd, let me know if u want it and ill send u it snail mail
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#25
Just to take this thread back ontopic a little, I can recommend Montague Summers' "The Vampire" to anyone who is interested in the subject. I don't know whether it is an entirely accurate treatise, but it does contain such interesting factoids as these:

- in the 1850s there were young women in the asylums in Paris who were convinced they were vampires (there you are you see, it's been around for ages!)

- if you are attempting to stake a vampire you must transfix it with a single blow, because the second stroke of the hammer will restore it to life (I've never seen this idea anywhere else, but if true it should probably be more widely publicised!)

There is much more intriguing material in there, and Summers also recommends a selection of other books which I have yet to track down but some of which sound very intriguing. Unfortunately the age of the book is such that many of the texts he references are now long out of print, some of them indeed being several hundred years old. I'll keep trying though!

PS Anyone know whether "Varney the Vampire" has ever been reprinted?


Cheers,
Razorwire
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#26
there's a lot of kids that aren't exactly -defaming- the vampire name, but merely use it to fit their lifestyle of clinging to self-delusions that they are in fact the realism of vampire. if vampires do exist, personally i believe they're not as appealing to become as the hollywood types.
but i'm sure some idiot goth has tried to sell his soul to some foul force to inherit the gene. who knows?
if you want to know what a vampire is, look it up in the dictionary. it provides a reasonable explaination. i've been into vampires a great deal of my life, and seen some weird things in my time..
but those gothic people -really- get on my nerves with their jabber about being 'real vampires'
for a good laugh you might want to check out
http://www.sanguinarius.com
and scroll down to ' vampire support page '.



I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#27
AW SHIT AW SHIT!!

AUUUUUUGHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I want to slap myself.

I had the title confused with Highlander!!!!

G'AK!!!!!!

I WANT TO POUND MY HEAD-INTO-THE-WALL.

WHAT A STUPID MISTAKE!!!!

Oh.....I have been so very very stupid.

Don't look at me.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#28
Highlander,Aliant?

Highlander?

Wow you feel awful strong about a MOVIE!
Gosh--buddy get a life.
I know you brought me here and all but that doesn't mean I have to suck up.

You-watch-too-much-tv-!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#29
Tang, I've gotta confess I haven't seen Blade 2 yet; however, I've never found experience a prerequisite to comment. You know I'm fully capable of mouthing off about things I know nothing about. :)

And you're right about Chewie being much cooler than Jar-Jar; still, it fits with the alien sidekick profile. I've heard this next film is going to be much better, so let's keep our fingers crossed.

Have you seen Shadow of the Vampire with Willem DeFoe and John Malkovitch? If so, what'd you think? It portrayed a "what if?" real-life Nosferatu pretty interestingly. Funny, too.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#30
Blade -v- Highlander

Suddenly, all your comments make sense, Aliant! Mind you, I still liked Highlander II. Just my blind optimism, and a basic desire for Christopher Lambert.:D
 
Top