Vampires (1998)

33% of critics liked it
(42 reviews)
53% of users liked it
(51,871 ratings)

John Carpenter directed this horror-western, adapted from the novel Vampire$ by John Steakley, illuminating the pivotal figure of fearless vampire killer Jack Crow (James Woods), who lost his parents to the creatures. In a remote New Mexico location, Crow and his team, protected with chain-mail fang… More John Carpenter directed this horror-western, adapted from the novel Vampire$ by John Steakley, illuminating the pivotal figure of fearless vampire killer Jack Crow (James Woods), who lost his parents to the creatures. In a remote New Mexico location, Crow and his team, protected with chain-mail fang shields on their throats, blast away at a vampire nest, haul them out with the Jeep's winch, and then celebrate by pulling on other wenches at the Sun God Motel. Their revels are soon brought to an end by king vampire Valek (Thomas Ian Griffith), who became invulnerable after a bungled "inverse exorcism" during the 14th Century. Amid the motel mayhem, Jack escapes, along with his buddy Montoya (Daniel Baldwin) and hooker Katrina (Sheryl Lee). Since Katrina was already bitten by Valek, they use her as a decoy to locate Valek. Cardinal Alba (Maximilian Schell) sends padre Guiteau (Tim Guinee) to join Crow, who is unaware that Montoya has been bitten by Katrina. The hunt begins. Director Carpenter composed the film's music. ~ Bhob Stewart, Rovi

Rating, Runtime: R, 1 hr. 47 min.
Directed By: John Carpenter
Written By: Don Jakoby
Genres: Horror

In Theaters: Oct 30, 1998 Wide
On DVD: May 22, 2001
Studio: Columbia Pictures

Critic Reviews

Nick Schager, Lessons of Darkness
A suspense-free snark-fest desperate to turn its protagonist - vampire slayer Jack Crow (James Woods) - into a Snake Plisskin-style icon of supernatural-badass cool.
Rob Gonsalves, eFilmCritic.com
Grungy, disreputable fun -- the kind of blood-and-tequila western that can only be made nowadays when disguised as a horror movie.
Chuck O'Leary, FulvueDrive-in.com
Woods is entertaining as badass vampire hunter Jack Crow, but the meanness he exhibits toward his young priest assistant is offensive and completely unnecessary. Still, this is Carpenter's best film since the 1980s ended.
Widgett Walls, Needcoffee.com
When in the first ten minutes of the film, your so-called master slayer could be put out of business by any film geek who's seen a few horror movies, then your script has some serious issues.
James Sanford, Kalamazoo Gazette
The movie is basically one-note: A vampire is harpooned and dragged out into the daylight where the body instantly explodes into flames. Creativity in action, for sure.

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

Featured Audience Ratings

John M

John Carpenter at his best, James Woods having a ton of fun!!!
Tim S

Here's a John Carpenter movie that I hadn't seen before, and one that I found pretty enjoyable for the most part. You see I've never been a huge John Carpenter fan. Yes he's made some terrific films in a couple of different genres, but when you look at his overall… More
Here's a John Carpenter movie that I hadn't seen before, and one that I found pretty enjoyable for the most part. You see I've never been a huge John Carpenter fan. Yes he's made some terrific films in a couple of different genres, but when you look at his overall output, a lot of times it feels lazy and stinks of egotism. Hell, nearly ever movie he makes he puts his name on the title, and I don't like that at all. Vampires could have been a great abortion in the style and awfulness of Ghosts of Mars, which he made right after this one, but it isn't. It's not incredibly-well acted (other than James Woods) and it's laughably schlocky at times, but it's different and manages to actually be entertaining in spite of itself. I wouldn't call it a masterpiece or anything, but I was pleasantly surprised at how much fun it was. It's not one of Carpenter's best films, but it's decent enough that you won't be bored or angry, like I usually get watching his lower calibre movies.
AJ V

I have heard a lot of good things about this movie and people keep asking me why I hate it since I love vampire movies, so I suppose I will give it another try sometime. But for now, I will say that I hated the beginning of this movie, it's confusing and strange and I… More
I have heard a lot of good things about this movie and people keep asking me why I hate it since I love vampire movies, so I suppose I will give it another try sometime. But for now, I will say that I hated the beginning of this movie, it's confusing and strange and I couldn't find anything good about it.
Jeff "

I am a diehard horror fan. I absolutely love John Carpenter's work. I've always wanted to see this film, but I somehow neglected it. Vampires is a different take on vampire films, and it's quite amusing to watch. From start to finish the film is filled with gore and… More
I am a diehard horror fan. I absolutely love John Carpenter's work. I've always wanted to see this film, but I somehow neglected it. Vampires is a different take on vampire films, and it's quite amusing to watch. From start to finish the film is filled with gore and awesome violence. This by far the goriest vampire film that I've seen in a while, and it's simply a well made film that will deliver good scares and action. John Carpenter has made a film that takes wise cracks the catholic church, and it's easy to see why the film has gained much controversy with the Vatican. But that doesn't really matter, this is a work of fiction after all, everything presented here is for simple viewing pleasure. Vampires is one demented vampire flick, and along with Robert Rodriguez's From Dusk Ti'll Dawn, this is the best vampire film of the second half of the 1990's. James Woods delivers a mean performance as Jack Crow, a vampire slayer under contract with the Vatican. Vampires is an action packed gore fest that will definitely appeal to gorehounds as much as vampires fans. I'veseen my share of vampire films, and this has got to be the bloodiest film that I've seen. John Carpenter's take on Vampirism is very interesting and opens up a new window of possibilities in the vampire genre. What makes the film worthwhile is that it doesn't take itself too seriously, and Carpenter delivers yet another solid horror film. Unfortunately this is quite his last great horror film, as ghosts of mars was borderline watchable. This is definitely a film that will appeal to vampire fans, as this is a different on the genre and is quite original in it's conception. James Woods is the best actor here, and it his acting acting definitely improves on the overall film. The result is a wicked vampire film with lots of gore and action. However I wouldn't recommend the film to everyone, but to those who haven't seen this film, and want to, you're in for quite a surprise.
Anthony L

A decent story but it's shows only a fraction of Carpenter's talents and so is a wasted opportunity!
Coxxie M

oh yes yes James Woods doesnt have a non-badass bone in his body and the body split down the middle scene can NEVER be topped! You know what flixster thank you. i think im gonna go buy this now. it makes from dusk til dawn look like twilight.
Phil H

Hmmm dodgy vamp flick Im afraid. Nice touches, like the rising from the ground at dusk, but its very lame and badly acted. Woods just doesn't fit the bill, the whole thing is very b-movie or TV movie standard.
Arash X

The whole religion vs. vampires crap always annoys me fortunately heres is not the case & it's quite the opposite but that's about the only good thing about the movie overall it was a weak effort by Carpenter specially compared to his other movies that I've seen… More
The whole religion vs. vampires crap always annoys me fortunately heres is not the case & it's quite the opposite but that's about the only good thing about the movie overall it was a weak effort by Carpenter specially compared to his other movies that I've seen "The Thing" & "In The Mouth Of Madness"
Tsubaki S

Carpenter already showing clear signs of getting rusted.
Al S

Director, John Carpenters best film to date. A masterpiece. Slick, stylish, cool and endlessly thrilling. A blood-thirsty classic of a horror film. Loaded ith exhilerating action and suspense. James Woods has never been better.
Jason S

Could have been good. They really wanted to do an update to the vampire myth and they had a good start just not a good story. I liked the fact that they all worked for the vatican and that the vamps were a little harder to kill than we were led to believe but it started to get… More
Could have been good. They really wanted to do an update to the vampire myth and they had a good start just not a good story. I liked the fact that they all worked for the vatican and that the vamps were a little harder to kill than we were led to believe but it started to get boring and predictable halfway through.
Film C

its quite good really reli gd interesting and exciting jumpy bits as well
Emily A

Ugh. I had such high hopes for this movie. I mean, it's got James friggin' Woods battling friggin' vampires! I keep watching it over again, in disbelief that it can possibly be as bad as I remember. It is. The villains are rubbish, the heroes are cretins and the effects… More
Ugh. I had such high hopes for this movie. I mean, it's got James friggin' Woods battling friggin' vampires! I keep watching it over again, in disbelief that it can possibly be as bad as I remember. It is. The villains are rubbish, the heroes are cretins and the effects are underwhelming. And James Woods is completely wasted, which is extra-tragic because he seems to be the only one putting any affort into this movie whatsoever. This film makes me weep for what could have been.
Dean M

Although James Woods is brilliantly cast as a foul-mouthed, Vatican-backed vampire slayer who heads an enthusiastic team of mercenaries, the film turns sour when our "hero" abandons his common sense while seeking vengeance against 600-year-old vampire master. The storyline… More
Although James Woods is brilliantly cast as a foul-mouthed, Vatican-backed vampire slayer who heads an enthusiastic team of mercenaries, the film turns sour when our "hero" abandons his common sense while seeking vengeance against 600-year-old vampire master. The storyline becomes ludicrously arbitrary and is not scary.
Rachel F

I love anything about vampires, they're kind of an obsession of mine.
Dr Blood

Although hardly a classic of the horror genre it certainly has its moments of extreme gore and some novel ways of ridding the world of the undead.
Dean !

A very good vampire film, all about hunting them down and killing them off!
Drew S

Saw the "sequel", which was lousy, so by law this is probably awful too.
xGary X

Lame post-Buffy vampire flick made well after Carpenter's star had well and truly waned. Humourless and stupid with feeble set pieces and dialogue like "A master vampire who can walk in daylight. Unstoppable. Unless we stop him." But still a hundred times better than… More
Lame post-Buffy vampire flick made well after Carpenter's star had well and truly waned. Humourless and stupid with feeble set pieces and dialogue like "A master vampire who can walk in daylight. Unstoppable. Unless we stop him." But still a hundred times better than Ghosts Of Mars...
Marion R

This movie is beyond silly. This is one of the worst Vampire film I have seen.