21 reviews
This movie was BEAUTIFULLY done in the genre of "Movies no one will ever want to watch." Gary Busey is the only redeeming factor, and not even because of his acting, but because he's Gary Busey. If this movie was never made, I probably would have done something better with the time that was wasted from my life watching this flick. The question every single one of you will have with this movie is...WHY THE GLASSES? The guy NEVER takes off his glasses, except to sleep. Ridiculous.
Overall, I'm willing to give this a star. Only one though. Out of 10. What's that? You want more? You can't have more. Not yours.
One (1) star out of Ten (10)
Overall, I'm willing to give this a star. Only one though. Out of 10. What's that? You want more? You can't have more. Not yours.
One (1) star out of Ten (10)
FROST is absolute crap from frame one. This pathetic, boring excuse for a movie is possibly one of the worst ever made, and not in the "so bad it's good" way, either, but in the "so bad, I shut it off after 20 minutes" way that renters find so commonplace these days. I walk into the video store and find endless rows of movies so bad or boring like this but beautifully packaged... Inside, they are all the same homogenized, no talent crap that makes me sick. With so much of this mindless junk clogging up the new release shelves, it's no wonder films are now called "product" in the industry. Why? Because there's no artistry, creativity or desire to "push the envelope" involved whatsoever anymore. Anyway, FROST is poorly acted (and when I say poor, I mean rock bottom), poorly written, poorly edited, and poorly directed. The CGI is awful and looks like a cheap video game. From Gary Busey's star billing on the box, I was hoping he was going to play a vampire, not DAREDEVIL! The only good thing about this film was the main title sequence, but even that was ruined by cutting away from it back to Gary Busey talking. The title didn't even come up until after all the rest of the credits were long gone! Way to ruin the only good thing this movie had going for it. Avoid FROST like the plague!!!
I think there`s a straight to video film called OCTOPUS which spends the first half of its running time being an action packed thriller ( Or meekly tries to ) then all of a sudden turns into a horror movie about a giant octopus . Well it`s the same with PORTRAIT OF A VAMPIRE which opens with a very brief scene with a Jerry Springer lookalike examining a body drained of blood then the film flashes back to Afghanistan in August 1989 ( Hadn`t the red army pulled out of there before then ? )which resembles the Nex Mexico desert . Not very convincing but it gets worse as we`re treated to a battle scene featuring CGI helicopters . How do I know they`re CGI ? Well it`s so obvious it`s impossible not to notice . It`s also impossible not to notice the pathetic standard of acting either and it`s at this point the script decides to meet the production`s dismal standards as it bores us ( No spoilers because you can see it coming a mile away ) with double and triple crosses in Mexico a year later . It`s at this point you find yourself asking what have I got to do to get an equity card ? , or how come film companies turn my scripts down when they finance crap like this ? and most importantly if this movie is called PORTRAIT OF A VAMPIRE then shouldn`t it be a horror film and not a crap action thriller similar to something Cannon used to produce in the mid 1980s ? It does turn into a horror movie about halfway through but the horror aspects are as badly done as the action adventure bits . I was going to feel sorry for Gary Busey appearing in this but it`s not like someone stuck a gun to head and made him do it . If you decide to appear in a film like this it`s your own fault and you deserve no sympathy
So just to sum up if you enjoy horror films you won`t want to see this because it`s not a horror film , it`s a horrible film . And if you enjoy action films you won`t want to see it either due to the laughable production values
So just to sum up if you enjoy horror films you won`t want to see this because it`s not a horror film , it`s a horrible film . And if you enjoy action films you won`t want to see it either due to the laughable production values
- Theo Robertson
- May 28, 2003
- Permalink
This movie was absolute crap. Nothing in it makes sense. It's funny because there's just no point. Read the tagline! What the hell does that even mean? Were they trying to make a horrible film?
The lead actor, whose name is Jack Frost in the movie, looks like a cross between George Michael and Kevin Smith. It's all downhill form there. They try to incorporate some sort of ridiculous war story into the plot, and it doesn't work at all. All of the actors just look goofy and the writing just makes no sense at all. They do throw in some nudity for good measure though, and to keep people from turning the movie off. I imagine they were trying to make Frost into some sort of cult hero like Ash or something, but, no, not even close. He walks around with his stupid sunglasses killing people. It's all really, really lame. So, yeah, they got all that. Then they got some top of the line computer effects. The helicopters in the movie will blow you away, I totally couldn't tell they were fake, same goes for the bats. I couldn't believe that the director, or whoever the hell it was did a special feature w/ commentary for the special effects. They're laughable at best. The whole movie is laughable actually. Gary Busey's total screen time is about 2 minutes. 2 non-consecutive minutes.
If you're looking for a laugh, definitely check this out. The complete non-sensical-ness(word?) all will have you cracking up.
The lead actor, whose name is Jack Frost in the movie, looks like a cross between George Michael and Kevin Smith. It's all downhill form there. They try to incorporate some sort of ridiculous war story into the plot, and it doesn't work at all. All of the actors just look goofy and the writing just makes no sense at all. They do throw in some nudity for good measure though, and to keep people from turning the movie off. I imagine they were trying to make Frost into some sort of cult hero like Ash or something, but, no, not even close. He walks around with his stupid sunglasses killing people. It's all really, really lame. So, yeah, they got all that. Then they got some top of the line computer effects. The helicopters in the movie will blow you away, I totally couldn't tell they were fake, same goes for the bats. I couldn't believe that the director, or whoever the hell it was did a special feature w/ commentary for the special effects. They're laughable at best. The whole movie is laughable actually. Gary Busey's total screen time is about 2 minutes. 2 non-consecutive minutes.
If you're looking for a laugh, definitely check this out. The complete non-sensical-ness(word?) all will have you cracking up.
- treesgetwheeledaway
- Nov 12, 2004
- Permalink
- jerronspencer
- Sep 27, 2004
- Permalink
- black_swan-1
- Feb 21, 2005
- Permalink
The movie's abysmal idiocy is not as terrifying as the fact that some of those who comment on it here on IMDb actually like it (like mortalli and coyote13). It's not just bad or disappointing. Someone should be made to PAY for releasing this onto the market. I actually went by Blockbuster's and complained, demanding my money back and for them to take the movie off the shelf. I LOVE the vampire concept, and stalk video stores for anything of the sort, knowing that I will be able to filter any bad things about such a movie out, and enjoy the good parts that I so love. Well, not this time. Absolute torture. Avoid at all costs. Seriously. It's not even funny.
This movie was REALLY REALLY badly done. It's not worth really saying much about it other than that, but it was SO bad that I just had to write SOMETHING about it.
There are no redeeming features in this movie. Why would Gary Busey do something like this? I don't understand.
There are no redeeming features in this movie. Why would Gary Busey do something like this? I don't understand.
Im one of those suckers that Always needs to see a new Vamp movie, just cant help myself i guess, but seeing this film made my past "all time worst" look like a dream (witch was Cross Roads by the way). The actors cant act, the story dont hold up, and the producer may just need a new job. It's all about making a 80'ish action hero look cool, walking around with a beard and sunglasses that any sign person vold rather die than wear, (i know it's suppose to be in the 80's but this is just a joke) and if this was'nt enuf, the "hero" has even less emotional expressions than Steven Seagal. To top it of the special effects are like what an 8 year old could do.
The only reason I watched this film in part was because I got it in a film pack. All the reviewer are right - this film sucks big time! Lame acting, dumb plot/story - just stupid. I couldn't watch the whole thing.
1/10.
1/10.
- Rainey-Dawn
- May 25, 2021
- Permalink
you'll probably pass on seeing this movie, as I nearly did. That may be a mistake. This is not a bad movie. It's not perfect (what is?), and it's definitely low budget with some so-so acting. But it does what it sets out to do, and my be the only movie to draw parallels between vampirism and post traumatic stress syndrome. Charles Lister as Nat, who goes from human to vamp in the course of this does an excellent job. The direction, staging, and composition of many of the shots are also above par, with careful thought given to them. It does have too many locations, but the jumps are easily followed by anyone who's half awake. Not a standard "vampire horror movie" (what exactly is that, any way?) by any means, but an interesting juxtaposition of vampires and war--a worthwhile addition to that small category (see also Lost Platoon, Deathdream, and Ghost Brigade for an instant vampire/war movie fest). If you're looking for something different, give Frost a try.
This is one of those rare movies that has absolutely nothing to recommend it. From beginning to end there are no high points. There aren't even points high enough to be called low - it is unrelentingly abysmal.
The acting is so bad you wonder if the cast members are even allowed to join Actors' Equity. I've seen better set design in high school plays. Continuity was awful, costumes were awful, everything was awful. Every possible detail was neglected or overlooked.
It drew an R rating - ostensibly for violence and nudity - but if that's what you're looking for, don't bother. The violence is tame and so poorly choreographed and directed that you're more likely to yawn than gasp. And you can see as much nudity on prime time broadcast TV. The actors aren't even good looking. Not even the gratuitous nude (her whole part was gratuitous not just her nude scene).
Do yourself a favor and leave this one alone.
The acting is so bad you wonder if the cast members are even allowed to join Actors' Equity. I've seen better set design in high school plays. Continuity was awful, costumes were awful, everything was awful. Every possible detail was neglected or overlooked.
It drew an R rating - ostensibly for violence and nudity - but if that's what you're looking for, don't bother. The violence is tame and so poorly choreographed and directed that you're more likely to yawn than gasp. And you can see as much nudity on prime time broadcast TV. The actors aren't even good looking. Not even the gratuitous nude (her whole part was gratuitous not just her nude scene).
Do yourself a favor and leave this one alone.
Actually I watched this on a Turkish satelitte channel. Can you believe that?? Kudos to the producers of this movie; they succeeded to find some suckers that actually payed MONEY to this emberassingly bad bad movie. The lead is a 80s George Micheal on steroids who has a fetish for shades and what the hell is Gary Busey doing in this movie??really? He is the one responsible for me not turnin off this flick after 5 minutes thinking maybe something worthy will happen in the upcoming minutes but no no way. Nothing in no way will make you interested or pay attention throughout the whole running time. I couldn't stand more so turned it off before the final confrontation. The production values and the acting quality is on par with cheap porn movies-and I mean the really cheap ones not f.e the vivid ones-. But I have to give it to the director for finding someone to pay money for this one. Believe me after watchin this movie thats the only question that comes to your mind.. What kind of a producer in his right mind can be persuaded to invest in this flick?
Well where do i start?
Frankly i wish i didnt have to, but i caught a bit of this film the other night, and feel that i have to share it with others, in the vain hope of realeasing the burden put upon me for having seen it!
I wont take long, but i will take long enough to mention the fact that Gary Busey looks like he belongs in a nursing home, and the so-called 'good guy' is some bear-like manakin, with the acting prowess of a slice of carrot cake. Also, the mere fact that he wears a pair of 1980's brown-tint pilot glasses throughout the entirety of the film made it almost unbearable to watch, in retrospect.
The CGI employed in this film was clearly put together on a Sinclair Spectrum, and the only person it seems to fool, is bear-man, who probably cant see it, because even whilst searching almost pitch-black sewer areas, he STILL keeps his shades on, and expects me to believe that he is going to find his way in complete darkness, with the aid of a AA pocket maglite.
The script is laughable and was probably written on toilet paper, to spare budget, seeing as this film was clearly made after the sale of a small selection of second hand shoes, which just about covered Busey's costs, to 'act' as a blind man.
God, i cant even continue, i have to stop myself right here.
Its that bad.
Frankly i wish i didnt have to, but i caught a bit of this film the other night, and feel that i have to share it with others, in the vain hope of realeasing the burden put upon me for having seen it!
I wont take long, but i will take long enough to mention the fact that Gary Busey looks like he belongs in a nursing home, and the so-called 'good guy' is some bear-like manakin, with the acting prowess of a slice of carrot cake. Also, the mere fact that he wears a pair of 1980's brown-tint pilot glasses throughout the entirety of the film made it almost unbearable to watch, in retrospect.
The CGI employed in this film was clearly put together on a Sinclair Spectrum, and the only person it seems to fool, is bear-man, who probably cant see it, because even whilst searching almost pitch-black sewer areas, he STILL keeps his shades on, and expects me to believe that he is going to find his way in complete darkness, with the aid of a AA pocket maglite.
The script is laughable and was probably written on toilet paper, to spare budget, seeing as this film was clearly made after the sale of a small selection of second hand shoes, which just about covered Busey's costs, to 'act' as a blind man.
God, i cant even continue, i have to stop myself right here.
Its that bad.
- DeadSalesman
- May 18, 2003
- Permalink
Oh my God!! Everyone was right - Frost is a horrible movie. I found it last night at the rental place and decided to give it a try. Once I got home I checked out IMDB for comments and got very concerned, but decided to try it anyway. Let's just say I fell asleep half way through. The acting was so horrible that it made me wonder if the director went out in the streets, asked the first person he saw "Have you ever acted before?" and when the person replied "No" he said "You're hired!!" I've seen better acting in porno movies! And my big question is after Nat got bit and they fast foward 1 year (it did say 1 year on the screen) how did his hair get so long!! I wish my hair would grow that fast in a year. And I thought Vampire couldn't walk in the daylight?! Maybe I missed that explaination at the end?! This is a horrible, pointless movie that couldn't scare me if it really tried. If you can avoid, please do so.
- LeMarchand
- Apr 24, 2003
- Permalink
Well, I'm not a frustrated (unsuccessful) filmmaker and I rather prefer movies that cross/blend/shatter stereotypical genre films, so I suppose that helps explain why I really enjoyed FROST. I suspect that the same people who don't like a combination of action and horror would call it "cliched" had FROST stayed in one realm or the other.
FROST hearkens back to a day when films were made to entertain and not done just to show how clever or slick the producer/director/etc. are. And FROST is entertaining. Damned entertaining. Watch-it-again-and-again entertaining. Part "Night Stalker," part Robert Ludlum, this movie pays tribute to the respective traditions and then sets out to bend several rules within them. We span 10 years, two countries, and four vampires by movie's end. Not to mention several murders, an art theft, two explosive-laden skirmishes, all deftly paced and all superbly handled. The dialogue for the characters is unique, as VanHook and the individual actors quickly define the personalities of their respective characters.
JACK FROST is the mercenary skeptic whose pragmatic world is rocked by the discovery that his best friend is now a vampire. And while Frost may not believe in vampires, he's also nobody's fool. Gary Busey is the wise blind Micah, Frost's friend and mentor in his battle against the undead.
Based on the best-selling comic JACK FROST (written by writer/director/producer Kevin VanHook), the movie remains faithful to the source material while both expanding upon and updating the tale. VanHook also pays homage to such influences (and I'm speculating here) as the afore-mentioned "Night Stalker," Tod Browing's FREAKS, Richard Matheson's I AM LEGEND, perhaps THE TERMINATOR (and others, I'm sure) while keeping the very original storyline intact.
The effects are believable, which isn't surprising as they were done by many of the same crew who did FX for DAREDEVIL, MISS CONGENIALITY and a host of other major motion pictures.
Is FROST: PORTRAIT OF A VAMPIRE the next TRAINSPOTTING? Probably not, but it's a damned entertaining flick that will provide 92 minutes of fun and leave you wanting more. I look forward to more of Mr. VanHook's work. If more people made entertaining movies, instead of trying for the next "box office smash hit," we'd be better off. I hope to see more of VanHook's films soon. He is a highly talented creative force who should get more oppotunities to tell his unique brand of tales to ever-widening audiences. Here's to a sequel, or whatever the future might hold from him!
FROST hearkens back to a day when films were made to entertain and not done just to show how clever or slick the producer/director/etc. are. And FROST is entertaining. Damned entertaining. Watch-it-again-and-again entertaining. Part "Night Stalker," part Robert Ludlum, this movie pays tribute to the respective traditions and then sets out to bend several rules within them. We span 10 years, two countries, and four vampires by movie's end. Not to mention several murders, an art theft, two explosive-laden skirmishes, all deftly paced and all superbly handled. The dialogue for the characters is unique, as VanHook and the individual actors quickly define the personalities of their respective characters.
JACK FROST is the mercenary skeptic whose pragmatic world is rocked by the discovery that his best friend is now a vampire. And while Frost may not believe in vampires, he's also nobody's fool. Gary Busey is the wise blind Micah, Frost's friend and mentor in his battle against the undead.
Based on the best-selling comic JACK FROST (written by writer/director/producer Kevin VanHook), the movie remains faithful to the source material while both expanding upon and updating the tale. VanHook also pays homage to such influences (and I'm speculating here) as the afore-mentioned "Night Stalker," Tod Browing's FREAKS, Richard Matheson's I AM LEGEND, perhaps THE TERMINATOR (and others, I'm sure) while keeping the very original storyline intact.
The effects are believable, which isn't surprising as they were done by many of the same crew who did FX for DAREDEVIL, MISS CONGENIALITY and a host of other major motion pictures.
Is FROST: PORTRAIT OF A VAMPIRE the next TRAINSPOTTING? Probably not, but it's a damned entertaining flick that will provide 92 minutes of fun and leave you wanting more. I look forward to more of Mr. VanHook's work. If more people made entertaining movies, instead of trying for the next "box office smash hit," we'd be better off. I hope to see more of VanHook's films soon. He is a highly talented creative force who should get more oppotunities to tell his unique brand of tales to ever-widening audiences. Here's to a sequel, or whatever the future might hold from him!
- gypsycaine
- Jan 27, 2004
- Permalink