But, because mopey blues and dopey looking romantic longing is suddenly what "vampire" movies mean, when I went to pick up the Blu Ray of one of my favorite genre entries, it was disheartening to see this:
That's the new cover slapped together to dupe Twilight fans into thinking that Near Dark is anything like those books. It's not.
If you've ever seen Near Dark, you know that. Here, for comparison's sake, are the trailers for Near Dark and Twilight.
I mean, I can see the superficial similarities, but the major difference is that instead of being solemn loners who wine about "she doesn't belong", the vampires in Near Dark are actually dangerous and pose a real threat to just about everyone they meet. Go all the way back to Nosferatu if you need to; vampires in cinema are not supposed to be safe. Alluring, sure, but always dangerous. If you pine for a vampire, things end badly.
Now, I haven't (and don't plan on) reading / watching Twilight, so if I'm missing some critical insight, fill me in. In the meantime, allow me to share the old dvd artwork for Near Dark, which while a bit spoileriffic, is much more appropriate to the tone of the film (which is essentially a western):
Oh well, I can always print a new cover out for the Blu Ray and enjoy the film for what it is. But I'm not going to pretend it's not terrible artwork in the meantime...
2 comments:
Howdy Cap'n. Yes the new cover for Near Dark is gay. I have never seen this movie but that cover would make me not want to at all. Is that the band Bon Jovi in the bottom left corner?
It is not Bon Jovi. The group in the corner is a mini-Aliens reunion of Lance Henriksen (Bishop), Jenette Goldstein (Vasquez), and Bill Paxton (Hudson), who play three of the other four vampires Adrian Pasdar runs afoul of.
Post a Comment