Dear Reader: Update, Movie Review Intelligence will
continue publishing this website through June (more...)
Search a Movie:
VAMPIRES SUCKMovie Reviews
Comedy about an anxious non-vampire high school girl torn between two boys. Cast:Chris Riggi, Ken JeongDirector:Jason FriedbergRelease Date:August 18, 2010DVD Release:November 30, 2010From:20th Century FoxRating:PG-13Length:1 hr 22 min
Vampires Suck played to poor reviews. • Randy Cordova wrote in the Arizona Republic, "...aggressively dumb, which isn't such a sin. But it is mostly unfunny, and that's living death in a movie like this." • And John Gholson wrote for Cinematical, "...almost bad enough to make me pity the 'Twilight' film series for being the subject of such limp, toothless mockery." More Reviews Below...
Adam Markovitz, Entertainment Weekly: FAIR(cg) " 'The Twilight Saga,' with its operatic gloom and straight-faced fantasy, is undoubtedly ripe for a smart, good-natured ribbing. This isn't it."(See all of Adam Markovitz's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 88 words, 08/20/10
we have an app for when you're out and about
get our iPhone app... or get our mobile web app...
movie review intelligence
NEW YORK/LOS ANGELES/CHICAGO/TORONTO (8 Reviews)
Jeannette Catsoulis, New York Times: POOR "...pointless... Though it's useful to learn that even vampires can be repelled by flatulence -- maybe we should eat that garlic instead of draping it on our windows."(See all of Jeannette Catsoulis's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 302 words, 08/19/10
Michael Ordoña, Los Angeles Times: MODERATE "...the usual mixed bag of hits and misses, but with more hits than expected.... Even its slack pacing -- it often feels as if it's holding for laughs -- recalls its sources."(See all of Michael Ordoña's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 283 words, 08/20/10
Bruce DeMara, Toronto Star: POOR(cg) "...another drearily pointless parody, this time lampooning the 'Twilight' series of movies (actually just the first two, 'Twilight' and 'New Moon')."(See all of Bruce DeMara's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 326 words, 08/18/10
Andrew Dowler, Toronto Now: WEAK(cg) "...a mediocre 'Twilight' parody whose most repeated gag involves somebody being hit on the head and/or falling down. Funny moments erupt now and then..."(See all of Andrew Dowler's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 196 words, 08/19/10
Peter Hartlaub, Houston Chronicle/San Francisco Chronicle: POOR(cg) "...looks like it cost less to make than the typical Bon Jovi video, mines gay stereotypes and manages not a single memorable joke..."(See all of Peter Hartlaub's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 445 words, 08/20/10
Natalie Southwick, Boston Globe: POOR(cg) "Twi-hards with a sense of humor should feel included in the jokes, or inspired to make up their own. Non-'Twilight' fans would be better off surfing YouTube."(See all of Natalie Southwick's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 420 words, 08/20/10
Steve Persall, St. Petersburg Times: FAIR(cg) "...the jokes run dry long before the fadeout, and the movie's only 80 minutes counting end credits. Desperation is obvious..."(See all of Steve Persall's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 468 words, 08/19/10
Nathan Rabin, AV Club: POOR(cg) "...merits commendation for such non-triumphs as telling a relatively coherent story, settling on one genre as a satirical target, and conveying a knowledge of its source material..."(See all of Nathan Rabin's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 368 words, 08/18/10
Simon Abrams, Slant: POOR(cg) "...reeks as much as the vampire trend it's parodying.... a lot of the jokes aren't jokes at all, but rather, inexplicable predated pop culture references."(See all of Simon Abrams's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 790 words, 08/18/10
Andrew Dowler, Toronto Now: WEAK(cg) "...a mediocre 'Twilight' parody whose most repeated gag involves somebody being hit on the head and/or falling down. Funny moments erupt now and then..."(See all of Andrew Dowler's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 196 words, 08/19/10
HIGHBROW PRESS (2 Reviews)
Jeannette Catsoulis, New York Times: POOR "...pointless... Though it's useful to learn that even vampires can be repelled by flatulence -- maybe we should eat that garlic instead of draping it on our windows."(See all of Jeannette Catsoulis's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 302 words, 08/19/10
Michael Ordoña, Los Angeles Times: MODERATE "...the usual mixed bag of hits and misses, but with more hits than expected.... Even its slack pacing -- it often feels as if it's holding for laughs -- recalls its sources."(See all of Michael Ordoña's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 283 words, 08/20/10
MOVIE INDUSTRY (4 Reviews)
Joe Leydon, Daily Variety: POOR "...an instantly forgettable trifle... fairly close to worthless. Brandishes obvious gags, uninventive slapstick and stale pop-culture allusions..."(See all of Joe Leydon's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 578 words, 08/17/10
Frank Scheck, Hollywood Reporter: POOR "If you think Jacob peeing on a tree or Becca farting in Edward's face when he attempts to climb into bed with her are the height of comic wit..."(See all of Frank Scheck's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 395 words, 08/18/10
Michael Ordoña, Los Angeles Times: MODERATE "...the usual mixed bag of hits and misses, but with more hits than expected.... Even its slack pacing -- it often feels as if it's holding for laughs -- recalls its sources."(See all of Michael Ordoña's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 283 words, 08/20/10
Jeannette Catsoulis, New York Times: POOR "...pointless... Though it's useful to learn that even vampires can be repelled by flatulence -- maybe we should eat that garlic instead of draping it on our windows."(See all of Jeannette Catsoulis's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 302 words, 08/19/10
12.7 Percentage Points Average Difference Between Reviews (Norm is 18.4pp; <18.4pp = More Consistent; >18.4pp = More Mixed)
Vampires Suck's reviews are separated by an average 12.7 percentage points. The norm for this measure is 18.4 percentage points. Less than 18.4 indicates more consistent reviews; greater than 18.4 indicates more mixed reviews. In the chart below, each dot represents a review, with the dots at the top more positive than the dots at the bottom. From left to right, the dots represent reviews in big, bigger and biggest publications. Roll over each dot for more detail.
Vampires Suck (22 reviews) Roll over dots for each review
Coverage:Vampires Suck's reviews cover 25.0% of potential readers (average is 67.9%). Volume:The film's reviews total 7,894 words involume (average is 20,194 words). Length:The film's reviews average 359 words in length (the norm is 517 words).
Reviews Broke 39.7 Hours After Release (Norm is 1.2 Release)
Vampires Suck's reviews on average broke 39.7 hours after opening. Norm for this measure is 1.2 hours before. The chart below shows reviews on opening day and the days before and after opening; the left side is earlier and the right side is later. The red bars extending above the horizontal mid-line represent more positive reviews, and the red bars extending below represent more negative reviews. The white space/red bar in the middle is Vampires Suck's opening day. Click on any bar for a list of the reviews for that day.
Vampires Suck (22 reviews, click on bars for reviews)
Mobile Web App version 1.2 shows a list of all current movies and review information. You can click through to the cast, director, synopsis, release date and rating on page two, plus individual reviews on page three. The information is updated on a live/real-time basis. You can also search our database of films. Designed for when you're on the move and want the latest info, this app will work on any mobile web browser. From your mobile device -- only from a mobile device -- open our Mobile Web App here...
