User Reviews

The main monster movie formula hasn't changed since the 1950s: The pet evil technology of the time (radiation, pollution, germ warfare, genetic engineering) in conjunction with the pet villain of the time (mad scientists, the CIA, right wing militias, evil industrialists) turn some natural creature into a dangerous mutated version of itself. Fighting it is made harder by clueless citizenry, corrupt politicians, and head-in-the-sand bureaucrats. Frequently the good guys are aided by a guilt-wracked insider. In the end, some sound or scent is often used to lure the creatures into one place where they can be destroyed.

The variables are filled, in this entry, by pollution, evil industrialists, vampire bats, and music. Instead of an explosion, they are killed by steam. We don't see much of the insider, who is used mainly to throw the audience off as to which character is a crook.

This movie isn't as silly or heavy-handed as many movies using this formula, plus the acting is better, but the fact remains that you've seen it dozens of times before. (Although the choices of evil technology and favorite villain always result in some reviewer gushing that it was "ripped from the headlines.")

1. Is this a horror movie about bats, or a preachy movie about pollution?

2. In the party scene, when the bats attack, Lucy and her close friends are not attacked, but many others are.

3. The bats are known to kill or to transmit rabies, but Lucy and her friends keep going to the bats without any protection (except a broom, sometimes).

4. Only one teacher's students are attacked. Are there any other teachers at this school?

5. What did Lucy use to catch the bats? This was never explained. It looked like some kind of huge sticky web, but where did it come from?

6. In the big finale, Lucy outruns flying bats (and she isn't even running fast), then manages to close a metal door without ANY of the bats getting through. She's not burned by the steam, either. I guess her broom protected her.

7. The editing in this film was atrocious, and the script wasn't very well written. Too many unexplained events.

8. One plus: Lucy answers the phone and says, "This is she." That's the first time I've heard CORRECT grammar concerning the use of pronouns following the verb "to be" in a LONG time. Usually, a character would say, "This is her," or "That's me."

9. Admittedly, Lucy looks good, but the skimpy outfits mentioned by another reviewer can be seen in only one scene, when the college girl leaves her window open and moves around on her bed in her underwear. Strangely, she isn't killed by the bats, but develops rabies. She didn't even realize that she had been bitten.

10. The final scene (three months later) made NO sense. Why was it included at all?

Sorry, but I wish I HAD missed most of this movie. I certainly can't see any reason to recommend it to anyone.

Final fotnote, added on 8/19/06: When Lucy fills a sample vial by dipping it into the polluted runoff from a waste pipe, she doesn't even wear gloves. Is THAT the sign of an experienced scientist?

Vampire Bats is set in the small Louisiana town of Mercier where Maddy Rierdon (Lucy Lawless) & her husband Dan Dryer (Dylan Neal) both teach biology at Tate University, Maddy learns that one of her students named Jason (Arnie Pantoja) has been found dead with all the blood drained from his body. Although murder is initially suspected Maddy takes a look at the body & discovers that it is covered in little bite marks that were caused by some animal but is unable to identify what. Shortly after two fishermen are also found dead with the same bite marks & having been drained of blood. Maddy eventually discovers that due to pollution an existing strain of Vampire Bat has mutated into something more aggressive that attacks & kills humans. Because all the local officials are incompetent Maddy & a few of her teenage students set out to destroy the Bat menace by themselves & save Mercier...

Not to be confused with the classic Vincent Price film The Vampire Bat (1933) this cheap made for television Creature Feature crap was directed by Eric Bross & is terrible, the second time husband & wife team of Dan Dryer & Maddy Rierdon have battled mutant creatures after having previously appeared in Locusts (2005) which I have not seen but am sure is as crap as Vampire Bats. Vampire Bats is one of those routine lacklustre Creature Feature films that has stupid scientific reasoning behind it, illogical character motivation as they just do the most inane things, a shallow environmental message that feels like an afterthought & some terrible attempts at plot twists which come off as predictable. Even though the IMDb lists a run time of 120 minutes (maybe that's with commercials?) Vampire Bats runs a more modest 90 odd minutes but still feels like a real effort to sit through it in one go, the pace is slow with minimal Bat attacks, a low body count & dull character's who are purely stock clichés for this type of film. If I am honest I can't really think of a single positive thing to say about Vampire Bats (both the film & the real life creature when I think about it) & there are far better Creature Feature films out that that are far more fun to watch. A real lifeless, bland & routine effort that exists purely to fill a time-slot on television.

Vampire Bats also has that made for television look to it, it plods along with no real style & has a young teen cast that were hired for their looks rather than their acting ability. There are very few actual Bat attacks, those we see are poorly staged with no sense of build-up at all. The film uses a mix of traditional puppet Bats & CGI computer effects with neither looking that great, the Bats are barely used to be honest & while there's lots of panicked talk of the threat they pose we see much of that threat materialise. There's zero gore, OK maybe a couple of dead Deer & a few Bat bites but nothing that will shock you or keep you up at night.

Apparently the filming of Vampire Bats had to stop while the production was in New Orleans because of Hurricane Katrina & was relocated to Nova Scotia in Canada for completion. The acting is bad, just bad all round really.

Vampire Bats is a poor Creature Feature of no interest at all, it has no gore, no scares, a stupid predictable plot & typical environmental message. Just another worthless Creature Feature that fails to deliver in any aspect, there is much better out there.

I have no hesitation to give this a one out of 10. The last time I check, this movie scores a 4.7 on the IMDb; no doubt the work of maligners who abused the ratings system simply because of the presence of Lucy Lawless in the movie. This is crazy. If Lawless strapped on her Xena armour and started dishing out pain to the bats, I might have given this movie at least a 5. However, Lawless only got a broom as weapon in this movie. What did she do with the broom in the movie? She tripped the bad guy. Boo Hoo. Big Deal.

There is no excitement in the movie and I felt like I am getting a lesson in environmental conservation from some greenies. The death scenes of victims are lame. One guy got bitten to death despite just an inch away from the swimming pool and he would have been safe if he just jumped into it. The way they killed the bats are lesson 1 in lame. There is twist in the end. Actually, not a twist but more like a crumple in the script which really doesn't connect to anything. The final scene (3 months later) is completely, utterly and totally unneeded. It looked like they just thought to get Lucy Lawless on screen again for the last time.

Lame and terrible. Xena would not have been pleased.

*** May contain spoilers. ***

Any viewer who has sit through three or more made-for-TV "attack of nature" movies will not find any clever plot twists in VAMPIRE BATS. However, the appealing elements of this movie more than make up for an unremarkable story.

First, VAMPIRE BATS has no 11-year-old snotty nosed whiz kid upstaging the grown-ups. Please see my reviews of previous made-for-TV movies to see how many other films have been ruined by kid this Steven Spielberg wannabe convention. In VAMPIRE BATS, command of science remains in the adult realm.

Second, but not least by all means, VAMPIRE BATS captures countless moments of attractive young females moving about in skimpy clothing. We are not talking just quantity here (although I dare say that this film can hold its own with the best R-rated horny teenager movies) -- no, we are talking QUALITY. The director of VAMPIRE BATS simply loves young, ripe, female curves in motion, and often proves this fact to the viewer.

Don't expect GLADIATOR. Don't expect high drama or an epic film score. But if you are a heterosexual male who watches a lot of commercial TV, you can plan on having some fun with VAMPIRE BATS.