Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

Dotbankey A lot of fun.

JulianPeacock This is one of those films which (like most straight to video/DVD fodder!) sadly, unfortunately DOES NOT live up to its poster! I remember years ago in the late 1990s, seeing a VHS (yes that long ago!) copy of it in my local video rental store, picking it up, reading the cover and thinking (as other reviewers have already mentioned) that in this film Don Wilson had a similar look to that of Brandon Lee in The Crow. And that it sounded like quite a fun film and also a bit of a change for Don Wilson, I believe it's the only slightly Horror themed film he has appeared in. However I didn't bother renting it at the time (1998/99) and it wasn't until many years later (2013) that I actually saw the film when someone kindly uploaded it for free on Youtube (In fact most crappy straight to DVD/video films should be uploaded on Youtube, because they certainly aren't worth paying to see!). And when I eventually did see it I thought to myself "That was crap and it didn't live up to its poster" and furthermore "I'm glad I didn't pay to see that all those years ago in the video rental shop". Like most low budget, straight to DVD films, the film is hampered by budget limitations, poor acting and a lame script. And as everyone else has mentioned, I really do not understand that earthquake camera effect?! William C Martell, the man responsible for the poor script usually blames the failure of films he wrote on the cast and crew involved and never seems to take his fair share of the blame! He often claim that the cast and crew changed almost every word he wrote! Martell said that Don Wilson did not actually want to do a horror/vampire themed film and when he eventually agreed to it, he wanted to control every damn part of the film? Well that may be true but from the looks of things Martell probably wrote the script in a couple of weeks, if that? He really needed to spend more time on it and made sure he sold it to a better production company as well! Don Wilson claims that ALL of the films that he "starred" in "made money" by that I assume he means that they broke even? But I find that hard to believe, because more expensive Wilson films such as the Cybertracker films had a few million spent on them (from the look of them) and how does a film that did not get a cinema release make a few million to break even? They couldn't have made that much on video, because it's the films that were previously at the cinema that make the most on video, not a film that's been released straight to DVD/video and "stars" a cast of nobodies.

BloodTheTelepathicDog I always rent a film with the desire to like it. However, this film started with two strikes against it. The first strike is that its lead is Don "The Dragon" Wilson, an inept actor by anyone's standards but a solid martial artist. I'm not a martial arts fan so I'm not big on Mr. Wilson. Second, its a vampire flick and you can count all the decent vampire films in history on one hand--and you won't employ all your fingers. So, you might be wondering, why I rented this. Well, I'm a video completist and will watch anything that Melanie Smith appears in. So there you have it.The film focuses on Don who plays Jack Cutter, the son of vampire hunters who were killed by head vampire Nicholas Guest and his minions when Don was just a boy. He grows up determined to rid the earth of vampires. When the police chase him (he has the ignorant tendency to run around town with a shotgun at any hour, day or night) he is hit by a vehicle driven by Melanie Smith. Melanie's intro isn't a casual hello for she, in Mina Harker like fashion, is the reincarnation of a lost love from Guest's past. So Don must save the world from bloodsuckers and the girl from the head fang-face.Don does battle with far more eyeliner than Melanie Smith wears... I guess vampire killers need to look dark-eyed. Also, filmgoers that can't stand movies that have vampires walking around in broad daylight will hate this film. They can combat the sun with shades.STORY: $$ (Too clichéd. The reincarnation subplot wasn't needed. This film borrows too heavily from other sources to flesh out its weak script, such as the Bram Stoker borrowing. Also, when Melanie gets shot while driving her car, she clearly gets it in the left tit, which made for a tricky Kennedy-esque shot from the officer who accidentally drilled her. Yet when Don treats her, her wound is in the right shoulder. However, jumping wounds aside, the head vampire is quite progressive and should be applauded for adhering to the call for diversity. His four vampire followers are a woman, an Asian, a black guy and a white guy. Way to go!)ACTING: $ (Although this is B-Rate fare there are many B-Rate films that boast solid acting. When your lead is the wooden Don "The Dragon" Wilson, you've ascribed, before filming, to low-grade acting. We also have the terrible erotic-thriller actress Maria Ford as the female vampire and Nicholas Guest is quite less-than-menacing as the lead vampire. Melanie Smith does a fine job with what little she has to work with and James Lew, who, perhaps, should have been the lead, gives a fine cameo performance as Don's dad).NUDITY: None

dominat Yes, indeed we have a winner- a winner in best dumb-action-movie!The only reason I chose to vote a 10 for this movie is because it's so incredibly bad-made that it actually becomes funny."Night Hunter" is basically about Jack Cutter, a Vampire hunter (Vampire hunters have been in his generation for centuries, apparently), and his mission, being that he has to kill the last remaining Vampires.This movie contains one of the cheesiest scenes I have ever seen in my life. Not to mention the really bad gun-shooting scenes. When people are shot in this movie, blood splatters- thick as ketchup all over the place, this makes the movie seem so cheap and lame that you just lose interest. A constant shaking of the camera is what annoys me the most during the fight-scenes. This is, I suppose, done to create an "action-effect", though in my opinion it gives no effect whatsoever. Its completely ridiculous! All stunt-scenes are done extremely badly. E.g a scene where the dead Vampire-leader gets thrown off a roof. When the corpse hits the ground, it bounces like a wobbly rubber-doll. A scene where Jack sniffs the ground, getting a vision was so lame it got me laughing hysterically.Lame music, cheesy scenes, bad acting and plain dumb filming techniques are obviously the functions that make this movie such a malfunction. To state that this is a good movie would be the same as stating that nuclear bombs are good for humans. Clearly those of you who say that this is one of the best action-movies, haven't seen many in your life.This is basically a B-class vampire-action-movie that deserves 0/10 but which I'll give 10/10, just for its ability (being the lousiest action-movie I have ever seen)of making me laugh and because I just can't live without it.

cine_critter More exciting than the Wesley Snipes film, and with better characters, too. The last vampire hunter must save Los Angeles from a coven of vampires out to conquer the city, aided by a tabloid journalist. Lost of fun... and the names of the characters are great!