The 1992 version of Dracula made by Coppola is my absolute favorite. But I see allot of vampire movies so I like allot of them. I think the Queen of the Damned movie was very nice and I have seen it many times. I like the Underworld movies as well as the Blade Triology. I like a movie called Cold Hearts, it is very nice. There is also a good movie named Drained of Blood which is nice. I love Vampires and Vampires Los Muertos. I like Lost Boys and Van Helsing. I also love several older movies like Twins of Evil and Vampire Circus. But that being said it is hard for me to choose any favorites as I am a huge vampire fan and I do not think there have been any vampire movies I have not liked at least a bit.

Quote:Yeah, the books are almost always better. It's ashame they didn't put the stuff about the twins. They shouldn't have tried to combine The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned into one movie. The soundtrack for Queen of the Damned was awesome!

The problem is that they tried to tell one story in one movie, not make a movies series. As such it would be difficult to include many of the things in the books. Take Marius for example, he is in the books not the one who makes Lestat into a vampire, but however he is Lestat's mentor figure so it is just easier to make him into the one responsible for Lestat being a vampire than to try to explain the whole, very complex storyline with Marcus which would take up allot of screen time, and which was not really that relevant for the story.

The same with the twins, their story is very complex, and I think it is far better that they did not include anything much about them at all than to try to squeeze their back story in and not doing it justice. It is the same that many is upset that Tom Bombadil did not make it into the Lord of the Rings movies. However just as with several characters in Queen of the Damned, he would be hard to explain and his presence in the movie would serve as little else than a distraction from what the movie tried to tell.

The original "DRACULA".

Not to speak bad of anyone favorites here, but I have never gotten why so many like the original Dracula movie. First of it is based on the play, not the books so the story is very different from that of the book. I think the movie is ok, but as far as vampire movies go, I think original Dracula is the one I have enjoyed the least, some of it is that I like the story in the book so much I got a bit disappointed, but also I do not really manage to get into the very over acted, more fit for the stage than than film acting. I like very many early movies, but I have never understood what pepole see in the first Dracula movie. As such I like Nosferatu better, at least that have a completely original story though it is obviously based on Dracula and as such the differences is more acceptable, and the same with the acting, it is a silent movie so the over acting is quite ok. But for me original Dracula feel like a theater play trying to be a movie.

mine is the original "Salem's Lot"

the old and original dracula in black and white

Interview With A Vampire... Hands down.

-Phreak