Carmilla (1999) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

This film is also known as Vampire Carmilla.

Carmilla is on a DVD with another film. The entire DVD is called "B-Movie Theater's Drive-in Double Feature".

Stop and think about that. If you made really good quality low budget films like those "Click" films, would you advertise them as "B Movies"? Of course not. Your self-esteem would place them at a higher level. If you made the kind of film that most of the world would dismiss as Grade-B garbage, would you call them B-Movies on the box? Probably not. You'd know they were at that level, but you would not necessarily want to advertise it. So what kind of movie would be advertised in that manner?

Are your answers locked in?

I think the answer is: "movies so bad that the director would be flattered to hear them called B-movies". In fact, the "B" is a tremendous compliment for this film, which is really at the level of "home movie". You know your Uncle Dwight's corny vacation movies with the additional footage of last year's Halloween party? They are probably technically superior to this, not to mention scarier. The entire film appears to have been shot with a home camcorder, and it's either not a very good camcorder, or the footage was shot by someone who doesn't realize how much light is necessary for making indoor videos, or how to capture the sound properly when actors are different distances from the camera.

In theory, it is a horrotica film, but:

1.  It isn't remotely scary or interesting because it has no sense of pacing (the camera sometimes stays on a stationary tableau for many seconds, all for no reason), and the actors are at the high school level. And I'm not talking about the leads from high school plays. I'm talking about the people who wanted to be in the play, but blew the try-outs.

2. In addition to a lack of horror, it has one other weakness which keeps it from being successful horrotica. It also lacks erotica. There is some sex and nudity, but it is in poor light, and totally passionless. To make matters worse, the DVD transfer is only about at the quality of video, if that good. To make matters worse still, the trailer for the film is better quality than the film itself and is in a theatrical aspect ratio, although the film proper is presented 4:3. In other words, a decent theatrical print exists, but they couldn't be bothered to look for it.

One member of the cast, Dawn Marie Psaltis, immediately quit film altogether in order to pursue a career in professional wrestling. The star of the film, Marina Morgan, didn't act again for four years, whereupon she returned to the silver screen in the timeless cinema classic Dr. Horror's Erotic House of Idiots. The director, Denise Templeton, has never gotten another opportunity to direct, which is not surprising.

Of course, the only reason I watched was to see the WWE's Dawn Marie before she was one of the Rasslebabes, or as they are often known, Rassholes. If you have the same curiosity, be advised that the distinguished Ms Psaltis dies in the opening credits, in a sequence almost unrelated to the rest of the film, so you do not have to watch the actual movie. That sequence will also be enough to give you the full flavor of the Shakespearian acting quality in this film. Unfortunately, it is not Shakespearian as in WILL Shakespeare, but rather HANK Shakespeare. He's the fiberglass fishing pole guy.


  • Dawn Marie Psaltis - breasts
  • Marina Morgan - breasts, brief frontal
  • Stacia Crawford - very brief breasts

DVD info from Amazon

  • two movies (this and "Game of Pleasure")

  • and a couple of extra trailers

(Weirdly enough, Hank's dad, who founded the Shakespeare company in the 1890s, was named William Shakespeare Jr. As Jack Paar used to say, I kid you not". Check out this link.)

Kudos for fiberglass fishing poles, but a resounding F for this movie, the first F I have declared in months.

The Critics Vote ...

  • no major reviews online

The People Vote ...

The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, this is an F.

Return to the Movie House home page