Interesteg What makes it different from others?

Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Alistair Olson After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

thatsarappp I am, admittedly, someone who believes in Jesus as who he says he is in the Christian bible. (Who HE says he is, not who "christians" say he is.) I am also rational, open-minded, and can certainly have a sense of humor when it comes to things of this nature. In fact, I was pretty excited to watch this when I read about it. Low budget in itself does not automatically disqualify ANY film from being considered one of quality. It can be done with great skill, creativity and style. By reading some of the reviews here and on Netflix, I got the impression JCVH had those things going for it. Good God was I wrong.It was by no means offensive. In fact, it didn't even border on it for me. Blasphemous? I suppose, in the most fundamental way, and to only the most small-minded of the Christian community. Perhaps the reason I found it so shockingly unoffensive was the fact that I never even really felt as if I was watching Jesus. That guy was no more Jesus than he was Ving Rhames. Chris Kattan, sure. Jesus, not so much. I read someone imply the film had some biblical wit to it- that is, the writers had some knowledge of the bible and used it to make the film funnier. That turned out to be untrue as well.The film is not really overly crude or vulgar, which is probably what most people expect it to be when they read the basic plot synopsis. Truthfully, it wasn't even funny at all. Weird and incredibly awkward, yes. Genuinely funny, not at all. There were even parts that made me feel very weird inside, and I think at one point I threw up in my mouth a little. (Transvestites with big hairy boobs tend to do that to me.) Now that I think about it, a little good old fashioned crude vulgarity would have done this film some good.As far as the technical aspects of the film, well, they are atrocious in every way imaginable. Again, with a little hard work and creativity, low budget can be done with some style. This was brutal to watch. The sound was some of the worst I've ever seen, if not THE worst. The dialog was so not in sync with the picture it looked as if it was dubbed. Visually, it was just as bad. Now, I'm no Avatar fan boy who judges films only by their visuals. (In fact, I pretty much hate all action movies.) But this was unbearable. Hard to believe this thing was made when it was.The reality here is, this is an awful film. The whole thing really just made my skin crawl. I really wanted to like it, and I stuck it out all the way to the end. But when all is said and done, there's nothing appealing about this film beyond its premise. And because the premise itself is still fantastic, it gets saved from the dreaded 1/10 rating.

Evil_Fred too be honest after 5 minutes of watching i was thinking - wow, this was made in 2000/2001 but they somehow fashioned it in one of the most low budget 70 's B movie . grind-house productions I've ever seen. it was quite an eye fest , and to be honest quite a feat as well. And since i love B movies and grind-house flicks, i enjoyed myself quite a bit during JCVH.if you enjoy low budget movies (and i mean low low budget) with a zing and some original scripting i totally recommend this one!Enjoy - .evil Fred

dareed-2 This could possibly be, no, most definitely was the most incredible waste of 52 minutes. Yes, the movie is actually 85 minutes total running time. 52 is when I tossed up my hands in utter defeat. Clearly a movie meant to entertain only the eight people involved in the film making process. The amateur filmmakers probably get the last laugh though, knowing full well they were trying to pass off a piece of crap as a potential cult classic. I was hoping for a refreshing and fun comedy about Jesus hunting vampires. How could that possibly yield anything other than hilarity? They found a way to suck out any sort of humor from a winning comedic combination. However, if you have a school boy fascination with lesbians, blasphemy, lame acting and repetitive scenes then this is the movie for you! I kept hoping that maybe there was a sense of irony, an extended metaphor or an allusion to deeper work, anything to give the film a shred of interest and I was simply over-looking it, but I really, really, really, doubt it. Please prove me wrong. Help me feel better about my 52 minutes.

hendrixy6 I have seen a bundle of bad horror films and bad horror spoofs in my lifetime. This is an obvious choice for "Worst Bad Movie Ever". The acting was god awful but that isn't what made this movie stink. The action scenes were badly filmed and incredibly boring. The outfits were simply terrible the script was undefinable and the director must have been a mentally retarded monkey. The film moved so slow and none of the jokes worked. You didn't like any of the characters and you could care less about the entire film. Ten minutes in you know you are in for a hour plus coma-watch. I drank so much coffee before I watched this and during. It made no difference. Watching this movie is like swallowing a sleeping pill coated in bloody bile and traced with razor sharp edges. I'd rather cough blood up for the rest of my life than watch this movie ever again. The biggest flaw is that they cut Jesus's hair and beard off ten minutes into the film. That was a huge mistake. The whole movie hinged on the fact that the vampire hunter was Jesus. When you cut his hair and remove the beard you just have another retarded Canadian. Christ, this movie stank.