Excellent, smart action film.

Boring

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

I remember when I first came across this TV movie I thought Anthony Perkins is in it, so he probably will be good, but beyond him there may not be anything redeeming. Just on the fact that I had never heard of it. Then I saw Stuart Gordon was the director and have really enjoyed Re-Animator and From Beyond so I was kind of excited. It is worth a look, but do remember this is a TV movie, so it will not be as gory as the two movies mentioned before.After the mother of Katherine Thatcher (well played by Mia Sara) dies Katherine is then on a quest to find her father. She is shown mysterious dreams and is being followed. She unearths information about her father and learns he is a vampire. Her father is Anthony Perkins and he does quite a fine job in the role. A thing that is different about the vampires in this movie and I admit I am not 100% sure why they did this is they do not have fangs, their tongues have fangs. Kind of weird, but it doesn't seem to really take away from the movie. It is the acting of the two main characters Mia Sara and Anthony Perkins that do bring this movie up. As well as the more than capable direction from Stuart Gordon. Worth a look if you can find it.

(Credit to Paul Lancaster) The Daughter of Darkness is an atmospheric, sub-hallucinogenic venture into the world of the unknown. The enigma facing the young woman is the identity of her father. Unfortunately for her she becomes drawn into a small Romanian underworld of brooding menace, darkness, torture chambers and bizarrely over make-overed vampires. This was actually not too shabby! The first half is a little slow, but never really boring. The second half really picks up and turns into a watchable, made for TV movie. I watched this because of Anthony Perkins! He's one of my favorites and I've tried to track this movie down for a while. This movie is very low-budget. It's also cheap looking (What do you expect from a movie that is filmed in Bucharest?) The Vampires themselves are not very creepy looking and feel somewhat out-of-place in the modern world. Placing vampires in a contemporary setting didn't work all that well in this movie. The makeup is poor and the low-budget really shows in that aspect of it. I liked how the vampires bit with their tongue, it was creative, I'll admit that. The creepy dream sequences provide a couple of thrills, though they do get a tad redundant at times. There is also some hallucinatory imagery that works, as well as some creepy atmosphere at times. Mia Sara is OK at best. She's great to look at, but she's on and off for the most part. She's slightly sympathetic, but she doesn't have the talent to pull it off. I like her, but not exactly for her acting. Anthony Perkins is nowhere near his best, but he can be entertaining, even when he's clearly here for the paycheck. His accent is average, but his presence alone keeps you glued to the screen. It was always livelier when he was around. This was one of his obscure T.V projects before his untimely demise. Jack Coleman is alright as the love interest, but I got annoyed at his cavalier attitude. If you stick with the slow first half, you'll be semi-rewarded with a solid second half. I didn't mind it and thought it passed the time decently for a TV movie. You can do better, but you could also do a lot worse5.3/10

I vividly remember the harrowing news bulletins and devastating images of Romania during the late 80's/early 90's, when the controversial reign of Ceausescu slowly came to an end and the nation was consumed with relentless violence and economical recession. It was definitely not the best place to be around that time, especially not if you were a member of a foreign (and thus 'wealthier') film crew. All the time whilst watching "Daughter of Darkness" I was wondering how Stuart Gordon and his crew were able to film amidst the thoroughly dangerous political climate in Bucharest, until of course I realized – and double checked the filming location section on IMDb – the whole movie was shot in Hungary instead. This was probably the wisest, not to mention safest, thing to do and in all honesty Budapest looks and feels just as ominous as Bucharest. That needless bit of information being said, "Daughter of Darkness" is a fairly successful and worthwhile little made-for-TV chiller that offers an okay albeit predictable and cliché-ridden plot and a couple of admirable acting performances. Those who are familiar with director Stuart Gordon's awesome repertoire (and if you're not: move your butt towards the nearest video store and rent "Re-Animator", "From Beyond" and "Castle Freak"!!) will promptly notice this is a rather atypical effort coming from him. His usual work features Grand Guignol make up effects and utterly absurd situations whereas this modestly produced film maintains a serious, almost dramatic tone and very sober decors. Following the death of her mother, cherubic twenty-something Cathy Thatcher travels to Romania all by herself because the only thing she knows about her father is that he and her mother met in Bucharest. With little help from the American ambassador and only a creepy taxi driver to rely on, Cathy quickly gets entangled in a mysterious web hinting at vampirism and political murder. She meets a peculiar glassblower (Anthony "Norman Bates" Perkins) and falls in love with a local hunk, all the while completely unaware of how dangerously close she finds herself to the truth regarding of her family's bloodline. The plot is remotely involving, even though you're always several steps ahead of the script, and Mia Sara's natural charm & innocence make it pretty much impossible not to care for her. The actual vampires are stereotypical characters and behave as such, though with one notable exception, namely they suck the blood of their victims using fangs that only appear when their tongues split open. This is a bizarre little gimmick, and I have no idea where it origins from, but it's hardly special enough to make the film is must-see genre effort. Perkins tries his best, but he obviously struggles with the accent as wells as with the lack of motel rooms and shower kills. There's very little blood and spectacle to find here (TV-movie, remember?) but the atmosphere is moody and the old buildings look uncanny. Hardly priority viewing for horror fans, but worth a peek nonetheless.

I recently bought this film for my girlfriend who had fond memories of watching it as a teenager. Being a made for TV film it does have some rather low production values, and some of the scripting is a little wooden. However, there is no denying that it has a certain atmosphere that you don't find in many films. Perhaps it had something to do with the location (the bulk of the film is set within Bucharest in Romania) or perhaps it is the combination of the set and the subject matter.Whatever the cause, the dreamy, sinister atmosphere of the film does make it worth watching...so long as you don't expect too much from it.If you like vampire films and haven't watched this yet then I can recommend it, a good film also for anyone wanting to catch a flavour of Eastern Europe and some of Romania's seedy little area's.