John Carpenter's Vampires

First myth dispelled.  John Carpenter is not a legendary director.  He is however a legend in his own mind and a crafty businessman who actually got the studio to give him a huge multi-picture deal and the right to have his name in each movies title.   It tricks you into thinking the studio is proud of him, when in fact they are just legally obligated.  John ( The law says I'm great) Carpenter has directed some entertaining films (Big trouble in little China and They Live are two of my favourites)  but usually it is the characters and script that made the film above average. Carpenter has his hand in a lot of stinkers too - Prince of Darkness being possibly one of the stupidest movies ever made.
Anyway, time ran out for John Carpenters Contract, and he churned out 2 movies in a row just in time for the millennium.  The highly average Halloween 2, (strangely dubbed H2O in a clear case of misdirected cleverness)
Then it came next. The worst movie I have ever had the excruciating misfortune to review.
The least offensive part of the movie had to be the complete lack of creativity.  The title says it all: Vampires. wow.  The main character is Jack Crow (James Woods clearly fulfilling a contract to do this role), The Vampire leader is named Valek (played by who cares) The costumes and swords and crucifixes are all standard issue (oh yawn, he is wearing a black leather jacket and shades and Valek has white make-up with dark eye shadow!) All standard, also the idea of a Vampire/Western had already been done 4 times that year I think. 
Did I mention that the soundtrack is a John Carpenter original?  Imagine a middle-aged man with no talent and a digital musicmaker program for Windows 98.  Yes, it is that lame and self indulgent.

Anyway, here is the premise; Jack Crow is hired by the Catholic Church to kill Vampires. Now get this twist -The Catholics (pompous old white men, of course) double cross Jack and cause his people to be killed, all to cover up things in the Church. Now only one man can stop them and he plays by his own set of rules.  Just shoot me. I kept waiting for Yapphet Kotto to appear as the angry black chief to round out the clichés
Apparently aware of the filmgoers inevitable boredom, Carpenter has a brilliant non-idea;  He 'directs' James woods to improv the scenes.  Woods then takes his abilities to the limits, which to Woods means becoming so intense that he  explodes into violent rage against anyone within the frame!  This may sound like awesome in-your-face acting but it is really just stupid.  For no reason every scene is some psychotic asshole attacking people. Why?  Who knows. Wouldn't that priest run away if being savagely beaten with a phone? Why would he stay to deliver his next lines?  Don't bother asking anymore because nothing is real and everyone is an asshole in this movie. It co-stars Daniel Baldwin (yes, he is the one you don't think you like.)  He beats women sadistically and carjacks innocent people.  Why do I care if a vampire kills him? I don't, but even if Valek and his hip vampires do rise out of dirt piles on the side of the road and then proceed to swagger 'menacingly' down the street to a motel room, knock on the door and then walk in systematically killing the asshole, I still don't even get to see good gory killing but rather the standard reach-into-chest (that is below camera) and then squishy sounds as vampire slowly pulls out rubber heart with fake blood on it.
Great. I was reduced to wanting gore and they couldn't give me that. Could they have at least had a hot woman in this movie? Yes, one who is a whore and any others were hip vampires. The whore gets beaten and any she-vampires get butchered. Coming soon -John Carpenters Misogyny. The movie seemed to end with Woods defeating Valek in a one on one battle bla-bla, It was all so quick with the fast-forward going.
Oh and one final warning. No it isn't 'so bad it’s good'. It is just pathetic.