Vampire$

My first introduction to the novel came about to John Carpenter's film version. I loved it, and would put it in one of the classic horror titles produced in the last twenty years or so. I looked for the novel fruitlessly for years, untill one day I finally found it in a book store. Devoured it in a weekend. The characterisations were amazing, and it has several good set pieces, especially when a group of vamps attack the slayer's in a church.



Is there anyone who loves the film, or more specifically, the book as well or am I alone?

It's an adaptation, so you gotta keep that in mind. It can't be a straight up copy.......for one thing, the movie would have to be about six hours long to even get half the depth of the book characters, something which Carpenter states in the commentary.
However, I DO think it did something important and captured the flavour of the book. It is a wonderful hybrid of a horror and a western, and I felt like it nailed the book's, well for lack of a better word, "look", or how I imagined it would look. Woods captured Crow's wild side exactly, it's just a shame we didn't see his softer, more vunerable side. I understand your argument completely, but I really truly think it's impossible to capture EVERY thing in a book on film, so why not just stick to th ebasic concept or ideas? (This being vatican sponsered vampire hunters) and some of the set pieces from the book was done very very well, and I thought the opening was done great too.

Starship Troopers is a movie I love but that was using the books themes, and mocking them (how war and violence do solve issues, which Heinlien does imply in one speech by Razcheck) .