SunnyHello Nice effects though.

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Kinley This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Leofwine_draca This is a derivative and quite frankly dreary old horror flick that owes much of its plot and inspiration to Dracula. There's the same kind of plot, with a lot of mysterious deaths in a remote village, blood loss and all. Except here there are no actors like Bela Lugosi and Edward Van Sloan to enjoy, only Lionel Atwill who puts in a rather impassive performance. There's also a lack of focus to the story (there's a rather large lull and then a sudden burst of plot in the last twenty minutes) and also a noticeable lack of action. No music either seems to drag the pacing of this film down to snail-speed, so this one is definitely for fans of the genre only, people who know what they're letting themselves in for.The trouble with this film is the characters; none of them really do much and most of the roles are quite boring and lacking in intrigue. Lionel Atwill - a much underrated horror star of the period, mixing classics like MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM and enjoyable low budget gems like MURDERS IN THE ZOO - has a great, menacing screen presence but is given no material to work with. If only the director had given him the opportunity to act up a little more and put some meat into his part. Similarly, famed screamer Fay Wray is almost unnoticeable in her serviceable role, her inclusion seemingly just to have a female face around. She is in the background for most of the time and is only put in danger once, at the end. If I remember correctly she doesn't even get the opportunity to scream! Melvyn Douglas is the bland policeman hero, so that leaves only Dwight Frye to put some life into the film. Frye plays a madman, a virtual reprisal of his Renfield role from Dracula, and is by far the most enjoyable thing in this film.Some atmosphere is built up as this film proceeds, but it's wasted in a finale which reveals that the supernatural is not to blame for the vampiric deaths. To make matters worse, there's even a "cheat" at the end which allows our heroes to escape with their lives intact, let's just say that it's a plot point that jumps suddenly out of nowhere with no warning. It's like the scriptwriters couldn't think of a way to finish the film so just made the first thing up that came into their heads instead. Overall, THE VAMPIRE BAT is an effectively brooding and atmospheric little B-movie, marred by stilted dialogue, a lack of pacing, and a story that goes nowhere.

gavin6942 When the villagers of Klineschloss start dying of blood loss, the town fathers suspect a resurgence of vampirism. While police inspector Karl remains skeptical, scientist Dr. von Niemann cares for the vampire's victims one by one, and suspicion falls on simple-minded Herman Gleib because of his fondness for bats.Majestic Pictures had lower overheads than the larger studios, who were struggling at the time during the Great Depression. Part of the reason that "The Vampire Bat" looked almost as good as any Universal Pictures horror film is because Majestic leased James Whale's castoffs, the "German Village" backlot sets left over from "Frankenstein" (1931) and the interior sets from his film "The Old Dark House" (1932), plus some location shooting at Bronson Caves. Completing the illusion that this was a film from a much bigger studio, Majestic hired actor Dwight Frye to populate scenes with Wray and Atwill.While the film has fallen into public domain and thus has some rather shoddy versions floating around, it is not by any means a bad film. Fay Wray is at her best here, and really ought to be known for more than being "King Kong's girlfriend". Lionel Atwill is also good, and Dwight Frye steals the show with his shtick. His role here is not too far removed from his turn as Renfield, which is unfortunate for him in that it made him typecast, but definitely resonated with fans of "Dracula".If a decent version does not exist, it ought to. With a new transfer and a decent historian on the audio commentary (Steve Haberman?) this would make a great companion to the Universal films. It is, after all, more or less a Universal knockoff anyway.

GL84 After several mysterious deaths around town, a town doctor and detective disprove the old town legend about vampires as the rising death toll suggests that vampire bats are the real culprit they band together to bring it to justice.This here wasn't all that bad and did have some good moments. One of the better features is that this here did get some rather atmospheric scenes at times, most notably the opening where a witness observes a figure leaving the scene of a crime on the rooftops from below though the trees. The combination of the setting and the scene taking place at night is a great combination and that there's other outside factors contributing to this one makes it all the better. The later confrontations inside the cave are quite fun which give off an air of suspense and creepiness, which is aided nicely by the sight of burning pitchforks and dogs barking off in the distance as well as features a lot of nice action since it's tagged off chasing scenes. Though these are presented as the follow-up scenes of many of these encounters, there's still plenty of energy here giving them some extra incentive to go alongside the rather fine mystery which is quite nicely layered with the attacks rousing the same local hysteria and mounting fear that's handedly played well with their dismissals and continued search leading them into fine territory with the action in the final half. These here are what make the film enjoyable though this here does have a few discernible flaws with it. One of the main ones is that this one doesn't know what kind of film it wants to be, as this one toys with vampires and killer vampire bats at several points, yet doesn't seem comfortable with either one as the villain. Despite strong evidence for both as the main target, they're automatically dismissed right when it makes sense at the time in the perfect opportunity given. The last flaw is that it doesn't really do much in the middle of the film. This is mostly relegated to talking about the situation on-hand and doesn't spend any time on the real heart of the story. That can make it seem like a drag, which isn't needed on a film this short. As well as the confusion over what happens in the finale, these here are what hold this one down.Today's Rating-PG: Mild Violence.

Uriah43 "Karl Brettschneider" (Melyvn Douglas) lives in the small village of Klineschloss and is investigating 6 strange deaths that have happened in as many weeks. The peculiar thing about them is that each person was totally drained of blood and had two small "bite marks" on their neck which has led the villagers to believe that these deaths are due to a vampire. Likewise, the fact that huge bats have been seen around town and a local man by the name of "Herman Gleib" just happens to collect bats as pets have convinced them that he is the vampire. But Karl isn't so sure about any of it. Yet as the deaths continue even he becomes more in tune with the idea. At any rate, rather than detail the rest of the movie and possibly spoil it for those who haven't seen it I will just say that for an older film of this nature it was at the very least watchable. I especially liked the addition of Fay Wray (as Karl's girlfriend "Ruth Bertin") whose presence at the very least added some nice scenery to the picture. In any case, as I stated earlier this film was certainly watchable and I rate it as about average.