JulianPeacock This is one of those films which (like most straight to video/DVD fodder!) sadly, unfortunately DOES NOT live up to its poster! I remember years ago in the late 1990s, seeing a VHS (yes that long ago!) copy of it in my local video rental store, picking it up, reading the cover and thinking (as other reviewers have already mentioned) that in this film Don Wilson had a similar look to that of Brandon Lee in The Crow. And that it sounded like quite a fun film and also a bit of a change for Don Wilson, I believe it's the only slightly Horror themed film he has appeared in. However I didn't bother renting it at the time (1998/99) and it wasn't until many years later (2013) that I actually saw the film when someone kindly uploaded it for free on Youtube (In fact most crappy straight to DVD/video films should be uploaded on Youtube, because they certainly aren't worth paying to see!). And when I eventually did see it I thought to myself "That was crap and it didn't live up to its poster" and furthermore "I'm glad I didn't pay to see that all those years ago in the video rental shop". Like most low budget, straight to DVD films, the film is hampered by budget limitations, poor acting and a lame script. And as everyone else has mentioned, I really do not understand that earthquake camera effect?! William C Martell, the man responsible for the poor script usually blames the failure of films he wrote on the cast and crew involved and never seems to take his fair share of the blame! He often claim that the cast and crew changed almost every word he wrote! Martell said that Don Wilson did not actually want to do a horror/vampire themed film and when he eventually agreed to it, he wanted to control every damn part of the film? Well that may be true but from the looks of things Martell probably wrote the script in a couple of weeks, if that? He really needed to spend more time on it and made sure he sold it to a better production company as well! Don Wilson claims that ALL of the films that he "starred" in "made money" by that I assume he means that they broke even? But I find that hard to believe, because more expensive Wilson films such as the Cybertracker films had a few million spent on them (from the look of them) and how does a film that did not get a cinema release make a few million to break even? They couldn't have made that much on video, because it's the films that were previously at the cinema that make the most on video, not a film that's been released straight to DVD/video and "stars" a cast of nobodies.

Wizard-8 In a change of pace, Roger Corman just distributed "Night Hunter", and didn't have anything to do with its making. That may explain why the production values of this Don Wilson movie a little better than usual, with some well-chosen locations that don't make this effort look as cheap as usual. Despite this, I knew I would still be in for a rough time, since the movie was made by schlock producer Ashok Amritraj. The script is pretty bad, with plot points that are never explained (like the healing elixir) or don't make up their mind (the movie at one point says vampires can be killed by breaking their necks... then later says they can be killed by breaking their backs!) Most people who watch this movie won't care about the script, and will just be interested in seeing the action. But be warned, the action isn't very good. The action is extremely tightly filmed, with rapid editing and unspectacular choreography. With most of his movies being as badly made as this, I think I know why Wilson retired from making movies several years ago.

Ky-D Pun intended. This low budget action/horror vehicle for Don Wilson's ability to kick things is the stuff direct-to-video fare is made of.The plot: Wilson is a humorless vampire hunter who comes under fire from local law enforcement after he is forced to slaughter creatures of the night in view of the public. Police chase him, vampires chase him, he responds by kicking...a lot.There is a little more to the story, but it is so inconsequential that I honestly can't remember it; I think people actually spoke in the movie, but that's up to debate. The plot is nothing more than a set-up for Wilson to kill as many vampires as possible in the running time, usually by kicking them.The technical specs are, in a word, anemic. Little color treating, amateurish use of lighting, simplistic use of camera and angle. Blood and gore is noticeably limited, odd for this type of film. The most hurtful of the filming foul-ups is the jarring shift to super-shaky cam during each and every fight scene. If the camera begins to bounce around like a reese monkey on speed, then you know Don is about to start kicking everything in sight.All in all, this is the kind of bad movie that can be made good with a few friends and a lot of cynical humor. Otherwise, do not watch, unless you really like to watch things get kicked.3/10

Chuck Straub Night Hunter is a vampire movie that is set in modern times. The film comes up with some innovative ideas about vampirism that are at odds with the traditional vampire movies. The traditional way of killing a vampire is abandoned as well as how, or I should say when, are new vampires made. I like the old traditional ways but for one movie it's alright. The most bothersome things in this movie are the fight scenes and there are quite a few. Actually the fight scenes are the movie. Anyway, during the filming of the fight scenes, they shake, wobble and spin the camera to make it look more hectic and presumably to give it more action. It was a bad idea. It failed and they should have realized it and tried something else. All it does is ruin the scene. Since there are so many fight scenes, this annoyance is quite frequent. There are numerous mistakes, and unanswered questions throughout the film. Not enough time was spent on the details. This movie is watchable but only if you have nothing better to watch and you don't expect too much. There are much better choices out there.