Elaine Hurt plays a cutie named Kate, her glasses help to disguise her cuteness. She is looking for a boyfriend but can not seem to find the right one. The whole movie changes when she is accidentally bitten by a vampire that is pushed into her when he is just trying to kiss her, not a bite. Her friends find out and try to help. Her male friends relate it to a video game in their heads but she has a girl friend who tries to keep it real. Then all the friends get together and try to find an actual cure for her problem. The vampire that bit her is not a bad guy, he doesn't kill anyone and sacrifices himself to turn Hurt back to a human. All in all this movie was a lot better than I thought it would be when I recorded it. This movie is not that serious and therefore it is funny with some nice looking female leads. I actually enjoyed it very much.

Yeah - anyone who completes a movie should get credit for it, and for this to be completed by a high school kid is pretty impressive.This does not make it a good movie.Other reviewers cite the low budget, but that didn't detract from the movie; in some films, it adds to the charm of indie movies.The dialog was the worst of it; stilted, awkward lines that nobody who was actually in a high school would believe came from human people. That many of the actors clearly didn't believe their lines didn't help any.The idea was good; a vampire is running amok at a SF convention, and the only people who know about it are the teens who have to try to stop him. It's formula, but it's really tough to make a horror or teen comedy without it having been done before, and the twist of it being at a SF con, where vampire costumes are everywhere, gave it a chance to be fresh.It would have helped if the SF Con was at all believable. I expect that the writer/director got some help from people who have actually gone to SF Cons, but didn't believe them; every degrading, negative stereotype was portrayed, few of which I've ever seen at a Con. "Your Tribbles and You"?? I've seen films that make fun of SF Fandom, and do it well; there's things to make fun of, but to do it well, it's important to know what you're making fun of, and Ms. Hagins clearly did not know her subject.She clearly knows teenagers better; she got two decent characters into the script, and paired them with some passable acting skill. Her other teen characters were, sadly, such cardboard cutouts that the people portraying the characters could not connect with who they were supposed to portray; the audience has no chance of taking them seriously, either.Pretty good, as a film school project, and the author/director shows some promise. But it's a school project, not something ready to release to the movie-going audience. It may look better as a double feature with something by Ewe Boll, but that still wouldn't make it something to recommend to others.

Wow, I'm shocked at the other reviews. I also saw it at SXSW and feel like I'm the one taking crazy pills after reading those negative reviews. Part of getting asses in seats is some kind of hook no matter what the budget of the thing is, it's some great story that peaks your interest. Sure I went in wondering what kind of a film could a 17 year old make and that got me in, but that thought completely fizzled out after about five minutes into it.The movie's fun regardless of whatever budget they were working with (I could care less). I absolutely found it charming, quirky, and the fact that a kid who can't even order a beer yet made it just impressed me more. There are moments where I thought "Hmm, I'd approach that differently," but I don't think it has anything to do with age/budget - I just think that's how the director wanted to go about it, which isn't to say it's bad just different. Would I give anyone in this an Oscar? No. Do I think they're going for an Oscar though? No. I think they set out to make a fun flick with goofy characters and vampires tossed into the mix and I absolutely think they succeeded.I don't know when or how this thing's coming out, but I've talked my friends ears off about the flick and can't wait for the DVD/BluRay/whatever.The movie's fun. If you can, check it out.

I caught a showing of My Sucky Teen Romance at a beautiful theater called The Paramount while attending SXSW 2011. There was a big crowd gathered pre-show so my expectations were high. I had also heard a bit about the director Emily Hagins who was supposed to be this young amazing filmmaker. I had seen a documentary about her making her first movie when she was 12 or 13 on the documentary channel. In short, my interest had been stoked. First let me say this movie is not bad - if taken in context. It was clearly a low budget indie and looked the part. It was obviously shot using minimal equipment, and with a couple of exceptions it was clear that the actors were not professionals. The feel of the story seemed too familiar to me. While the plot lines of My Sucky Teen Romance and Buffy the Vampire Slayer (movie version) are not the same - having a bunch of teens at a comic convention dealing with vampires reminded me a lot of having a bunch of teens at a prom dealing with vampires. If you keep in mind that this movie was made by a high-school student then it was pretty good for a high-school student film. Where it failed for me was that it played a major festival, when it clearly should not have. SXSW is a hometown festival for Austin, Texas and the director, Emily Hagins, is a hometown Austin girl. But my guess is, this is likely the last time she will be able to play the I'm-a-teen-movie-maker card and get away with it. In short, if you want to see a good high-school student film that was clearly made on a shoestring then you should definitely check it out. However, if you want to see a movie that stands on its own merits, without the gimmick of a child director, then you will probably want to pass and invest your time elsewhere.