Lurid vampire film, set within a seedy part of London where night feeders feast on the blood of prostitutes. Well two, in particular, both bitten by a mysterious woman, never named(..and whose face is never shown). One is Vincent Monroe(Giles Alderson), a night feeder who waxes existential about how the addiction for blood is akin to a heroine junkie's need for the next fix. He falls in love with a tough-talking, street-wise exotic dancer, Ruby(Katia Winter, who smolders on screen)for whom he bites, and turns, into a feeder. Ruby is haunted by the nightmarish childhood where memories of her heroine-addicted father(..seen at the opening as we view his puss-oozing arm, infected by the ugly needles)who would commit suicide in the next room. Ruby is being groomed as the top stripper of a club magnate, Max(Jonathan Coyne), a bald vicious sort, in tailor-made suits who "protects" the female investments under his employ. The lucrative prostitution ring he runs in his stripping establishment is ran under Max's iron fist and, along with his muscle(Daniel Kobbina), persuades his girls to participate in keeping the business a success. Ruby is continuously pressured by Max to take her position as a dancer one step further by making more money having sex with clients. Soon Ruby will attempt to leave her boss with Vincent working as her avenger..but a Jack-the-Ripper type psychopath(René Zagger), under Max's employ, also a feeder(..the other male turned by the mysterious female who seems to meet men she picks up at bars with the sole intent on spreading her "sickness" to others)has a fixation with Ruby and will seek revenge for what Vincent does to his boss, as well as to settle a score with the one who denounced his advances. This psycho is the actual one feasting on his boss' employees.I commend the effort of director Lawrence Pearce whose obviously working with a rather low budget..it really shows because he shoots most of the film at night, with characters shot in darkened rooms and streets. Set in London, the director opts to show very little of the characteristics associated with the city, probably due to financial woes than choice. Yes, he does use modern techniques, but the director seems intent on keeping this "vampire" tale story-driven, even if the setting is riddled with foul characters and ugly circumstances. London, in this film, is portrayed as a nasty world replete with loathsome people. The title is quite appropriate..this views vampirism as an addiction with the need to feed insatiable, always there yearning for blood as the body desires oxygen. We are privy to Vincent's methods in how he selects and disposes with his victims. He tries to be selective, but there are times where he must not be choosy.He informs Ruby as they stroll a bridge that over the edge is his "..cute little community which rests at the bottom of the Thames." Ruby finds this repulsive, but Vincent believes he's doing them the community a service, if he left the bodies he fed from lying dead, "..it'd be like a user dumping needles on the street." This film is very talky with Vincent narratively explaining the burden of his addiction. At the forefront is this tragic love story between two lost souls trying to make a pact against feeding, but fighting the craving for blood(..along with the psycho searching for them and his climactic confrontation)will test their bond. Not a bad little movie, I rather liked it. But, the film is drenched in unpleasantness(the sleazy nature of Max's business is exploited; René Zagger's sadistic psycho beats a drunken hooker across the face in a rage, lapping up the blood on her face like a starving mutt), so it's not for all tastes(..pun intended). Many might feel that René Zagger is a bit too over-the-top..he certainly seems to be enjoying himself, relishing his violent behavior theatrically.

Ahh, yes! -Another take on the vampire lore! I like the fact that the writer of this thing is trying to do something different with the vampire idea (as others have tried to do). The basic change always seems to involve removing some of the traditional qualities of the vampire that most of us are familiar with. In this instance, the writer went for broke and removed almost everything but the need for blood.I'm none too happy with that.The vampires in Night Junkies seem like ordinary junkies or ordinary people with a chemical addiction. There is nothing eerie or supernatural in their appearance. FOR GODSAKE, THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE FANGS! IMAGINE THAT! Practically speaking, having extended incisors makes taking blood more efficient; "neater" in fact, since you need only make 2 puncture holes in the right place. However, with regular "human" teeth it becomes a messier affair as it requires some tearing of flesh to get what you want. We could therefore say that these particular vampires are not as evolved as traditional vampires with there long sharp "practical" fangs.I think the main reason for these untraditional vampires is that the writer (and most of the IMDb commentators) wants a fresh perspective and to "update" the vampire idea. I'm all for a fresh look at the vampire idea but I really believe you do a disservice to it when you take away the eeriness and creepiness of it; the "supernatural" or "otherworldly" flavor of it, if you will. This is a big part of what scares you. So why take it out by stripping the vampire of so much of their power? The vampires in this movie are horrific only in the sense that serial killers are. Nothing preternatural about them, just psycho. This is one reason I did not like the movie that much. But also, with these human-like vampires, the movie seemed more like a depressing slice of life of those who live on the fringes of society due to mental disorders, drug addiction, and prostitution. Everybody in this movie seemed depressingly dysfunctional. In fact this "vampire" movie comes off as a METAPHOR for drug addiction and the sad lives of those so addicted. So if you want to see this movie -BE WARNED! It is a drug addiction-type movie more than a "vampire" one.I guess some writers feel that the vampire idea is more believable (and more interesting) if they are more human than they traditionally are. There may be some truth to this. But I say there has to be a way that the traditional vampire who is able to become a bat, a wolf, smoke, and able to climb sheer walls and hypnotize the hell out of you could still be interesting to today's more sophisticated audience. Love, Boloxxxi.

It is very disappointing that the IMDb reviews are ruined by people involved with a film posting 10/10 ratings and reviews that are so obviously false. Just about all the reviews/ratings for this film appear to be of that type.My review is independent and unbiased. My son asked me what the film was like after I had watched it and I replied "mediocre", which is exactly what it is. The actor playing the lead character (Vincent) was miscast - he looked the part, but his delivery was far too wooden. The other actors were okay I guess, but none of the characters made me care about what happened. The basic plot outline - modern day Jack the Ripper meets Vampires/Junkies - had promise, but it was not developed well enough. In the end it was one of those films that you watch and forget about. I have seen much worse, but I cannot recommend it to anyone.I will say there there were aspects of the film that suggest Lawrence Pearce has potential. However, he has a lot of learning to do, and would probably benefit from a screenwriter. With help, experience and a suitable leading actor, he may yet make a film that earns good reviews from more than just his family and friends.

As a puritanical fan of cinema and the concept of vampires, I have felt woefully let down by the spate of vampire flicks in recent years. The low budget ones especially have been cringe worthy. And then Lawrence Pearce comes along with his debut feature to restore my faith. It goes to show what someone with talent and vision can do on a true shoestring of a budget.Night Junkies banishes the supernatural and elitist aspects that are always tied to the vampire genre, and gone too is the un-relatable overly brooding protagonist. Pearce's vampires are junkies in the truest sense of the term, and it is certainly a much more disturbing context, particularly with a view to the more than psychotic character: these are just people, albeit with a very unusual addiction. It creates a vulnerability in the characters that is endearing, and allows for the humanising moral debate within the vampires on who they feed on, or even if they could bring themselves to do it at all, giving them fantastic depth instead of emotional flat-lining.Neither the sex nor the violence are at all gratuitous – although it is certainly shocking in places. Misogyny is not a keyword for this movie, but sexy certainly is. While most vampire movies flirt with the idea of eroticism, this film puts out. And the key thing to it is that it is never out of place, you never think that it is there for audience titillation; it flows smoothly with the plot, as it should.The Tarantino references are well earned, and like all good Tarantino movies, this movie has plenty of lines to quote. The script is fantastic in fact; the dialogue is never over fussy or disjointed. And as with any script, the delivery can make or break it. Despite the general rule that low budget equals less than second-rate acting, this film refuses to conform. The acting is far superior to other low budget movies in the genre, divine in places I would go so far to say. And while the plot is certainly dark, it is never gloomy, there is a humour to it that us horror fans particularly enjoy, especially when it is done so well so as not to detract from the mood or to create moments where it becomes a parody.I think one of the biggest joys of this movie is that it doesn't just appeal to a singular demographic or type of movie fan: it isn't limited to the enjoyment of the die-hard vampire or horror movie buff. It is enjoyable on both those levels, of course, but also for the drama and thriller audience this would hold a thrall. In fact the romance that unravels between Ruby and Vincent is truly captivating; it is a real romance, not the numb emotionally stunted whim so often portrayed in films of the genre that Pearce has managed to give the kiss of life. In short, seeing this film almost makes you feel that you have seen a number as it fills the need that each of the genres of horror, drama, thriller and romance fill – you finish it feeling satiated in the best sense of the word.I can't wait to see what will come next from this director, and I can only hope and pray for another instalment in this world he has created so expertly.