The first thing I'd like to say about this movie is that the synopsis is incorrect. While the vampire "Alex" (Julian Sands) does in fact drink the blood of animals, it also clearly shows him drinking the blood of humans and he admits doing so as well. So it isn't like he's a "pacifist" or the vampire equivalent of a vegetarian or anything. I say this in order to make the mood of the movie more understandable. It's a dark film and I think Julian Sands does a good job showcasing the brooding and sad state of emotion that has come over him. Likewise, Suzanne Hamilton (as both "Anne" and "Virginia") also shows a certain sense of loneliness that is necessary for the character as well as a sober film of this type. To be sure, this is not an action-packed film with all of the usual clichés thrown in for good measure. The vampires in this film can function during the day without bursting into flames and there are no scenes of wooden stakes through the heart. So some viewers may not enjoy the film because of the lack of action or preset notions they have come to expect. On the other hand, I don't believe that this is a film without flaws either. In some parts it is both slow and dull and I think it was due more to the director (Shimako Sato) trying to create something "artistic" rather than something just simply enjoyable. But that's just my opinion. I also would have preferred that Julian Sands had shown a bit more passion instead of keeping things so lifeless and understated. In short, this isn't a bad movie. But I don't think it set any new standards of excellence either.

I have to admit that Julian Sands is one of my favorites, and it was the strength of Mr. Sands in the title role that was my draw to film. It was a very atmospheric piece with some of the most haunting scenes that I can remember in a movie.All of the three principals in the film did an excellent job! I liked the plot a lot. The movie kept you wondering who the love interest was. You wondered if she was immortal. The twist ending was unexpected, but on a second watching, the director did insert clues throughout the film.It was not quite the Sixth Sense, but Tale of a Vampire did it better than most movies do.

I watch lots of scary movies (or at least they try to be) and this has to be the worst if not 2nd worst movie I have ever had to make myself try to sit through. I never knew the depths of Masacism until I rented this piece of moldy cheese covered in a used latex contraceptive. I am a fan of Julian Sans, but this is worse than I would hope for him.On the other hand the story was promising and I was intrigued...for the first minute and a half while the credits rolled and I had yet to see what pain looked like first hand. Perhaps there are some viewers out there that enjoyed this and can point me in the right direction, but then again I know of those viewers who understand if not commemorate me, especially when we had to turn the video off, and that simply is NOT done with our watching (we had to make one exception obviously). If it were up for a remake, I'd give it a chance so long as they had at most 1% of the original incorporated into it. That's all.

Vampire falls in love with a woman who looks an awful lot like a long lost love of his who died many centuries ago. However, a pesky doctor seems to know more then he is letting on and seems to have an evil motive. All three leads are exceptional (as far as horror movies go), the sets are well done, and the premise & story is intelligent & interesting, but the snail like pace almost does in a fine horror film.Rated R; Violence.