The Fearless Vampire Killers [1967] Movie Review

"The Fearless Vampire Killers" is a 1967 movie directed by Roman Polanski, and the second of Sharon Tate's starring roles. I rented the movie on youtube. It was 1 hour and 47 minutes long.

While watching the movie, I wondered if it was possible that Polanski saw the movie "Viy", which had been released that same year, as both movies have a similar tone to them. I doubt that he did, but the theme between the two couldn't be unnoticed by me. There was definitely a similar idea from the book "Dracula" by Bram Stoker though. I also wondered if Polanski had possible been inspired by "Black Sunday/The Masque of Satan", which had been released in 1960. That movie was also inspired by the same story "Viy" which was written by Nikolai Gogol, that the 1967 movie was based off of. 

The movie in general has this tongue in cheek aspect to it, with some funny moments. I found Alfred (played by Roman Polanski) to have some funny reactions to certain scenes, like when Sarah (Sharon Tate) was kidnapped by the vampire.  Alfred's shriek when he saw Yoyek rise as a vampire was also pretty funny. Personally, I found some of the sexual jokes and undertones hard to laugh at, considering Polanski's career in the decades since the movie's release.

Despite being a comedy, or Horror-satire-comedy-type, it's not really as funny as one might expect. The title to the movie is the first joke, as Polanski's character and his Professor are two of the most wimpy vampire hunters around. This was surely intended. 

I really enjoyed the shots and set building to the movie. I think that was one of the shining points to the movie, I loved seeing the snow fall. 

The movie is a slow burn, taking its time to establish its points, which from what I understand, is pretty typical of Polanski's style.  Sharon looked absolutely beautiful in the movie, and I truly wish that she had been shown more. I found it almost a misnomer that she "starred" in the movie, when she really didn't have that much of the runtime. Majority of the time, you see Polanski on screen in the movie. 

 

 

 

A part of me found it pretty arrogant for Polanski to direct and star in the movie. Even though this was a different time period, and I know that many of the women in movies back then were just there to be ogled at, much of the plot to the movie would have made more sense if we saw Sharon more. Her character was seen just a few times, before Polanski decides that he had to save her. It was odd, why did he want to risk his life for a woman that he just met? 

The movie ran too long for me, and I think that some scenes could have been cut. From a viewer's position, there were just too many threads introduced that really didn't amount to much. In some ways, it was like Roman took a lot of funny ideas from TV shows from that time period, and tried to combine them into one long episode. If "The Fearless Vampire Killers" had been a TV show, I think that it would have been easier to digest, and more enjoyable. 

 --

Of course, during the time of filming this movie, Sharon and Roman fell in love, and got married just a few months after the movie was released. In 1968, the two were wed. You can kind of see how in the movie, some of the glances that Roman would take at Sharon, were him actually gazing at her beauty.

 And Sharon looked absolutely stunning in the vampire royal dance scene, where she was in her red ball gown. I would have loved to have seen more scenes with her in that dress. 

 I will be honest, I was scared to watch this movie at first, because of everything I've read about the Manson Family, and Sharon's murder. I didn't know if I would have been able to watch the movie without tearing up. But thankfully, I was able to go through it. As stated before, I actually wish that we could have seen Sharon more. 

Because of what happened to Sharon 2 years after the film's release, I couldn't help but look through the newspaper archives to see what was said about the film before and in the years after its release.

A 1967 article from The Daily News, that was more of a promotion piece for the movie.

1967 ad for the movie

1967 promotional article 

A 1967 article that talks about the movie a little bit. Apparently, it was originally cut and redubbed so much, that Polanski didn't want his name on it anymore. I couldn't find what the "original" cut of the movie ran for in theaters, but it seems that it was nothing like the original.

In various versions of these types of articles, it was stated that the movie was filmed in Italy and London, though the parts that were filmed in Poland, were not filmed/directed by Polanski "for some reason". Looking at the wikipedia article for the film, there were multiple issues with the movie's filming. Polanski believed that some of the Italian crew were "robbing them blind". 
 

 

 

1968 ads for the movie

 

There were a couple of ads for the movie in early 1969, January, though the news didn't really discuss it that much. 

 After Sharon's murder, the movie was especially advertised in the news, and played in theaters in August of 1969. In general, majority of the films that Sharon was in were replayed in honor of her.

 

 For those that don't know, yet are somehow reading this blog post, Sharon Tate was murdered by The Manson on August 9th, 1969. She was 8.5 months pregnant, very close to her due date, and begged for the life of her child. Tex Watson and Susan Atkins were the ones to kill her. Both were convicted and sentenced to death, though in 1972, this was commuted to life with the possibility of parole. Susan Atkins died in 2009. 

In 1969, "The Fearless Vampire Killers" was often advertised alongside "The Green Slime", a 1968 sci-fi movie.

 

"Vampire Killers" clearly stayed in rotation for years, because of the Tate-LaBianca murders, and the circus of the Manson family trial. Pictures of Sharon would even be printed next to some of the summaries of the movie in the papers, even as late at 1976. 

 Even still, the movie was still advertised and shown in the news, decades after its release. Any actual articles or reviews of the movie would always mention Sharon's murder by the Manson Family. In some ways, it seemed like Roman was keeping Sharon's memory alive by having the movie shown in decades since it was released, and her murder. The movie has been mentioned in the news in some way, every year, as recently as 2025 (it's 2026 as I type this). There are still places that show the movie to this day, in person. And of course, you can stream it online on services such as youtube and Amazon. 

I really couldn't find any actual reviews for the movie in the new archives, except one. It was from 1984, and pretty much said much of the same things I have. It's not a super funny movie, but it has good elements to it. In the decades since Sharon's murder, it's hard not to think what could have been for her, had life been different. 

 If you don't know who Sharon Tate, or the Manson Family were, I don't know if this would be a movie the average person would even think about watching. I don't mean that in a mean way, but in comparison to other vampire films (The Hammer Horror ones especially), you might think of watching something else. Truly, I think that this is the type of movie that a person like me, who has read extensively about Charles Manson and The Tate-LaBianca murders would watch. Seeing Sharon move and speak humanized her a lot, where books and movies such as "Helter Skelter" only seemed to remember her as the murdered pregnant actress. It was nice to see her alive, in her work, even if it was for a small bit of time. 

I gave the movie itself a 2.5/5, but that's because the story wasn't that great. It's pretty cheesy. But I would watch it again, for Halloween, in a party setting. 

 1995 Daily Mirror clip 

VIY 1967 Review

  VIY 1967

“Viy” is a Soviet Union made film from 1967. It’s said to be the Soviet Union horror film. I watched it for free on Fawesome, on January 12th, 2026. 

I went in blind watching the film, only hearing that it was pretty scary. I knew nothing else about it. Upon first look, I was immediately enamored with the creepy opening shots of the spiderwebs and stone. It can be immediately said that “Viy” is a beautiful movie. I was really taken back by the various shots that were legitimately taken outdoors. The countryside shots were beautiful to see, and so well captured. In general, the captures in the movie are so well done and artistic. I was legitimately shocked that the movie originally came out in 1967, because the camerawork was ahead of its time, nearly seeming like something from the 1980’s. There’s a lot that doesn’t seem to be known about the film’s background; production trivia is scant. 

The plot of “Viy” is based off of the story of the same name. Originally a story written by Nikolai Gogol, the movie follows the story faithfully. This was interesting to watch after seeing “Black Sunday”, which was released 7 years prior in 1960, and was also inspired by the story. The difference though is that “Black Sunday” is much more inspired than a faithful recreation. “Viy” is essentially the story made into movie form, from what I understand. 
To quickly sum up the plot, three Seminary students get lost after being released for break. They come across a farm, and the old woman only allows them to stay if they agree to sleep in separate rooms. Our main character, Khoma, goes into the barn to sleep, when the old lady comes in trying to seduce him. She climbs on his shoulders and they run outside, where they start flying. Khoma realizes that she’s a witch, he calls on Christ, and they land, where he proceeds to beat the witch to death. Before she dies, she transforms into a beautiful woman. Khoma then runs away, back to the Seminary, where he’s told that he’s to say prayers over a Sotnik’s dying daughter; the daughter asked for him specifically. Despite not wanting to go, he’s forced to anyway. Right before arriving, the daughter dies. When Khoma goes in to see the woman, she turns out to be the beautiful woman he killed. Khoma is then to say prayers over her for 3 nights while locked in the church. After the 3 days, he’s supposed to get 1000 gold. To spoil the ending, this doesn’t happen, and Khoma is scared to death. 

The movie isn’t very long, only about 1 hour and 16 minutes. It builds up in the first half, just to get to the church. I think that this build up is necessary, to understand how much of a coward Khoma was, because he couldn’t admit he hurt that girl. I don’t think he ever admits to anyone in the movie that he killed her. Eventually, it’s made clear that this is all part of an ancient folktale, that the other people are aware of. So, it might have been possible that people knew he killed her. Either way, it seems that others knew he was being haunted by the witch’s spirit. 

Even though this is considered the first Soviet Horror Film, I don’t find the movie scary, honestly. But, I don’t think the Soviet Union would have allowed to it be any creepier than it is. The “horror” aspect is much more in the Scooby Doo spooky realm, than something like “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”. But I think that this is fitting, considering that it’s a folktale, and not a slasher film. 

I found the practical effects absolutely amazing in the movie. There was obviously a lot of work put into all of the sets and props. This is most strongly seen at the end of the movie, where the monsters all come out of the Church crevices. The biggest one of all, being Viy. I found the Goblin Viy himself to be an interesting creature, though lackluster in the sense that he wasn’t really worth the movie being named after. Viy was a creature entirely different from the witch, though I know that this is how the original story goes. It’s still a shame though, that Viy is only in the movie for a very short period of time, before it ends. 

The effects used in the movie really show during this final scene, all of the detail that went into making it. The use of green screen magic really added to the magical sense of the movie. Though the modern eye can easily tell that it’s green screen, I think that this looks really well considering the folklore theme. The end part with the hands surrounding Khoma looked really cool and haunted. The wooden Church used for the set adds to this creepy folklore story, and Scooby Doo vibe. I know that Scooby came out 2 years after the movie was made, but I can’t think of anything else that comes close to the feeling that “Viy” conjures.  The campy creepy feeling, that’s a lot more silly in the end, but in a good way. 

The movie has this more classic “scary” feeling, using hand gestures with the girl, in ways that remind me of how theater shows will use hands a lot to create even the smallest of effects during a play. 

I also loved the use of the green screen for the drunk effect, when the men were in the tavern, before reaching the dying woman. I’ve never seen a movie use the screen before in such a way, and I thought that it was very clever. 

Overall, I think that this is a great movie, and actually, really funny. I loved how the camera showed the expression on Khoma’s face when the other women started telling the tale of the witch, which is what ended up happening to him. I don’t know what you’d call this type of cinematography in general, but I love this style so much. It’s definitely one of the earliest examples of “modern” movie making, or rather, an early film that takes a step away from the standard “Old Hollywood”, “Golden Era” film. It uses shots and set making that are similar to movies seen in the 70’s, and that era of horror movies. One that comes to mind, is “Magic” with Anthony Hopkins. That film style is what I thought of, when I saw “Viy”, and ironically, those films are 12 years apart! I’m unsure what the film influences to “Viy” are, but they had to have been different from the standard Hollywood hits of the time. 

Not much info is out there about the movie in general. It seems to have come to America around 2001, judging by a DVD version being released that year, according to Wikipedia. I didn’t see anything about it in the newspaper archives. IMDB doesn’t have much more info either, just some of the same things that are on wikipedia. Interestingly, the wooden church used in the film burned down, but was rebuilt in 2006.

 One of the interesting things about the movie was how it so beautifully captured people who were born a very long time ago. It’s interesting watching this film in 2026, 59 years later. Many of the actors have since passed away, and any of the living young people are old now. Some of the characters, such as the man who plays the old version of the witch, and a few of the men that go with Khoma to the dying woman, were born in the 1800’s! It’s mind blowing, to see actors so well depicted, yet having been born so far away from the time we are in now. I think that goes to show, that with a high enough quality camera, decades in the past can seem nearly modern day, or a few years ago. 

Overall, I think that the movie is worth watching, though you’ll have to read the subtitles. I have no problem with that, though some people do. I found this movie funny, interesting, and artistically beautiful. If you’re into underground horror, weird, cult movies, this is something you should at least watch once. I can actually see myself watching this again. If anything, you should watch the movie for the silly little pufferfish ghoul that they glued crab legs onto. I have no idea what that thing was, but it was so silly and cute. 

4/5 Stars

 

My video: https://youtu.be/Y1Z4SAz6LAQ