Gemma Arterton might be a good reason for me to like this movie, but it is not. She is gorgeous, even as a Vampire, but the truth is that the movie is kind of interesting. It is a drama, more than anything else. There are no really stale moments, and the story is quite fluid. But the best thing on the movie is not just vampires that do not bite (but use a pointy nail), but the way the story is told. In different moments different characters tell parts of the relevant story. And as you might imagine, given it is a Vampire story, we are not talking about a few years story, but more than 200 years of story. Not all those years are relevant, but you understand the idea. Just like some comment on ICheckMovies, I can say this is a refreshing Vampires movie. Not the usual boring way. Very different. I kind of liked it (not a favorite movie, but enough for a 7 in 10 @ IMDB).
Yes, I went to the movie theater knowing what to expect from the movie. I knew it was some kind of Scary Movie but, instead of having horror as the central point, having vampires. And it could be a good source of ideas, as at the moment there are lots of series about vampires. Probably I did not understand some of the jokes because I do not watch them. Oh well.
The movie sucks. No story, no intelligent jokes. Just stupidity. Of course it make me laugh. We laugh of stupidity often. In fact, we laugh of people falling and injuring themselves (just look to the usual Fail videos on the Internet).
Scary Movie movies had at least two or three nice looking actresses, and a lot of sexual jokes. Vampires Suck just has Jenn Proske (she is a really cutie, let me tell you) and the amount of sexual jokes is not really relevant.