Ever since 'interview with the vampire' came out back in the early 90's I've been waiting for someone to make the definitive Gothic vampire flick...maybe i should do it hahaha something serious, with tons of sex, blood and rock n roll...I've seen most of the old hammer horrors (Lust for a Vampire is a good one) plus some by Jean Rollin and Jess Franco (check Vampyres Lesbos, wat a trip!),and read tons of books...

this one isn't bad, the director obviously had some vision...SFX were OK, camera angles and use of music was good and i liked the locations...the babes are cute but the acting was pretty terrible...the whole thing is very B-grade, but that isn't always a bad thing in my opinion. U don't need millions of dollars to make a good movie, but solid actors may have changed this from an OK vampire flick into something special...

any 'twilight' fans can forget this. This isn't hardcore as far as im concerned, but would definitely be on past their bedtimes...

What works with Temptation:

1.) Topless violin playing. I love the violin.

2.) There were times during this tedious production, that I thought about turning it off and trying to weather it in nibble-sized pieces. Why I didn't was because Caroline Haines gives a compelling enough performance as Isabel. Her performance is better than the movie she's in and her acting is better than 99.9998% of the horrendous "acting" I see trying to endure these indie screeners. I couldn't think of a moment that I didn't believe Haines, long after I had given up on the movie. It's a wonder what a British accent can do to elevate a performance.

What doesn't work:

1.) In this "feminine approach to the vampire genre", writer Julianne White and director Catherine Taylor have attempted to make an Interview-with-the-Vampire-ish goth drama instead of a straight horror movie, but the results are a lot more tedious. I couldn't think of a single scare, even a cheap one. Or if there had been, I hadn't noticed it because I was so bored.

2.) Random characters have almost page-long monologues that have nothing to do with the main story line. As I watched I wondered what the hell these speeches had to do with the rest of the movie. Nothing.

3.) A character (I didn't bother to remember minor character names) "accidentally" leaves a body drained of blood in the middle of a park for the cops to find. I was unintentionally laughing at this rather convenient plot development, but I can't complain too much, since it was something other than monotony.

Despite the undeniable allure of lesbian vampires, resist any temptation to see this, as the movie will leave you unfulfilled on nearly every level. Its lack of both frights and effective titillation will leave you wanting… …for the Lesbian Vampire Killers to appear, if only to end this movie prematurely.

I've given this 9 out of 10 and the reason is you have to take it in context.

It has a story. It delivers that story. It's an indie production - I like that - it should be encouraged. Some of the acting isn't great. It's got girls. It's got breasts aplenty And it's got vampires Best of all it's set in London....

In a nutshell, I think people get too precious about film and treat everything like it should be a masterpiece. Not everything is. If we deride everything for what it's not.

If you part with your hard earned cash to see it at a cinema or buy it on DVD I don't think you'll be disappointed.