djexplorer I agree with krobyn that this one was not really a horror movie, and almost entirely an erotic one. Of course, the same is true of many or most vampire type movies. It has fewer vampire and plot pretensions than most though.What carries the movie and makes it pretty good as erotic is entirely Madison Clark. She plays a sultry yet essentially innocent brunette, who is trying to make a go as a performance artist, but becomes the object of vampire attractions, along with others of course.Kobryn says she thinks its really pretty good erotica, though she says from her female perspective. Here's my male perspective. It sure isn't a hard core pump movie, or even really soft-core porn. But it is pretty hot erotica. What entirely carries the movie erotically is raven haired Madison Clark's intelligent and very soulful sexual submissiveness, just beneath the surface, which is the juice of the flick. The girl's got heat. She's a sort of "Betty Boop" type.As for explicitness, it isn't much there. A good deal of partial nudity, and erotic "performance art" dancing though. The underlying soft S&M is what creates the interest. Though the thinness and slowness of the plot makes it hard to sustain unless you're seeing it as a fooling around with your sweetie sort of movie, or while surfing the net between periods on interest, or whatever.Madison Clark has definite potential in erotica though. She seems to have mostly played bit parts as a dancer type so far, before this movie. Hey, Shannon Tweed isn't my type and is rather long in the tooth anyway. Make room.

bazdol A very nice soft core sex/vampire film. Kevin Spirtas does a fine job as the master vampire; convincing acting without going overboard (it would have been easy to do so in a film like this). I'm disappointed that Angelia High has not appeared in more movies; I thought she was also quite convincing and looked the part of a female vamp.A realistic ending.

yojimbo999 You've got "Embrace" and "Darkness" in the title, and it's made in the '90s, so what else can it be but a soft-core vampire flick? But unlike a lot of "vampire romance" movies, this one is actually pretty damn sexy. It is NOT a very good movie if you take out all the sex, but taken for what it is -- a softcore vampire flick -- it delivers in spades. Although, I could use a little less of the male vampire playing the piano to soothe away his vampire thirst -- or for whatever nonsense he was playing it. A great fast-forward movie, with plenty of opportunity to press the "play" button, since there's plenty of flesh to be spotted.

krobyn Yeah I saw this movie. I'm only admitting it because I wrote a comment on Dracula 2000 about fans of the genre. Immediately after doing so, I noticed this was on, so I decided to give it a chance to be fair as well as to see it attempt to be horrific in any way. I'd like to start by saying that I will NEVER understand how this gets listed as a horror flick. It should fall under the adult or mature category because it's nothing more than soft porn. That being said, as soft porn goes, it definitely has more of a story line to it than most. As a HORROR film expect the cheapest, most over dramatized(and used) effects. I swear they used red paint in a tube for blood. One victim had blood spots on his neck that looked exactly like red versions of chocolate chips complete with the little swirly bit on top. If this were horror, it's pure cheese. As for mature, one of the best I've seen. Seriously. For horror-a 1 on a scale of 1-10. For soft porn-I'd say about an 8. Very sexy. Not the murderous bit, but the truly sexual stuff. I am a woman, so a man may not agree with the thought.