Eric Stevenson Never heard of this movie? Well, it does have a fair number of reviews. This is one of the worst movies I've seen all month and it's so sad I have to end Book Month like this. This movie features Dracula trying to get his bride. That's really all I could follow. I fell half asleep watching this thing.It was just that dull. It's simply an ugly looking film. The slow motion is used so terribly. The movie ends with Dracula being impaled by a cross and that's it. What an anti-climax. The costumes look like something out of a Halloween party and the teeth are so fake looking. I obviously didn't see this in 3D and wouldn't have wanted to give anything more to see this.Throughout the film, there's random scripture being recited and mostly pointless religious imagery. It's just a movie that accomplishes nothing and it does seem to go right by as so little happens. Strange how it says the movie's 110 minutes long when every version I could find was only 93, but that's probably for the better. Well, that's it for Book Month. Now I'm doing Cult Month! Not cult as in worship, cult as in films that have reached cult status.

zardoz-13 Famed Italian horror maestro Dario Argento of "Suspiria" finally sinks his own fangs in Bram Stoker's classic novel "Dracula" with his own version of the immortal tale of terror. Dario has taken liberties like all filmmakers has done before in the past. Although obvious, third-rate CGI recurs throughout "Dracula 3-D," the Argento slant on the infamous fangster is still eminently worth watching for Stoker aficionados. The casting of Rutger Hauer as the Dutch hero Van Helsing is a triumph not only because Hauer hails from the Netherlands, but also because his interpretation of Van Helsing is probably the best thing about this Dracula. Thomas Kretschmann isn't the best Count. Indeed, neither the spirits of Christopher Lee nor Bela Lugosi need worry about Kretschmann's Dracula. Gary Oldman's Dracula also surpasses him, but Kretschmann is far from the worst. He amounts to a fair to middling Dracula. Basically, he lacks presence, and he also lacks an accent.Several differences mark this vampire take on Stoker's text. First, "Dracula 3-D" confines itself to Transylvania. Second, the residents of the town of Passborg not only know about the notorious Count, but they also are grateful to him for his economic assistance. Nevertheless, the residents know better than to linger after dusk, and this gets Tanja (Miriam Giovanelli) in trouble when she has an assignation with a married man, Milos (Christian Burruano), in a stable after her mother, Jarmila (Maria Cristina Heller) has warned her about staying out past dark. Milos refuses to escort Tanja back into town for fear that he will expose himself to charges of adultery. Tanja argues that nobody will see him because everybody is locked up safely in their homes. Nevertheless, Milos lets Tanja fend for herself, and she is attacked by a huge owl as she walks home through the woods. This scene never happened in Stoker, and Dracula never assumes the shape of an owl. In fact, Dracula takes the form of several animals and insects in "Dracula 3-D" that he never took in the novel. Of course, he appears as a wolf at one point, but he also appears as a cockroach and a mantis. The mantis scene is particularly effective despite the obvious CGI. Fourth, Jonathan Harker (Unax Ugalde) goes to work for Dracula as a librarian. Incidentally, Jonathan Harker masqueraded as a librarian in the "Horror of Dracula" so he could kill Dracula, but his plans backfired on him. Five, instead of Dracula attacking Harker after he cuts himself on a shard of glass from the picture casing of his wife, Tanja feeds on him until Dracula bursts into the room and sends her packing. Harker never recovers his Dracula's blood-sucking and later Van Helsing puts him to the stake. Repeatedly, Tanja takes advantage of Harker. Sixth, Dracula materializes out of nowhere every time that he shows up. He materializes into the room where the Passborg officials have gathered to deal with him. He kills them all except one who has abetted him. Dracula mesmerizes Lucy and bites her on the back of her knee on the left leg. She dies not long afterward. Interestingly enough, Van Helsing catches Lucy with an infant child that she has feasted on at night. Seventh, Van Helsing relies on garlic-encrusted revolver bullets to destroy Dracula and Mina shoots him to death with this exotic bullet. Eighth, Argento treats Renfield in a different manner. Renfield worships the ground that Tanja treads and he shows up with the townspeople prepare to drive a wooden stake through her heart. She escapes, but Renfield roughs up this crew before he is incarcerated. Aside from his interesting departures from Stoker, Argento includes Castle Dracula in this yarn. Generally speaking, "Dracula 3-D" sticks to the basics, with the villainous Count generating paranoia in the hearts of simple country folks. We only get a glimpse of Van Helsing's Carfax sanitarium with its horde of insane patients. Tanja bites off more than she can chew or suck when she takes on Van Helsing and he surprises her with a cross that kills her, reducing her body to powder that it blown away to leave nothing of her presence. Argento aficionados will enjoy "Dracula 3-D."

kosmasp I haven't seen the 3D version, so I am not at liberty to judge that (though a friend told me that a scene with a naked lady almost at the beginning is looking good). What I can say, is that the movie in general is not looking good. I watched it on DVD but it's painfully obvious that there was almost no money to spend. While small budget movies in America make it look like they do have a big budget, Dario Argento is not able to make it look like anything.Family "issues" aside (though Asia never had a problem with her body, so let's not read anything into her being naked once again in a movie by her dad), it's the acting altogether that will have you shaking your head, if not giving you a bad feeling. It's a disaster and not in a good or funny sense. In Giallo you could have fun with how ridiculous and how bad the acting was (or the "plot"). Unfortunately there is nothing to laugh here. There is a bit of the mentioned eye candy for lovers of the female body, don't wait for any male hunk to appear though.The "special" effects are another tragic category that add to the confusion. If it were a student movie you might be able to forgive and forget, but for a former (?) maestro of the horror genre this is just pitiful. And that's me being nice. He might be forced to have his actors talk in English (which makes them look worse), but that doesn't change the fact, that the direction is bad too, the script is lacking and a general absence of anything that might be able to save this .... I do wonder if his early work might have been elevated by the people surrounding him (Goblin and other people) ...

jrd_73 This must have been one cheap production! Dario Argento, once my favorite horror director, has made a Dracula for those amused by the CGI giant snake films that run on the Sci-fi Channel. There is something about bad CGI that makes them hard to even laugh at. Some old school FX, like the man-in-a-cheap-monster-suit, could be charming. there is no charm to be had with bad computer effects. The ones in this Dracula film look like they were leftover from a low budget 1990's movie. Dario Argento once had an outstanding visual style (Suspiria, Inferno). His Dracula movie is overlit and fake looking. The digital photography makes it look like porn. Add in the frequent nudity (the only visually appealing images in the film) and one starts to wonder if Dracula's bride will be sucking more than blood. My friend and I gave up taking this film seriously after the first half-hour. The remainder of the running time was spent casting the porn version. Dracula - Dale Dabone (in place of the only fair Thomas Kretchsmann)Mina - Stoya (in place of Marta Gastini) Jonathan - James Deen (in place of the lame Unax Uglade) Lucy - Sasha Grey (in place of Asia Argento)Tania - Lexi Belle (in place of Miriam Giovanelli) Van Helsing - Nina Hartley (in place of tired looking Rutger Hauer)fat priest - Ron Jeremy (of course!)Now that I write this, I think that Argento's film would have been improved with that cast, even if it still had no sex in it. At least the players would have matched the photography.