lvnut This effort does so much more with a very modest budget than most other interpretations of the Bram Stoker classic. First, it respects the novel: an undead creature whose only nourishment is human blood would be strongly motivated to go from an empty castle in the wilds of Transylvania to the world's busiest (1897) metropolis, with its limitless supply of blood. It's absurd and stupid to refashion the nightmare of the novel into the assorted erotica of Hollywood and European films. Second, it takes itself seriously: although some of the acting is terrible, most of it is rather good; some of the dialogue is bad, but again most of it is excellent; but, most importantly, the movie attempts to frighten you, as a horror movie based on the most terrifying novel of all should. The story requires expensive special effects (unfortunately beyond the reach of such a tiny budget) and some better actors; but it manages to evoke some of the atmosphere of the novel, something beyond much more lavish productions. This (mostly) talented group deserves more viewer support and much more financing.

slowtraincoming-1 I was pleased to finally view this film. I went in knowing that this was a modest production. Looking past its humble audio-visual values, what this project evidences is a deep love and respect for its subject matter - the Gothic origins of the Dracula Mythology. Anthony D. P. Mann and company have put together a script that honors the Stoker source material while bringing their own ideas to the table. The depiction of the Count by Mann is quite effective. In the modern milieu, overrun by vampires as erotic creatures or teen idols, it is refreshing to see the portrayal of Dracula as the evil monster Stoker intended. Such projects should be encouraged by the intended community - lovers of horror, appreciators of an older form of storytelling, where dialogue is important and genre traditions are revered. I look forward to whatever projects this troupe has planned next.

WHO OPODER I was surprised by the performances and production. It is quite interesting to see that they have placed details that can not be seen in other versions of Dracula.I do not know how to raise money to make a movie (long) in other countries, but consider: Actors, clothes, objects, locations, cameras, editing, etc. All this represents cost And a budget of only 15,000? Great job!You just have to watch and don't want a copy of a super production or silly action/effects movie. Watch and enjoy a good movie!> The Original Gothic Horror Returns <

trashgang This is a difficult one to review. The 9,9 out of ten given when I was seeing this flick was surely added by the film makers themselves. The love for old school Gothic horrors by Anthony D.P. Mann is well known for readers of Fangoria or people who see his introduction on the DVD. He adores Hammer and Amicus and Jess Franco for their love towards the Gothic feeling. By saying that you know that this flick moves away from the new styled horrors with flashy editing and gore.The film opens with stating that this should be classified under Hammer or Amicus horror flicks. That should be great but the Gothic atmosphere is never there. The budget was too low to give it that feeling. The edited it slowly and added the VHS look over the film, scratches included but that doesn't make it a Hammer. Hammer and Amicus used real effects and the two effects here are done CGI wise. Many of the actors did appear for the first time and it shows. Some acting is really wooden. What Anthony did was staying as close as possible to the real Bram Stoker script. If you have seen Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula then you will recognize some scene's here in Terror Of Dracula. But there is too much talking in stead of action. Anthony plays Dracula himself and you can see that he loves the character. Maybe indeed old school buffs will love it. I love the Gothic horrors but therefore I missed the typical nudity and bloodletting. Maybe it looked more like a 50's 60's flick...Gore 0/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 2/5 Story 4/5 Comedy 0/5