Dracula is back….
But sadly enough, with less blood and more romance added to the character. When I read this was to be a Universal Studios reboot of the monster franchises, I thought “Really?” I mean, Bram Stoker’s Dracula(1992)had more blood and action. There were a few cringe scenes in this film, but not nearly as many as I would have expected from a flick featuring a gruesome historical character without much of a heart.
This film, aimed more at women than men–I believe, would actually be a good date movie. It’s a monster flick wrapped up in a LOTR-styled package.
Luke Evans does give a great performance as Vlad the Imapaler. His acting chops are quite impressive. Take the scene where he gets the strength of the vampire: his confusion is evident and palpable to the audience. However, the camera loves him as well. I’d almost purchase the DVD just for some of the shirtless shots.
The actress who portrayed his wife reminded me somehow of Eva Gabor in Green Acres. I had a hard time not hearing the theme song as I watched her run about distractedly and solve problems! Don’t know where the image got into my brain, but it stuck.(“Transylvania is the place for me/Castle living through eternity…”) I think her character would have benefited from a grittier reboot.
The monstrous vampire who lives in a mountain cave is archaically gruesome.
And the action scenes are quite immersive.
However: make up your mind if a cross or silver will weaken a vampire. Silver always does in this film, but the cross–it does, then it doesn’t.
And the ending of the film was a big disappointment. Not to spoil it, but playing with timelines was done far better in the 1992 film.
Personal opinion: Better vamp romance/swordfighting, yes. Not enough darkness, meh. He’s a vampire–darkness is his birthright.
—photo credit Wikipedia film page—