indianasmith
Archeologist, Theologian, Elder Scrolls Addict, and a
B-Movie Kraken
Karma: 2594
Posts: 15212
A good bad movie is like popcorn for the soul!
|
 |
« on: June 09, 2008, 02:29:54 PM » |
|
I was out of town over the weekend at an arrowhead show and didn't get a chance to watch any movies, so Sunday afternoon I popped into Hastings and happened to see this one on the shelf. Of course, the "Dracula spelled backwards" thing has been done to death, but I was curious to see what spin they would put on it in the kind of no-budget production that Brain Damage Films seems to specialize in.
First of all, the DVD seemed a little odd to me. The movie started in the middle of a scene, and there were no trailers or DVD extras . . . not even a menu. I don't know if I got a defective copy, or if this was just an odd movie.
The film itself was a remarkably straightforward retelling of the original Bram Stoker novel - in fact, one of the more faithful retellings I have seen on screen. The dialogue was all original, and the screenwriter had made minimal adaptations to the modern setting. One or two of the actors seemed to be very much into their roles, especially Van Helsing and Mina.
The downsides were that the movie was ultra-cheap - for instance, the three "wolves" that killed the peasant woman in the beginning of the film were actually yellow labs, and the attempt to preserve the Victorian flair of the original led to some real anachronisms - most notably the dialogue, but also some of the props - the use of laptops and old school 1920's typewriters, and the final battle with the gypsies outside "Castle Dracula" was largely swordfighting, even though most of the characters had automatic weapons a few scenes earlier. Also, the movie opens with Jonathan Harker about to attempt his escape from Castle Alucard, with no real reference to how he got there. There was very little nudity in the film, either - only the very briefest flash of Mina's breast in one scene, as well as "Count Alucard's" dangling dingus. And some of the actors obviously had a hard time with the Victorian dialect - particularly Lord Godalming, inexplicably played by an Indian actor. All his lines were just flat.
But you have to give credit for a labor of love. Whoever directed this (I'm too lazy to surf over to IMDB after reading four days' worth of posts on the forum) obviously had a real love for the story and wanted to make a faithful adaptation on a shoestring budget.
All that being said, I would call this one worth seeing for any Dracula fans.
|
