Dracula 3D
Tags: good versus evil, violence, gothic

Plot synopsis:
The tale begins with Jonathan Harker, journeying by train and carriage from England to Count Dracula's crumbling, remote castle situated in the Carpathian Mountains on the border of Transylvania. The purpose of his mission is to catalogue the big library of Dracula. At first enticed by Dracula's gracious manner, Harker soon discovers that he has become a prisoner in the castle. He also begins to see disquieting facets of Dracula's nocturnal life. One night while searching for a way out of the castle, and against Dracula's strict admonition not to venture outside his room at night, Harker falls under the spell of three wanton female vampires, the Brides of Dracula.He is saved at the last second by the Count, because he wants to keep Harker alive. Harker barely escapes from the castle with his life. Soon Dracula is tracking Harker's devoted fiancée, Wilhelmina "Mina" Murray, and her friend, Lucy Westenra. There is a notable encounter between Dracula and Renfield, an insane man who means to consume insects, spiders, birds, and other creatures in ascending order of size in order to absorb their "life force". Renfield acts as a motion sensor, detecting Dracula's proximity and supplying clues accordingly.Lucy begins to waste away suspiciously. All her suitors fret, and Seward calls in his old teacher, Professor Abraham Van Helsing from Amsterdam. Van Helsing immediately determines the cause of Lucy's condition but refuses to disclose it, knowing that Seward's faith in him will be shaken if he starts to speak of vampires. Van Helsing tries multiple blood transfusions, but they are clearly losing ground. On a night when Van Helsing must return to Amsterdam, Lucy and her mother are attacked by a wolf. Mrs Westenra, who has a heart condition, dies of fright, and Lucy apparently dies soon after. Lucy is buried, but soon afterward the newspapers report children being stalked in the night by a "bloofer lady". Van Helsing knows that this means Lucy has become a vampire. The suitors and Van Helsing track her down, and after a disturbing confrontation between her vampiric self and Arthur, they stake her heart, behead her, and fill her mouth with garlic.Around the same time, Jonathan Harker arrives home from recuperation in Budapest; he and Mina also join the coalition, who turn their attentions to dealing with Dracula. After Dracula learns of Van Helsing and the others' plot against him, he takes revenge by visitingand biting Mina at least three times. Dracula also feeds Mina his blood, creating a spiritual bond between them to control her. The only way to forestall this is to kill Dracula first. Mina slowly succumbs to the blood of the vampire that flows through her veins, switching back and forth from a state of consciousness to a state of semi-trance during which she is telepathically connected with Dracula. It is this connection that they start to use to deduce Dracula's movements.It is only possible to detect Dracula's surroundings when Mina is put under hypnosis by Van Helsing. This ability gradually gets weaker as the group make their way to Dracula's castle. Dracula flees back to his castle in Transylvania, followed by Van Helsing's group, who manage to track him down just before sundown and destroy him by shearing "through the throat" with a knife and stabbing him in the heart also with a knife. Dracula crumbles to dust, his spell is lifted and Mina is freed from the marks. Quincey Morris is killed in the final battle, stabbed by Gypsies who had been charged with returning Dracula to his castle; the survivors return to England. OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS

Review: The Italian master of horror, Dario Argento, delivers his cheesiest movie...in 3D.Looking at the trailers, i already knew that Dracula 3D would have been a fun and trashy cheesefest (and i gotta be honest, i have seen better CGI effects in movies made by The Asylum).Sure, the film is a fun and trashy cheesefest, but it manages to get pretty boring in many moments, plus, Rutger Hauer only appears after a big chunk of the first half of the feature.The CGI effects are cringe-worthy, they remind me of old computer games, i wouldn't be surprised if the (already) hilarious mantis scene will become an internet meme.If it wasn't for the gore scenes (which they are good enough to keep the gorehounds entertained), the sexy Miriam Giovanelli, Rutger Hauer and the soundtrack (provided by Claudio Simonetti), the film would be just forgettable, but Dracula 3D is actually a forgettable cheesefest, if it was made in the 70's or 80's, it would have been considered as a cult classic.I actually like Argento's most modern films (such as: Sleepless, Il Cartaio and Mother of tears), but if you thought that his last three films were bad, then you should take a look at Dracula 3D..
As this last version ¨Dracula¨ 3D (2012) by Dario Argento with Rutger Hauer as Abraham Van Helsing , Asia Argento as Lucy , Unax Ugalde as Johnathan Harker and Thomas Kretschmann as Dracula .
Rating : 5,5/10 ; acceptable and passable , though middlingly realized .Other films retelling the known legend based as originally conceived on this Bram Stoker novel are the followings : ¨ Dracula¨ (1974) by Dan Curtis with Jack Palance , Simon Ward , Nigel Davenport , ¨Bram's Stoker Dracula¨ with David Suchet as Abraham Van Helsing , Marc Warren as Count Dracula and Sophia Myles as Lucy ; of course , splendid versions from Hammer Production mostly starred by Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing ; and Jesus Franco retelling titled ¨Count Dracula¨ with Christopher Lee , Herbert Lom , Soledad Miranda , Klaus Kinski ; the best results to be ¨Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula¨ with Gary Oldman , Winona Ryder , Gary Elwes , Keanu Reeves and Anthony Hopkins ..
For sure the acting was rather wooden, the effects (specially the digital ones) looked cheap sometimes and the story was not mind blowing, but I very much liked the retro-look of this film.
There is blood (mostly CG) and the lovely ladies of Dracula 3D show us their breasts and backsides.(including Dario's own daughter, the ever so attractive Asia Argento) The erotic elements will receive no complaint from me, but do not make up for such a bad film.
However "Dracula 3D" is certainly his worst movie, retelling Bram Stoker's Gothic novel with poor performances in cheesy scenario, CGI and art direction.
But as a friend of mine uses to say about this "Dracula 3D", the worst movie by Dario Argento is still better than most of the teen horror movies.
There's also some fine nudity from Miriam Giovanelli.I did like its set design though which comes across as a nice homage to the old style Universal/Hammer horrors to an almost stereotypically Gothic degree, all dark castles and heaving bosoms in corsets.I'm giving this a very generous 6/10 as despite its very real flaws and being rather uneventful in parts, it's also overall a helluva lot more entertaining than I was expecting, although sadly nowhere near as entertaining or gratuitous as his bonkers Mother of Tears.Lifelong Argento fans will in all probability hate this, but after watching it all I can say is...
A pleasant surprise, this movie goes back to the golden years of horror cinema to create an atmospheric, mesmerizing Dracula that stands out as one of the best adaptations of Bram Stoker's book.Argento reveals a capacity for the classic that matches his abilities in modern horror( where he has delivered some of the greatest films of the genre, such as Suspiria and Inferno).Dracula is one of his most accomplished films, in my opinion, and you can immerse yourself in the cold poetry of his vision.I' ve watched the film in 2D and I'm not so sure it would work as good in 3D, as I tend to imagine that the 3D feeling could potentially destroy the tone of the film.Pessimistic in spirit, it seems to bring elements from various adaptations, from Tod Browning's version to Hertzog's Nosferatou, and from Hammer's Dracula to Coppola's one, but in the end the feeling the movie creates is unique, and certainly European.The impressive thing is that Argento holds back his tendency for impressing and prefers to avoid pointless jumps in the script in favor of a certain pace that makes the film a contemporary classic.Bravo!.
"Suspiria", this ain't.Why Dario Argento attempted to make the one millionth version of "Dracula" is probably the most puzzling thing about this truly terrible version of Bram Stoker's undying novel.
Argento evidently wanted his shot at the venerable story, but the result is a hot mess that can't even qualify as a cult movie, despite the fact that late in the movie, Dracula turns himself into a giant deadly mantis to kill another extra who didn't know he needed to call Orkin.The entire movie is shot under incredibly bright light, making even the night scenes looks as if everyone's going to hit the beach as soon as the director yells "cut".
Rutger Hauer shows up late in the game as Van Helsing, gets knocked around for his trouble and Mina shoots the Count, who turns into an ashy replica of himself before blowing up real good.For Dracula completists only, and even then, on fast-forward.
Nothing will quite prepare you for just how poor this work is in virtually every conceivable sense.The film predominately follows Mina Harker (Marta Gastini), as she travels to the village of Passo Borgo at the foot of the Carpathian Mountains sometime after her husband Jonathan (Unax Ugalde) was sent to meet Count Dracula for business.
And the movie had probably been better off without this half-hearted attempt of making it in 3D.The story in the movie is fairly similar to the story that we all know, though Argento does take the liberty of adding stuff here and there, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.The movie suffered from horrible dialogue that was for most parts of the movie delivered by people who didn't speak proper English, or sounded like they were synchronized in a very bad way.
Not even Rutger Hauer (playing Abraham Van Helsing) or Asia Argento (playing Lucy) did anything to lift up the movie in any way.
And Thomas Kretschmann (playing Dracula) was just so wrongly cast for this role; the way he portrayed his lines was even more strained and oddly-paused-at-the-wrong-times than Jeremy Iron's performances in "Dungeons & Dragons".The movie made use of CGI as well, which for most parts worked out well enough.
And the costumes looked great and seemed proper for the time in which the story was supposed to take place.If you enjoy vampire movies and have a taste for the "Dracula" myth, then stay well clear of this movie, because it is a shameful attempt at telling the tale.
Dario Argento takes a dump on Bram Stoker's classic story with this amateurish, cheap and dull production of Dracula.
I already mentioned the blood and gore, but there's also a poorly done effect of bodies turning to ash as well as a laughably bad (but incredibly short) scene where Dracula attacks someone in the form of a (CGI) praying mantis(!).
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.
The ones in this Dracula film look like they were leftover from a low budget 1990's movie.
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.
Enter Jonathan Harker, a naive outsider who has gotten a job as Drac's librarian through his new wife Mina's best friend, a local named Lucy played by Dario's daughter Asia Argento.
Dracula rapidly becomes obsessed with Mina while posing an increasing threat to everyone else in town.As the movie proceeds, there's a ton of violence, gore, and nudity including another infamous father-daughter nude scene with Dario filming Asia taking a bath!
Dario Argento may not be the master filmmaker he once was but this certainly isn't the disaster that Giallo and Mother of Tears were and shows that he can still make a watchable little horror movie..
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.
Okay, now I'm certain that that is where the positives of the film ends.The effects good lord, they look like something you would see in a SyFy channel movie, maybe even worse.
All kinds of scenery chewing present from the actors (most of who I have not heard of apart from Asia Argento).The above negatives may sound good to someone who would think "this movie sounds like its bad but in a way where you can find cheesy enjoyment out of it." That is not true.
This film is Dario Argento's take on the Dracula story, with more than a few detours from the traditional telling.
Not even Rutger Hauer and music from Claudio Simonetti can save this stinker.The dubbing is poor, the acting is weak and the film opens with a terrible special effects shot.
This is a fun movie, as I mentioned this is far from Argento's best work but you can see that Dario pulled from the Bram Stoker & Hammer lore of Dracula and made something that ONLY Argento could do.
Looks like it was filmed on a bad hd video camera and who needs another uninspired retread of Dracula anyway ...
Argento's Dracula is a very low budget Euro horror movie, a faithful retelling of Stoker's original story, complete with Hammer-inspired sights and sounds.
In fact, Argento has produced a very watchable vampire film that, while certainly not the next great horror masterpiece, isn't all bad, either.
Argento seems to have based his film more upon the great Hammer films starring Christopher Lee than any other source, and while his Dracula film isn't as good as any of those classics, it's still worth a look by vampire fans of every stripe..
Dario Argento's new film is a rather enjoyable adaptation of "Dracula", full of affectionate nods to old horror movies made in the 50's and 60's, like the ones directed by Mario Bava, Riccardo Freda, Antonio Margheriti and of course the vampires movies from Hammer Films.
Most of the FX are decent (except the CGI used for the wolf bit and the weird, nosferatu-esque scene of praying mantis..) and the casting is OK, especially Rutger Hauer as a solid and charismatic Van Helsing, Marta Gastini as the appropriately cute and -not so- fragile heroine and last but not the least, a deliciously wooden Thomas Kretschmann as the melancholic Count Dracula.
With having found director Dario Argento's 2009 movie Giallo to be a shockingly dull,poorly made film,I initially decided to stay away from Argento's latest title,until I began to hear from fellow IMDb'er's that whilst being far from a return to form,the film did offer the chance of seeing Argento be much lively then he was for Giallo,which led to me deciding that it was time for me to pay a visit to Dario's Dracula.The plot:Accepting a job offer to be a libarian for a generous Count called Dracula,Jonathan Harker catches the first train to Translyvainia,as his wife Mina waves goodbye,and promises to re-join her husband in a few days time,once she has sorted out some family matters.Arriving in the town on his own,Harker attempts to talk to the locals, (who weirdly appear to be keen on placing garlic all over their buildings) but is mostly met with cold, dead stares,with the only info that Harker receives being that a number of the townspeople credit Count Dracula for pulling the village out of "the dark ages".Being in the mood of leaving the local welcome that he has received behind him,Harker sets off for Dracula's isolated mansion.Meeting Count Dracula,Jonathan Harker soon discovers that Dracula's "simple" library job has a deadly bite,that he may not be able to chew.View on the film:Streatched to a 105 minute running time,the dry,plodding moments in the screenplay by co-writer/director Dario Argento and, (deep breath!) Enrique Cerezo,Stefano Piani and Antonio Tentori are thankfully countered by a number of "unique" moments in the film,with Jonathan Harker being shown to be unable to resit temptations,and Dracula's transformation into various animals giving the movie an (unintensinal?) comedic edge,which give the movie a real burst of life.Backed by Claudio Simonetti's Ouija board score and some extremely low quality 3D effects,cinematography Luciano Tovoli gives the film a strong rustic,Gothic atmosphere,thanks to Tovoli covering the movie Autumn,candle wax red's,and dark,moody brown colours.Revaling an unexpected amount of energy,Argento attacks the set pieces in the movie with a bombastic steak,which along with helping to make the scenes as wonderfully demented as possible,gives the film a lively,comedic punch.Playing the title character,Thomas Kretschmann gives a surprisingly dry,stilted performance as Count Dracula,which along with taking away the menacing heart of Dracula,also leads to the character lacking any figure of fun aspects which would have smoothly fit in with the tone of the movie.Going in the opposite direction of Kretschmann,Rutger Hauer, (who is the first actor from the Neatherlands to actually play the role)gives a terrificly wild performance as Abraham Van Helsing,with Hauer showing Helsing's search for Count Dracula to be something that has gotten him completely off his hinges.Joining Hauer,the beautiful Miriam Giovanelli, (who also appears naked in the movie) gives the movie a full dose of erotic garlic,as Jonathan Harker realises to his horror,that he has entered Dracula's third dimension..
This is not a faithful adaptation of Dracula and Dracula's Guest by Bram Stoker.Too many liberties taken with both stories.This adaptation has more in common with the Hammer Studio Dracula films.The actor playing Dracula is doing a better job on the new NBC miniseries Dracula as Van Helsing and that is not saying much since NBC has also taken too many liberties with the Stoker novel by adding in additional characters and subplots.Asia Argento is likable but lets face fact she is a little long in the tooth for the part of Lucy.Rutger Hauer's Van Helsing is a good portrayal.I didn't care for the staking of a child victim of Lucy's something that did not happen in the original novel.Dracula only has one bride in this version a peasant girl named Tanya whom he turned into a vampire in the guise of an owl instead of a bat.Dracula killing Lucy's father (she had a mother in the Stoker book) as a preying mantis.This version has Mina as the reincarnation of one of Dracula's royal wives a character from Dracula's Guest Countess Dolingen de Gratz.They never used reincarnation story lines in Dracula movies until 1973 when Dan Curtis had the Lucy character as an incarnation of Dracula's wife Maria and then you had Francis Ford Coppola's 1992 version Mina as an incarnation of Dracula's suicidal wife Elizabeta and now in the 2013 NBC you have Mina the incarnation of Dracula's murdered wife Ilona.Four things I appreciate about this version 1.I like the atmospheric quality it reminds me of the Hammer films I watched growing up.2.I appreciate that Dracula's Guest which was originally the lost chapter of Bram Stoker's Dracula has been incorporated into this version with some of it's characters.3.
I appreciate that this version at least gives names of one of the brides of Dracula the brides names were never mentioned in the Stoker novel and actually in the historical Dracula only one of his wives was named because the names of his women his first wife a boyar's daughter and mistresses were lost to history.I hope that someone in the future can come up with a Dracula film that also could create some storyline for his wives.Like who were they to him (noble or royal wives or peasant girl mistresses).4.At least this version kept the Lucy,Jonathan,Mina,Van Helsing and Renfield characters.This film isn't the worse but it is far from the best!
Italian horror master Dario Argento sexy, gory version of Dracula doesn't follow the book very much (in this version, Jonathan Harker is a librarian, hired to put order to the old books of the count), but it is a watchable effort, reminiscent of the low budget British made horror films of the 1960s and 1970s.
Argento's direction is fine, though a psychologist would surely tell us why he would want to film his daughter Asia in the nude (she plays Lucy Westenra in the movie).
German actor Thomas Kretschmann is Dracula; he has been fine in other movies, but he lacks charisma here as the Count (he has one great scene, though, taking on five or six people at the same time).
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.