Abraham's Boys

I'll start by saying that I really wanted to like this film. The location was gorgeous, the cinematography is fantastic, and the story it's based on is an interesting read. The issue? A really bad script that needed a few more revisions, scenes that played zero role in the story, and some really bad acting from half of the cast.

Dollar store Udo Kier just didn't do anything to help the film, and neither did the younger brother. Every scene involving the two felt like a chore to sit through because the acting was just poor. The mother, despite being from Amsterdam, had a very American accent, so it felt unbelievable even though her acting was up to par. The only good casting here was the older brother and the settler girl, the latter was not given much material to work with either, which was a shame as she played her role to the best of her ability. It didn't help matters that the dialog throughout the film was incredibly stilted, for all parties involved.

Another point to be made is that the film is just boring for the majority of it's runtime. Virtually nothing happens until about the last twenty minutes or so. I understand that it's a slow burn story, but the writer/director should have done something to spruce the story up a bit. For instance, it's the reason why Mike Flanagan is able to pull of Stephen King stories so well, he knows when to take chances and when to be faithful. There is a lot that could have been done with this story, and it all just ends up feeling like one big missed opportunity.

The film also neglects to show even a shred of the brothers believing in Abraham's atrocities once revealed. The brothers never buy into the fact that the man's determinations might be true, therefore making at least 20 minutes of the film null and void. It's one of the reasons why the film Frailty worked so well. In that film, the boys were never quite sure of whether or not their father's supposed mission was real, or if he was just a psycho, making us, the audience, rethink the entire thing ourselves. It's something that you can tell was an inspiration for the storyline, but the writer didn't study that film well enough to understand why it was so compelling and apply it to this story here.

Overall, it can wait until streaming. Yes, the location was a nice view and the cinematography steals the majority of the show, but it's really not worth sitting through in a theater, as it was, for the most part, a bore of a film and not compelling enough to make it an interesting viewing experience.

1.5 Frailty knockoffs out of 5.

Abraham's Boys is a really clever concept for any medium, and it is little wonder it began as a short story by Joe Hill (if it wasn't by him his dad would have taken a crack at something like this at some point); on the surface, it appears to be a "Sequel" to Dracula following Professor Van Helsing living in quiet **very sunny** California but, alas, the undead wont leave him and his young boys and wife Mina Harker alone. What stands out is the perspective and how this is closer to Bill Paxton's Frailty as far as twisted and grisly Father Knows Best pressure cooker where the two boys - one older (looking a lot like a stand-in for Zac Efron 20 years ago) and one younger - have to learn their dad's methods for destroying the cursed vampires... but are they that? Were they ever?

I think the movie means to make it clear that even if at some point there was just *one* blood-sucking Bad Guy Abe Van Helsing has killed innocent people (and the big guy Dracula is only mentioned in a cursory way, like it you say his name he will Beetlejuice into the story, maybe a slight misgiving but got to mention it), and that is what makes this so compelling and terrifying, even as this is not exactly a very scary "horror" so much as a domestic drama with the genre clothing. The film is also shot with a lot of harsh bright light during the day scenes (California and all) and there is this slow burn panic that sets in when we realize this story is not going the way we expected.

The Van Helsing of this story is so severe in fact, and giving TV's Bosch himself Titus Welliver a hell of a strong showcase, that he wouldn't be out of place in a brutal Ingmar Bergman existential tragedy. Once you know the tone that director Natasha Kermani has set and the stakes (hehe) for the kid characters to have in their way, not to mention their poor sick mom, you want to see where this goes next. If there is a downside in terms of execution of the material it's that the actors playing the sons are a little stiff, with Hepner keeping the same look of confusion and consternation while Mackey is just hanging on to get through some of the period-set dialog.

The more I think on the film though the more I respect it as it is a good formal swing, and not just because of the affected aspect ratio (though the black and white for the dream scenes is old hat). It gives a more genuine "what if" kind of twist on a world we all know than like Last Voyage of the Demeter, and if it is less than great it is more thoughtful as a rigorous tale of how some critical thinking skills need to take hold when it comes to parents sometimes (especially but not limited to when they are keeping helpless women locked in the cellar!) 6.5/10.

Abraham's Boys had all the right ingredients to be a horror hit: a chilling premise, rich source material from Joe Hill, and the pedigree of Natasha Kermani (Lucky) behind the camera. Positioned as a Dracula sequel through the lens of trauma, inheritance, and paranoia, the film sets its sights high, but sadly, this Shudder release ends up being more of a missed opportunity than a memorable fright.

The story follows Max and Rudy Van Helsing, two teenage brothers raised under the increasingly unhinged rule of their father, Abraham Van Helsing-the same Van Helsing who helped destroy Dracula decades ago. While the Dracula novel is treated canonically (minus the final, somewhat tidy epilogue), this film is more of a slow-burn domestic horror than a vampire thriller. Unfortunately, the burn is too slow, and the tension fizzles before it truly ignites.

The film clearly aims to explore generational trauma through a Gothic lens, what it's like to grow up with a father scarred by monsters both literal and psychological. That concept is compelling, and the moments that touch on this theme are some of the strongest. Watching Max and Rudy slowly piece together the dark legacy they've inherited, and realize their father's madness may be rooted in terrifying truth, should be captivating.

But here's the problem: while watching it, I couldn't help but be reminded of another, better film and I found myself wanting to leave the theater to watch it instead. Revealing that title will be a major spoiler.

That's not to say it's a total loss. But that's part of the frustration: Abraham's Boys has so much potential. For those curious about Van Helsing's tragic legacy, it might be worth a watch-but only with tempered expectations. There's a much better film buried somewhere in here, but like Dracula himself, it never fully rises from the grave.

Alright, folks, let me kick this off by saying that when I sat down to watch "Abraham's Boys: A Dracula Story," I wasn't sure what to expect. I'm a sucker for vampire tales - yeah, pun intended - ever since I first got hooked on the classics like Bram Stoker's original novel or those timeless Hammer Horror flicks. But this one? It's a modern spin that tries to breathe new life into the age-old legend of Dracula, and honestly, I have to give it credit where it's due. The movie was well done, I'll say that upfront. It's got that polished production value that makes you feel like you're in for a treat, even if it doesn't quite hit the mark in every way. While I enjoyed parts of it, I was extremely disappointed overall, and I'll do my best not to spoil anything so you can have your own experience. Who knows, you might walk away enjoying it a little more than I did. Let's dive in, shall we?

First off, let's talk about the creative spin on this timeless story. Dracula has been done to death - pun again, sorry - in every conceivable way: from gothic horror to romantic dramas and even action-packed blockbusters. But "Abraham's Boys" takes a fresh angle that I found intriguing. It plays with the lore in a way that feels innovative without completely abandoning the roots of the original tale. We're talking about exploring the human side of the vampire mythos, delving into themes of legacy, family, and the eternal struggle between darkness and light. It's creative, no doubt about it. The writers clearly put in the effort to twist the narrative into something that could appeal to both die-hard fans of the genre and newcomers who might not have picked up a copy of Stoker's work. I appreciated how it avoided the overdone tropes of endless chases or repetitive bite scenes, opting instead for a more introspective approach. It's like they took the classic elements and gave them a 21st-century makeover, which kept me engaged for the first half or so. If you're tired of the same old vampire schtick, this might just reignite your interest in the undead world.

Now, where this film really shines is in the acting. Oh man, the performances here are top-notch and deserve all the praise. The lead actors bring a level of depth and nuance that elevates the entire production. Take the portrayal of the central characters - I won't name names to avoid spoilers, but let's just say the actor playing the vampire protagonist delivers a performance that's both chilling and heartbreaking. There's this raw vulnerability mixed with predatory intensity that makes you forget you're watching a movie; it feels real, tangible. It's not over-the-top ham acting like in some older horror flicks; instead, it's subtle, layered, and incredibly compelling. The supporting cast holds their own too, creating a dynamic ensemble that feels lived-in and authentic. One scene in particular - again, no details - had me on the edge of my seat because of how convincingly they conveyed emotion and tension. It's performances like these that remind me why I love cinema; they turn a potentially formulaic story into something memorable. If awards season rolls around, I'd be surprised if this cast doesn't get some nods. Great acting can make or break a film, and here, it definitely makes it.

But let's not forget the scenic cinematography, which is another standout element. Wow, the visuals in this movie are stunning - absolutely breathtaking at times. The directors and cinematographers did an phenomenal job capturing the essence of the settings, blending eerie atmospheres with gorgeous landscapes that pull you right into the story. We're talking sweeping shots of foggy moors, ancient castles shrouded in mist, and urban nightscapes that pulse with a modern energy. It's like they took the romanticism of classic vampire lore and amplified it through modern lens techniques, with clever use of lighting and color grading to enhance the mood. The cinematography isn't just pretty for pretty's sake; it serves the narrative, building suspense and immersion. For instance, there are these wide-angle panoramas that make the world feel vast and ominous, contrasting the intimate, close-up moments that heighten the drama. It's reminiscent of films like "Bram Stoker's Dracula" directed by Francis Ford Coppola, where every frame is a work of art. I found myself pausing the movie at points just to appreciate the composition - that's how good it is. In a genre that's often dark and gritty, this film's visual style adds a layer of elegance that sets it apart.

Despite all that praise, I have to be honest: I was extremely disappointed with the overall execution. Don't worry, I'm not going to give anything away - I want you to form your own opinions - but there were elements that just didn't land for me. The story builds up this creative premise so well in the beginning, with its fresh take and strong character foundations, but as it progresses, it starts to falter. It's like the film promises a deep, thought-provoking exploration but then veers into territory that feels unresolved or underdeveloped. I enjoyed the ride for a while, getting swept up in the acting and the visuals, but by the end, I was left with a sense of unmet potential. Maybe it's because I'm a purist when it comes to vampire stories, or perhaps I had higher expectations based on the hype, but something about the way certain plot threads were handled just didn't sit right. It's frustrating because the foundation is so solid - the acting and cinematography carry it far - but the story's payoff didn't deliver the emotional punch I was hoping for. If you're going into this blind, you might not have the same issues; everyone's tastes are different, after all.

In wrapping this up, "Abraham's Boys: A Dracula Story" is a film that's worth your time if you're a fan of the genre, but go in with an open mind. The creative spin on the Dracula legend is refreshing, the acting is stellar, and the cinematography is downright gorgeous. It's well done in so many technical aspects that it's hard not to recommend it. Yet, as someone who enjoyed it initially but ended up disappointed, I'd say it's a mixed bag. Maybe you'll connect with it more than I did - perhaps the scenic beauty and powerful performances will win you over completely. At the very least, it's a reminder that even in a crowded field like vampire movies, there's room for innovation. If you do decide to watch it, make sure you've got a cozy setup, some popcorn, and no distractions. Who knows? You might find yourself enthralled by Abraham's Boys in a way that I wasn't. All in all, it's a solid effort that showcases great talent behind and in front of the camera, even if it doesn't quite stick the landing for everyone.

This movie is a fanfiction sequel of Dracula and therefore requires a solid basis of knowledge of the Dracula canon in order to "work" for its audience.

The characters themselves have their own steady convictions they aren't giving up any time soon: the doubts and questions must live in the viewer instead. The audience knows what happened with Dracula. We were essentially "there" ourselves, witnessing the horror, the terror, and the gore of it through various books, films, and TV shows. We got splashed with the blood and felt the seduction first hand.

But here, under the pleasant California sun and tranquil landscape, and all that darkness far away in another movie/lifetime, it's easy to doubt our memories and wonder: how easy would it be to fool us? Could we have made a mistake? Are we the same as those people in the past who were so certain as they burned witches we now know we're innocent?

The flaws of this movie are that you do need this built in background knowledge of the characters or it's just not going to work. You will be bored and lost and wondering why certain things are big deals and who all these people are.

And while it's fairly well done, it feels like they did a great job using Walmart acrylics, when it could have been a masterpiece in oil grisaille if they'd gotten just slightly better actors/ writers/ directors all around.

A must see for Dracula fans for the very interesting thought experiment, but a pass for everyone else.