Dracula: The Dark Prince

Ok, so we have a mashup of low budget medieval adventure and Beauty and the Beast but with vampires.

Lets not forget the terrible costume design, the way they ripped off Dracula's look from Castlevania and the soft porn scenes that add nothing to the plot.

If you are like me and will watch any tv show/movie with vampires just for the sake of it then go ahead. But if you are looking for a good adventure/horror movie just skip this one.

This is a low budget film about how Dracula came to be after his love, Elizabeth, was murdered. After his change, he sets his mind to finding the "Lightbringer", the scythe that Cain used to kill his brother Abel. It is with this scythe that Dracula, a descendant of Abel, will be able to prevent death to anyone he chooses essentially making himself a god. He runs into a problem when he finds what he believes to be the reincarnation of Elizabeth in Alina, a demon slaying woman. He tries to woo her into remembering the life they once shared while a group of Alina's fellow demon slayers both search for her and seek to kill Dracula.

I liked it. That's not to say that it didn't need work but overall I found the story interesting. Again, it is low budget so you get so-so acting, shaky scripting and action that needs some choreographic help. I've seen much worse though. This is one that you just have to give it a chance to play out all the way and then make your decision as to how good you think it is.

It would be a good movie if:

• Had no unnecessary nudity;

• The clothes were more appropriate to the time and more rustic;

• Women do not appear with a look from a beauty salon (much production in the face and hair);

• The younger actors seem to have left the Glee show.

The story became very different, it was not bad, just different.

The production is modest, within the available budget. Being a super production is not mandatory and does not guarantee a good movie.

The film has some good actors, yes. And it's easy to see who they are, the more experienced and less exaggerated.

One thing that can be said confidently is that there has never been any shortage of Dracula themed movies. Even after Hammer Horror were laid to rest we got wall to wall films cashing in on the popularity of the worlds favorite Transylvanian.

This is one of those efforts that presents him as almost an anti-hero, forced into the darkness through anger at the loss of his true love.

Trouble is this one simply isn't very good, it's a combination of classic mythology and modern nonsense that simply doesn't work.

It looks shoddy, it sounds poor and poor Jon Voight looks very out of place.

With a blonde dracula, practically no bites/blood/vamperic action and more Christian references than a priest could shake his tallywacker at this is a poor piece of Dracula cinema.

The Good:

A few decent designs here and there

The Bad:

Far too much christianity

Incredibly dull

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

Jon Voight must have lost a bet

Dracula has that power to heal wrath(i mean Lich king)even he repaired the broken armor chest, the thing about this movie is that the makers don't know the real good story bout Count Dracula, Vlad the impaler. the castle design ha ha even in games the 3D designs are better.. so much supernatural(the TV show) here.. demons, undead etc. but not a story bout vampires... my votes -15/10 the best char with hugh jackman - van helsing 2004 and in my opinion if the director was another , someone who has made high rated movies could make this so much better for watchin and excitement... but as i can see this director should stay on the path to make some bad horror movies, don't give him a chance to make another disaster movie like he has done right now about Dracula the blond gay ..