Soft-core porn movies used to be a lot of fun to watch and 25 years ago built up huge followings for actresses like Shannon Tweed and Tanya Roberts. But in the 21st Century cable-TV has gone the low road, showing lots of edited from XXX (what's the point??) features and garbage like this purported Dracula movie.
Cast is a mixture, mainly hardcore porn superstars like Alexis Texas as Ms. Dracula and Chad White (his big dick purposely hidden from view throughout) as Von Helsing. That bit of Stoker name-dropping is the end of any resemblance to the horror classic. What we have to sit through is uninspired soft-soft-soft-core sex simulation (1969 or 1970 films have more explicit nudity and believable sex) and annoyingly poorly written dialog, listlessly delivered by a paycheck-seeking cast. Irony is that most of these actors would rather be doing a XXX assignment and would be more artistically motivated therein. Exception is a few schlubs like too-often-seen on cable "Tony Marino" as the hero Jonathan (Harker). A hardcore actor of zero interest, Romeo Price, sort of plays Renfield but is dead air on screen.
Another irony is that with the exception of Ms. Texas, the female cast is simply not as pretty as the lead actresses in virtually any XXX production nowadays. Where this inversion on the beauty scale vis a vis hardcore/soft-core divide occurred I don't know, but with the exception of some stars like Tina Russell, Starlyn Simone and Lily Foster, the early days of hardcore were dominated by skanky looking leading ladies.
It is obvious during the first five minutes that this project was shot soft-core only rather than a hand-me-down from a lengthy XXX video. Theoretically that is a plus, since I don't see why anyone would want to watch a bowdlerized version of a hardcore porn film for any reason. But in this case, the result is so dull and unerotic the cut-down porn like New Sensations romances playing on pay-cable are the way to go.
Director Jake Kane develops no atmosphere whatsoever -the entire film being very brightly lit and cheery, taking place in sunlight (Renfield whips up some concoction for Ms. Dracula to drink that lets her go out for a sun tan if desired). There's no violence or horror or even fantasy, and what passes for a storyline about Jonathan rescuing a female prisoner of Drac's for a big reward is mentioned but sloughed off. When plot threads are sort of being tied up in the final reel, a girl says "it's time for an orgy", and just as sure as in a Carlos Tobalina theatrical porn clunker of 30 years earlier a tedious orgy erupts.
These pornographers are perhaps illiterate, as indicated by this being about the sixth porn film I've seen recently where a male character, Jonathan in this case, is referred to as a "masseuse" several times. Except for the Brazzers series "Dirty Masseur" it seems that X-rated auteurs never heard of that proper masculine terminology.
Sole point of interest for me (hardly justifying my wasting an hour or so on Showtime viewing this turkey) is that it is set at the famous porn location mansion used for hundreds of shoots, notable for its oval portal door glass and spiral staircase (simulated sex on the staircase is a highlight), which I christened the "Immoral Proposal" mansion after the classic Nica Noelle video made there. Future students of interior design working on a dumbed-down master's thesis (U. of Phoenix perhaps?) will want to watch thousands of porn films and videos to see a virtual history of the subject on the cusp of the 21st Century.
