[go: up one dir, main page]

    Release calendarTop 250 moviesMost popular moviesBrowse movies by genreTop box officeShowtimes & ticketsMovie newsIndia movie spotlight
    What's on TV & streamingTop 250 TV showsMost popular TV showsBrowse TV shows by genreTV news
    What to watchLatest trailersIMDb OriginalsIMDb PicksIMDb SpotlightFamily entertainment guideIMDb Podcasts
    OscarsEmmysSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideToronto Int'l Film FestivalSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAll events
    Born todayMost popular celebsCelebrity news
    Help centerContributor zonePolls
For industry professionals
  • Language
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Sign in
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Use app
Back
  • Cast & crew
  • User reviews
IMDbPro
Die Hard Dracula (1998)

User reviews

Die Hard Dracula

19 reviews
2/10

Come on doc... you can tell us... ve are friends

Is there a point where a movie goes beyond campy to just plain dumb? I didn't think so - but Die Hard Dracula is pushing the envelope way into the realm of stupid. It has plenty of camp which I was expecting - the music score was inspired with only 3 songs Ride of the Valkyries, Blue Danube, and some obscure 70's wakka wakka music. And the effects from blue screening the main character over a CNN documentary of Romania, to the magic chest of gold with it's own internal lighting (if you close the top does it shut off like a fridge), to the rubber mouse being pulled across the floor for ambiance, there is plenty to entertain anyone who loves trashing movies.

But I do not think anybody in the production of the movie took it seriously, they set out to make trash from the beginning. You have to try to be this bad. The dialog drones on like the computer who reads weather warnings, the plot was just thrown together as the movie went along, and the cheesy mother/father dialogue should have been delivered to a child of 8 not 18 going on 43. They couldn't even find a stone building to film the interior scenes in - instead they found some Black and White cow wallpaper and "made do".

But what I think really turned me off to this movie is that I felt they tried too hard to be "bad in the good way" and ruined the whole fun of ridiculing the movie. It kind of felt like teasing the class clown... you get no pleasure from it and he gets the attention he wants.

Thanks a lot for ruining my fun guys... This movie had lots of potential for all time camp, but no, you had to try to be this bad.

There is better movie trash to watch, bail on this one.
  • manicgecko
  • May 21, 2006
  • Permalink
1/10

Egads!!!

It's hard to even put this in to words. This movie honestly looked like a group of people threw this together in a week using a camcorder. I believe they started off trying to make a serious movie, then tried to make it a comedy when they realized how bad it was, and then failed at making it into a comedy. From what I could gather (Without skipping through) A guys girlfriend drowns, he goes to Europe. Dracula wakes up. People turn into bad acting vampires, and there's a bad ending. European women must be really trusting, because they have no trouble walking up to shrouded, hideously disfigured strangers, completely unarmed. There's all of 2 seconds of female nudity in the film, but believe me, you'd be better off watching "Porky's". God forbid you actually buy this thing like I did. I suppose I should have taken a hint when a new DVD only cost me 5 bucks. This is also one of the only dvd's I've seen that had no menu or scene selection. Even Crummy bootlegs usually give you that much. Please don't think that you can buy this thing just to make fun of it. The bad comedy makes even that joy impossible. Movies like this are the basic reason why independent films are so heavily frowned upon. I'm sure the makers had good intentions, and they probably enjoyed making it. But even Troma films have a certain degree of cheap disgusting charm to them, this one is just soul less.
  • Evil_dead_ash
  • Jan 4, 2003
  • Permalink
2/10

I bought this movie on DVD in a flea market for $4

  • nomadicbynature
  • Apr 3, 2005
  • Permalink

Avoid this like the plague!

In general, I tend to appreciate low-budget films. Either I admire them for being creative within limited resources, or I laugh at them for utterly failing to accomplish their goals. Thus, I went into this film at least expecting to be mildly amused. Unfortunately, the movie falls into the most unwatchable category of film: the failed comedy. The script isn't much to begin with, and the cast is very weak; combine these two things with inconsistent, hard-to-understand fake accents, and you have an unwatchable mess. Since the whole thing is supposed to be funny, the viewer can't even have the luxury of laughing at it for falling short of its ambitions. Unless you enjoy cringing, I'd recommend looking elsewhere for entertainment.
  • Whovian
  • Jan 28, 2002
  • Permalink
1/10

This movie sucks...an unoriginal and unfunny pun to go with a corresponding movie.

Wow! This is like the opposite of good cinema. The camera-work looks just awful, the acting is some of the worst ever seen on screen, and the script is full of clichéd lines, bad puns and characters who don't deserve to be alive. This is quite probably the worst vampire movie ever made!

The film starts off with a weird history of vampires which felt like a bad History channel special. Then we move to the plot that Steven, a teenage boy, has just lost his girlfriend in a jet ski accident, so he travels to Rome for some odd reason. He ends up meeting up with Dr. Van Helsing to kill Dracula who has been sucking the local girls' blood. This is a very flat movie, but it may seem 4-D because it will suck the life right out of you.

Dracula is a bizarre character here. He is played by many different actors. He ranges from normal looking, to looking like a lion or something, to being morbidly obese. And he will change scene by scene. Maybe this was explained somewhere in the movie, but I've now watched this a miserable three times, and not caught it once. To go with Dracula's changing appearance, someone other than the actors provide his voice, and he sounds horrible. Dracula sounds like a bad video game character, only much worse recorded.

The special effects...oh goodness are they special. They include the superimposing of a coffin to a castle overhead shot to appear as the coffin is floating. And in one great scene Dracula throws burning balls at the main characters, which is another spectacular effect. Industrial Lights and Magic should learn something from this masterpiece.

The acting...AUGH!!! Just because a movie is low budget doesn't mean they have to get bad actors, but this was the worst. It's like the director intentionally picked people who couldn't act. There was not a decent acting job in the entire movie, which is somewhat comedic, but also intolerable after a while.

This is a horrible movie. The worst vampire flick. Never will a movie be this bad again, unless a sequel is produced, written and directed by Aaron Seltzer and Jason Friedberg.

My rating: BOMB out of ****. 90 mins. Not rated
  • TOMNEL
  • May 18, 2009
  • Permalink
2/10

No budget, stupid and rather boring vampire flick.

I don't know what to say, I am completely nonplussed. The description for this film makes it seem like it would, if not good, at least be funny. I was completely unprepared for what it turned out to be.

Firstly, there is an issue with the quality of the film. The picture is grainy and blurry, the camera-work is shake, there is lots of background noise in the sound and the special effects look like slide transitions in Powerpoint.

Secondly, the acting is atrocious, so wooden, so stiff, so sub par that you need a submarine to go lower. That they use multiple actors to play Dracula doesn't help either.

Thirdly, the story itself is really bad, like it was conjured up in a coffee break or something cause it feels really badly put together, bad stereotypes replacing characters, and a lot of failed attempts at witty dialog replacing action.

When they finally go up against Dracula with an arsenal of weapons, it is rather funny, but the silliness, bad acting, and shoddy quality takes away the fun. Not to mention, far too much time is spent talking about attacking Dracula as opposed to actually doing it.

Strangely, I did not find this movie as annoying, or as aggravating as I should have given the circumstances.
  • a-twetman
  • Mar 19, 2013
  • Permalink
2/10

Better Than What You Think

I am honestly surprised at how low a rating this movie has received here. I've seen far worse movies, that have much higher ratings. Don't get me wrong, this is not a good movie, or even a "so bad it's good" movie ( such as "Autumn" (2009) ).

The thing that strikes me as the biggest single issue, is lack of creativity. Every possible chance the director had to suck the life out of this movie, he went for.

Here is a list of some of the issues I had with this little train wreck:

The editing. Many scenes were cut short, most notably the dinner scene. Many more seemed like there was some footage missing. The editing department was not very kind to scene transitions.

The script had to be written by a 12 year old. No adult could have come up with a storyline like this, unless he was very intoxicated.

The twist ending .... What?! Why?! How The?!

The acting. The folks who were in this were trying there best to act, but it is apparent they are not actors.

Sound was OK for the most part, except for certain scenes like the hayloft were noise obscured dialog.

All the central "good" characters were always in the same room.

Character's behavior "out of character" ( to put it mildly ).

Character interactions were very wrong.

Dracula - the whole character was wrong.

Dark blue day-for-night shots.

Plot points brought up, and dropped.

What little set design there were, looked more at home at a high school play, than this movie.

Special effects were so cheap, the movie would have been slightly better without them.

Of all these bad things I have said about this movie, there is 1 good thing I can say. It had some pretty good footage of the Sedlec Ossuary .
  • rls0812
  • Aug 4, 2012
  • Permalink
1/10

Should this even be considered a movie? It looks more like an extended YouTube video.

  • planktonrules
  • Jan 13, 2010
  • Permalink
4/10

Good for a Laugh!!

Bought this movie at a 2nd hand store for a $1, so i wasn't expecting too much. But i have to tell you, it was hilarious!!! Why would you be expecting an Oscar winner with a title like this? Come on don't be so serious! The best part was the villagers with the changing accents. "Let's get torches & pitchforks" & then the father more concerned about his daughter being in bed with the guy than her being carried off by the Dracula. The other part everyone enjoyed was the flying coffin with the song of the Valkyrie's for a theme. "The only way to travel" hahaha!!!We watched it with a group of people and maybe that made it better as we had our own running commentary. Would we watch it again.. oh yeah!
  • boo2620
  • Feb 22, 2005
  • Permalink
1/10

Spoiler

  • tbrass1515
  • Jun 26, 2009
  • Permalink
1/10

mental film making

  • kingmonkey
  • Mar 10, 2006
  • Permalink
10/10

The most epic day of my existence

if i could i would have rated this epic and alluring movie a twelve. it's intense story line compliments the brilliant acting. I thought the set design could have been more intricate but i forgot about it when the dialog was happening. This was sheer brilliance and i highly recommend it. People take these low indie horror film for advantage. The first hint that this movie was going to be a life changing experience was the inspiring title. it intrigued me. When i saw it sitting on the block buster shelf all by it's lonesome i had to grab before anyone else did. I was confused though when i brought to the register and the cashier looked at me funny and began to giggle. i wondered was it because of my purchase or perhaps I'm just funny looking? i figured it was my appearance once i saw he movie. Whoever thought of this was pure genius and i would encourage hen to make a sequel! Please go out and get this movie you won't be disappointed.
  • musicalvampires_inc
  • Sep 14, 2007
  • Permalink
1/10

Where did he get the grenade?

  • zoe_longwood27
  • Apr 14, 2014
  • Permalink

Strangest vampire feature ever!

Since I'm an actor/director of features with the same kind of lack of budget and understand how hard it is to even get a production completed, I try to find the good points about them. I can only imagine why this one had 3 different actors play Dracula. That alone is a good reason to see this thing! I have to admit, I wasn't sure if the humor was intentional or not because it seemed to come & go, just like the actor's accents. There were a couple of interesting sight gags that actually got me laughing hard, like a flying coffin! Other then that, it had me thinking "What the h___ is this!". If you're a fan of flicks like "Plan 9......" & "Robot Monster", you'll probably want to see this one.
  • Loon-5
  • Feb 22, 2003
  • Permalink
2/10

Pitiful

  • Leofwine_draca
  • Apr 13, 2017
  • Permalink
1/10

Dracula, Watched and Hated It.

  • mark.waltz
  • Oct 14, 2023
  • Permalink
3/10

So yeah...

  • BandSAboutMovies
  • Jan 11, 2022
  • Permalink
10/10

i wasn't shouting, i wasn't shouting, i wasn't shouting, i wasn't shouting, i wasn't shouting, i wasn't shouting, i wasn't shouting.

WELL WHAT CAN I SAY?... AWE INSPIRING A TRUE CHICK FLICK, DAVE CLINTON IS A HUNK OF A GUY AND I'm A HETEROSEXUAL ape As well. ANYWAY HES NOT IN THE FILM, THE FILM HOWEVER LEFT ME MENTAL, PHYSICALLY AND EMOTIONALLY SCARRED FOR 5 MONTHS, THEN I WAS CURED BUt i am now suffering from insomnia and diahrea only in the morning between 4 and 6.15. the best part of the film was when the credits were rolling at the end it had me on a natural high for at least what i can consider to be about 5 8ths of a donkeys lifespan. but then you have to say, NO this is my life and you cant tell me what to do, I'm a chuck Norris fan, i own you, your but a mere toucan to me, a mere one! but no seriously this film is not funny and in my opinion it should be classed as a video nasty and banned. after viewing the film with my optical sensors and listening with my audio devices that are located on the side of my face i have depicted the true meaning about black pudding. it's just a excuse to put all of the rubbish thats left of a hog into on measly portion of indepence. pooch, shelves, trashcan, elves and mantoes are all a current feature in this movie and i have to say that were a completed waste of time and they have been used far to to many time in these chauvinistic capitalist films about the grime raper. yes thats right the grim raper not grim reaper.
  • joe_bassist89
  • Jul 5, 2006
  • Permalink
10/10

I don't get the negative reviews. These people are bloggbusser.

As far as horror comedies go this movie is second best to Schaub's standup only. Bbbbbeast of a film.
  • gonzotheblue
  • Mar 5, 2021
  • Permalink

More from this title

More to explore

Recently viewed

Please enable browser cookies to use this feature. Learn more.
Get the IMDb App
Sign in for more accessSign in for more access
Follow IMDb on social
Get the IMDb App
For Android and iOS
Get the IMDb App
  • Help
  • Site Index
  • IMDbPro
  • Box Office Mojo
  • License IMDb Data
  • Press Room
  • Advertising
  • Jobs
  • Conditions of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Your Ads Privacy Choices
IMDb, an Amazon company

© 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.