Wrath of Dracula

The film centers around the story of Jonathan Harkers incarceration by Count Dracula. He writes a note of dismay home to his beloved Mina, warning her of his impending doom. Mina who finds help with the dull, boring all knowing Van Helsing begins a journey to castle Dracula to rescue her beloved. Not before though she must train, to have the strength to fight the vampires. For she cannot handle the weight of a hammer to drive the steak through the Lord of the darkness' Heart. Though she can lift suitcase containing a heavy typewriter which weights far more. Anyway she trains in martial arts, for some reason, and learns it rather quickly from mere illustrations, our Heroine is far stronger willed than we would assume her pretty demeanour. The castle is a let down, the vampires and action scenes are poor, sound poor, look worse and the script is tedious. Jonathan Harker is a weak performance in every way a good C- GCSE. Van Helsing isn't bad but the script doesn't do much for his excitement. It's slow and a waste of time. It's not even worth the B movie viewing novelty. The model castle though is great. Draculas lisp is hilarious. The rain effect is probably my most favourite element to the film. It was the moment that most caught my attention, trying to figure out how long they spent adding it. Much like the sound of the wolf howls. Mina is clearly the best paid actress perhaps only paid actress and isn't too bad, I'd expect a decent performance from Hannaj with a decent script and a hint of a budget. The credit sequence is better than the film. Look I get it, it's budget b movie and fun for the crew to make. You'd hope. For Stoker fans, which is why I gave it my time, it's not worth it.

I recently watched "The Wrath of Dracula," and it took me a good 40 minutes to realize it was not your typical horror flick but rather at time's a black comedy. The film presents a unique take on the well-trodden Dracula story, blending humor into the narrative. I hope it was intended

The performances were decent, with the cast embracing the film's comedic elements. However, I found myself questioning the necessity of adapting this familiar story into another film. While the twist towards comedy was unexpected, it didn't necessarily enhance the overall viewing experience for me.

Despite my reservations about the film's choice of direction, I appreciate the attempt to bring something new to the Dracula narrative. "The Wrath of Dracula" might not be everyone's cup of tea, but if you're open to a comedic spin on classic horror, it could be an interesting watch.

Overall, the film leaves an impression with its unexpected genre shift, but whether it successfully revitalizes the well-known Dracula story is up for debate.

Jonathan Harker has been a guest of Count Dracula at his Castle in Transylvania, tearing that something isn't quite right, he sends for his wife, who arrives and instantly neets up with Professor van Helsing.

So, the film has a relatively low score, and justifiably so I hear you say, but it's actually not all bad.

So, it looks a little amateur, and feels a little cheap, but late night on Christmas eve, after a few gins, waiting for Santa, I rather enjoyed it. It is very talky, and at times it looks rough around the edges, but there's definitely some creativity behind it.

Considering this was made on a shoestring budget, if actually looks decent at times, some of the sets and costumes are nice, and Castle Dracula looks awesome. There's some interesting mythology surrounding The Count, I liked the ideas about his origins.

It's still better than the third part of Moffatt's BBC series from a few years ago.

Sean Cronin makes for an interesting Count Dracula, he's quite a fishy vampire.

Nonsense, but fun.

6/10.

Many fans of Gothic horror will welcome this low budget adaptation of Bram Stoker's tale. The film's strengths lie in atmospheric cinematography and strong acting performances by the main protagonists, especially that of Hannaj Bang Bendz as Mina, who almost succeed in overcoming an overly wordy script which weakens the otherwise prevailing sense of menace. The director attempts the Shakespearean ploy of introducing scenes of light relief through visual gags during action scenes but these largely misfire in my humble opinion. Dracula's brides are beautiful and chilling in equal measure with Ayvianna Snow's Maria a stand out performance. More, please!

I was liking this as soon as i saw Hannaj Bang Bendz in the opening credits, i think she really adds to any role.

Ok, this time Mina travels to Castle Dracula to find Jonathan. Upon arrival she runs into Van Helsing and from there, well you know the rest. Most of the acting was good.

The film is very pleasing, the set design, the lighting, it just looks good. The story drags on too slow, as though its an episode of a series.

There is a real PG13 feel of this, a very soft approach, total lack of gore and an odd interjection of camp in one of the few fight scenes. I sort of got the feel they were trying different things during the course of production. To me there was a real lack of consistancy.

Overall its not bad and after watching it, my impression was that it had the look of a pilot movie for a tv series. The ending even supported this. So much that it reminded me of the Dracula tv series from 2013 that was cancelled mid first season.

You dont see much of Dracula in this movie at all. That really leaves me wondering about the title. He is sctually portrayed as a wimp.

Its worth watching, it has entertainment value.

However they had a decent cast and could have made it much more lively.