Customer Reviews


 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


11 of 15 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars not your typical Dracula
As a fan of Bram Stoker's character in all of its representations, I did not hold up much hope for this film, particularly when it was promoted by the BBC as being a highly "sexed up" representation of the classic tale. Much to my surprise, it has become one of my favorite adaptations -- not because it holds true to the novel in any way (it doesn't) but because it has a...
Published on 29 Jan. 2007 by Charity Bishop

versus
12 of 12 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Marc Warren is woefully miscast in a dissapointing effort
The umpteenth in a long line of screen adaptations of Bram Stoker's iconic literary creation the BBC's 2006 production has the dubious distinction of a unorthodox casting in "Hustle's" Marc Warren as the vampiric Count while diverting more so from Stoker's classic novel than previous versions.

This version sees young English estate agent, Jonathan Harker...
Published on 15 Oct. 2009 by Mr. R. Mcelwaine


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 4 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

12 of 12 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Marc Warren is woefully miscast in a dissapointing effort, 15 Oct. 2009
By 
Mr. R. Mcelwaine "Bobislost" (Clydebank, Scotland) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
The umpteenth in a long line of screen adaptations of Bram Stoker's iconic literary creation the BBC's 2006 production has the dubious distinction of a unorthodox casting in "Hustle's" Marc Warren as the vampiric Count while diverting more so from Stoker's classic novel than previous versions.

This version sees young English estate agent, Jonathan Harker journeying to Transylvania to finalise the sale of a property being bought by the aged Count Dracula. Little does he realise and all of us are more than aware, the Count is a vampire and upon learning this, Jonathan is murdered by Dracula. Meanwhile back in England , Jonathan's fiancé, Mina Murray is celebrating the imminent nuptials of her best friend Lucy Westernra to Lord Arthur Holmwood. However, unknown to Lucy her husband to be has contracted syphilis, a disease that was passed on to him by his father before his birth and is therefore unable to consummate their marriage. In the vain hope of ridding himself of the fatal illness he enlists the services of Dracula who he has been told can rid him of the affliction and aided him to secure the purchase of Carfax Abbey as a residence in London. But the Count has his own agenda and with the help of a cult who worship him, he plots to make London his own personal feeding ground. It is only the sage knowledge of Dutch professor, Abraham Van Helsing that can put a stop to Dracula's plans.

The BBC has a distinguished history, particularly when it comes to costume drama's and while it's beautiful to look at and the scenes in Transylvania are brought brilliantly to life, this latest adaptation is incredibly misjudged, hollow and ultimately unfulfilling. The problem primarily is with the unnecessary alterations made to the films source material. The whole angle revolving around Arthur's affliction only serves to add the ridiculous notion and terribly misconceived notion that Dracula is the figure of worship, a clear attempt by the films writers to do something original and inventive with the story which only manages to be tawdry. The actors struggle to bring any credibility to the sorry affair with Warren chiefly miscast as the titular Count, lacking any commanding presence that former Dracula's (Christopher Lee springs to mind) had arlier scenes in abundance. While impressive in earlier scenes where the Count is elderly, his later scenes are woeful. Warren stares fixedly at his co-stars clearly attempting to provoke chills and merely provokes indifference. Only David Suchet comes out of the whole farrago with any dignity in tact as Van Helsing.

More depressing than scary and only running in at an hour and a half in length "Dracula" is a dull inspired mess as is the rest of the acting. It's hard to really care about any of the characters least of all Arthur who is partially responsible for bringing Dracula to London while Warren preying on Sophia Myles Lucy in the bedroom scenes, obviously an attempt to recreate the sexiness of Francis Ford Coppola's "Bram Stoker's Dracula" just comes across as flat and unappealing.

If you want to see a good adaptation of Bram Stoker's novel then don't bother with this one, the hammy bygone days of the old Hammer Horror films were more enjoyable than this fluff.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


24 of 26 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars This Dracula has no bite!, 24 Feb. 2007
By 
D. Woods (DURHAM, DURHAM United Kingdom) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
I have been a fan of the Dracula novel and most of the various film adaptations as well, so when I heard of this brand new version I couldn't wait to see it. Unfortunately, I shouldn't have wasted my time. This is the most stale, dramatically empty version of the story I've ever seen. Most of the versions prior to this, although never a straight presentation of the novel, did put parts of it on screen. This one, in a move to be 'daring' and 'sexy' chose to put in a plot line about a sexually transmitted disease and for the action to be filmed at jaunty angles. Everyone is woefully miscast, especially Marc Warren as the Count. There is no mystery about him, no air of menace, just blandness. Not only that, but where are his brides? His transformations into a wolf or a bat? Where's the race against time finale? There's just no driving force in this adaptation at all. One of the most crucial characters, Van Helsing, doesn't appear until the last 25 minutes. And one of the most crucial scenes - Lucy's transformation and destruction happens in the last 10 minutes. Catch any of the Hammer movies, they're infinately better. Or check out the 1970's version with Frank Langella - a superb movie and possibly the best version to date. Anything to avoid this!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Oh my god why did i bother!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, 19 Jun. 2010
By 
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
ok like most vampire fans i was very much looking forward to this new version of Dracula, but i wish i had not wasted my time setting up the video recorder.
Dracula- who chose him to play the lead role, his acting skills where crap and i've seen the Jack Parlance version of Dracula i think i enjoyed that more!, Castle bad trying to hard to copy Gary Oldman, and can some one please tell me where the vampiresses were and why Johnathan does not escape he does not get killed in the castle he get's out and finds Sister Agatha.
i can't remember seening any gyspy's, and i don't know why Dracula wears Johnathans clothes when he is in Whitby in the day time because if you remember in the book Johnathan see's Dracula wearing his clothes out of the window when he's locked in the castle, and Dracula is on his way to the village masqurading as Johnathan to post the letters.
i can't remember seeing Quincy P. Morris in the film or Renfield, Dr Seward is in it.....thats all i can say, didn't realy do much in the film, oh before i forget Athur Holmwood is in the film, and all the way throw it he's trying to get Dracula to give him the dark gift which drag's throw the whole film.
And Lucy does get embraced but only in the last half an hour of the film and again trying to hard to copy Gary Oldman, while Mina never get's embraced by the vampire instead she get's out witted by a white sheet down in a cellar where and i still can not believe it, you meet one of the most key leading figures of the book sitting in the dark in the last 10 mins of the film VAN HELSING................and i don't remember if Dracula get's staked i think he get's shot or he might get staked after he get's shot i forget i was just just glad that the film was over.

DON'T BUY THIS GET THE 1992 FRANCIS FORD COPPOLA DRACULA, IT IS FAR THE MOST BEST DRACULA FILM I HAVE EVER SEEN, DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME WITH THIS NEW HOG WASH OF A MOVIE.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Awful... JUST... Awful., 4 Feb. 2012
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
Funnily enough this TV Movie was created by BBC not ITV, although it says it on the DVD. And it isnt the first time BBC have created a TV Dracula movie. There was one in 1977, which in my eyes is one of the greatest Dracula movie's to date. Where as this... what went wrong. They completely changed the story. Only small part's are close to the book. For Example: Like how Dracula starts off as an old man and slowely gets younger. Now normally i dont mind if it isnt Accurate to the novel. My favorite Dracula movie is the 1931 movie starring Bela Lugosi, and even that differs alot from the novel. But the thing is, i dont like the changes in this movie. It just doesnt work. For a start i dont like the whole Arthur getting cyphilis storyline. It was un-nessecarilly boring and didnt make it better. Van-Helsing, only get's like 10 minuets screen time. AND THANK GOD! David Suchet's performance is so dull. Van Helsing doesn't do anything but winge and wine. He looks and sounds and acts weak. Marc Warren as Dracula. He only gets a small amount of screen time. So from what i can tell, he's an alright Dracula. He's not bad. But he's to young and doesn't do much. The rest of the whole movie is pretty much talking about a wedding and talking about cyphilis.

So all in all this is by far the worst Dracula movie ive seen so far. If you want a BBC Dracula movie to watch, ignore this one, and stick with the 1977 version.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Dire; so bad, I wish they hadn't bothered., 18 Dec. 2012
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
A prime example of ghastly 'event' television during Mark Thompson's time as BBC Director General; resources were being spread so thinly that when an adaptation was attempted it had to be something oh so familiar to ensure a basic audience, and then it had to be given a 'modern' (i.e. trendy) twist, to justify doing it at all.

Unfortunately, it looks like the 'spreading resources thinly' approach is set to stay, even if twentieth century and twenty-first century works are now more likely to be adapted rather than those from the nineteenth century like this.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Dracul, 26 April 2014
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
When I first watched this, I did not know what to make of it. I did wonder why it id rated "18" and not 12 or 15. I think Marc Warren was quite good as Dracula, and the whole thing was "alright", but I think it could have been better.
I would recommend Francis Coppola's Dracula instead of this weirdness.
I was also a li'l disappointed with David Suchet's performance as Van Helsing. I am used to him as Hercule Poirot, I am used to the Anthony Hopkins as Van Helsing, which is even better.

Don not waste yon money on this, get the 1992 of it instead.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Mad, bad and if you've not seen it yet, be glad., 20 Mar. 2014
By 
Amazon Customer (Yorkshire, England) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
I loath to give negative reviews, but I loath this version of Stoker's classic tale far more. Horrifically mis-cast and unfathomably "reimagined", this misfire sees some usually exceptional actors (Warren, Suchet, Myles) battle through this turgid mess in a cringe inducing abomination. Mad subplots, paper thin characterisations and silly dialogue go towards making this opportunity missed drama one to let pass you by.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Strangely absent Dracula, 13 Oct. 2008
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
Despite the title, there's really not a lot of Dracula in this adaption.

Marc Warren is okay in the lead - but this is all it comes to unfortunately. Everything about this is just 'okay', on the verge of being boring.

Sophia Myles is beautiful as always - but we get to see only the briefest glimpse of her after she is 'turned', and that's just a bit disappointing.

A bit of a let down.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5 of 6 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars An insult to the orginal story, 6 Jan. 2007
By 
Bezerus Bezby "Bez" (Leeds, UK) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
I was really looking forward to this tv adaptation. I have been a fan of this novel since I was a small child, but it was a big disappointment. I cannot understand why they changed the story in such a way, ie, Lord Holmwood has a nasty STD and asks Dracula over for a cup of tea to sort him out. Dracula turns nasty (duhh!)

The acting was bad, the script was poor and I will never understand why film/tv makers feel the need to always change this story. If it aint broke, don't fix it!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


7 of 9 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Bloodsucked, 15 July 2007
By 
EA Solinas "ea_solinas" (MD USA) - See all my reviews
(HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)    (TOP 500 REVIEWER)   
This review is from: Dracula [DVD] [2006] (DVD)
Apparently seductive vampires, malignant superpowers and evil vs. good aren't sufficiently chilling enough anymore. We need STDs, satanic cults and a loopy hermit.

Because those are only a few of the mutilations made to Bram Stoker's classic "Dracula," which the BBC has raped in just about every way a plot can be. Wretched direction, appalling acting, and a plot with barely a shred of Stoker's original story -- we're left with a third-rate vampire flick that thinks it's first-rate.

Arthur Holmwood (Dan Stevens) is apalled when he finds that his father is dying of syphilis -- and he was infected at birth. To save his life and sanity -- and marry the beautiful Lucy (Sophia Myles) -- he involves himself in a strange cult that promises to cure him. Meanwhile, young solicitor Jonathan Harker (Rafe Spall) is sent to Transylvania to sell a house to the decrepit Count Dracula... only to meet a gruesome fate when he sees Dracula's true nature.

Arthur and Lucy have married, but the wedding is not consummated, so Lucy spends most of her time with her pal Mina (Stephanie Leonidas), who is worrying about her fiancee Jonathan. Then one night a ship crashes on the rocks nearby, and it seems that Arthur and the cult have unleashed Count Dracula on England's shores. The only way to stop him -- and save Mina -- is to trust in a strange man who already knows too much of vampires...

It's pretty difficult to find the shreds of Stoker's original story in this adaptation -- apparently the BBC writers were under the impression that they could do better than the greatest vampire story ever written. So they tack in syphilis, a murder mystery, a satanic cult, a mysterious disappearance, and Van Helsing being a crazy old man locked in a basement.

It might not have been as wretched as it is, had it not been for the woefully bad direction. Lots of seizure-inducing quick cuts and repetitive close-ups of fangs, and plot holes you could drive a truck through, such as Dracula's sporadic immunity to sunlight. Moreover, the first three-fourths of the movie are miserably slow and dull, only to tumble rapidly to an unsatisfying, inconclusive ending.

And the whole "erotic vampire-blood-sex" undertone, which has been around since Victorian times, is handled with hilarious consequences. Whose idea was it to have Dracula orgasm every time he drinks blood?

Ultimately any "Dracula" movie is only as good as its Dracula. Marc Warren is no fiery, sweeping, intense Boyar prince with a deep thirst for women -- he looks like a Neanderthal goth frat boy with too much makeup, and he's apparently too stupid to get to England without someone sending him a ticket. He's no Bela Lugosi or Christopher Lee -- he looks (and acts) more like Jack White with a severe head injury.

The rest of the cast is about as impressive. The talented Suchet does as well as he can with a loopy, fearful Van Helsing, and Myles does a solid job as Dracula's first girl. But the other actors are mediocre at best -- Leonidas is particularly awful when she's feigning hysterics, and Stevens is an embarrassment as a bad parody of Arthur.

The latest adaptation of "Dracula" falls below the worst of Hammer Horror and lame TV movies -- a bastardized disaster of syphilitic writing, miserable direction and a Dracula who's as intimidating as a wet sponge.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 4 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Dracula [DVD] [2006]
Dracula [DVD] [2006] by Bill Eagles (DVD - 2007)
£5.01
In stock
Add to basket Add to wishlist
Only search this product's reviews