Before delving into the review, I should make a disclosure: I really enjoy Dario Argento’s movies. While that’s a topic for a separate, long post, suffice it to say that there’s something about his use of color, proportion, and scene setting that resonates with me. In fact, in terms of “bad” movies, Argento is the high standard to which all other bad movies are held by this reviewer. Seriously. I love his stuff and, at least subconsciously, it figures into how I judge other bad horror movies.
Last night, I became overly excited to see Argento’s Dracula 3-D available on iTunes. I read the reviews on iTunes and went ahead and rented it. (Note to self: iTunes movie reviewers are, generally, idiots.)
Some warnings: this is an adult movie. There’s nudity and one graphic sex scene; it is also violent and gory – there were a couple of scenes that bugged me. One scene in particular: the scene after Lucy Westenra is dispatched. Nothing is shown on screen, yet it’s a rather uncomfortable moment.
Dracula doesn’t quite rise to the same quality (in terms of color and proportion) as Argento’s other movies ( such as Suspiria or Inferno). The movie also doesn’t follow the traditional storyline of Dracula. Well, it does, I guess. In a rather mixed up way. Argento has always had his own take on these things. All the traditional characters eventually show up in some form or another. And there is what seems to now be the standard line indicating “this is a Dracula movie”, to wit: “The children of the night…what music they make.” Beyond that, it’s more of a movie inspired by Bram Stoker’s novel.
The movie opens with a peasant girl, Tania, helping to lock up the house and then taking off to rendezvous with her married lover. At which time, there’s a rather extended scene of them copiously copulating. There is nudity.
As is wont to happen after hot barn sex, the couple fight, Tania takes off and is bitten by a vampire owl (yes, I know that’s not how you spell “bat” because…well…it wasn’t a bat) that transforms into Dracula. Dracula is played with a sublime air of creepiness by Thomas Kretschmann. He did a nice job with the role.
Tania becomes a vampire and then Jonathan Harker shows up in town to work for Count Dracula as his librarian. Harker cuts his hand, Tania show up to suck it. Later, in an objectively horrible scene of seduction (more nudity, no sex), Tania attacks him, Dracula appears and attacks her, then he attacks Harker. Later Harker escapes. Just to get eaten by wolves. Which is OK because the entire time Harker is on screen, all I could think was “Would someone please cut that poor bastard’s hair!”. Sure, getting eaten by wolves is extreme. But, hey, no more hair!
Mina comes to town and visits with her friend Lucy. Lucy gets sick, dies, comes back, attacks a kid – pretty much the standard storyline. Somewhere along the way, Van Helsing (played by Rutger Hauer – which you’d think would help things, but it really doesn’t) shows up and gets to work.
A bunch of other stuff happens (OWEMYGAWD! the leadership of the town was in cahoots with Count Dracula all along!) and eventually Dracula gets killed by Mina.
While there’s nothing to especially recommend this movie, I was still entertained. There were some new takes on the Dracula mythos (e.g., the owl and watch out for the praying mantis scene) and a rather faded sense of Argento’s color/proportion/blocking is present. The story is choppy (yet leaves one with a feeling of having been told a good story); the acting is…well, I kind of had the feeling that no one really knew their lines and everyone had had too much wine at lunch, breakfast, and dinner; there are some CGI effects that may elicit laughter.
There are some very nice scenes in terms of photography and blocking. Most of the scenes have just the right touches of color (the scene of Mina and Lucy in the landau is a nice highlight of that).
If you’re a fan of Argento’s work, I think you’ll like it and also see a fading of the talent. If you don’t like Argento’s work, well why the hell are you even reading this? Go play in the snow! Have some fun. If you’re new to Argento’s work, you’ll get his best work in Suspiria and, to an extent, Inferno (I also really liked Opera and Giallo). To American audiences, a good description of what you might expect is “spaghetti horror” (reminiscent of the spaghetti westerns of the 1960s and 70s).
I also have a feeling that, to an American viewer (specifically, to me), that Argento’s work might be more intelligible if one had a better background of Italian life. I have a feeling that there’s some cultural context that would add some depth or, at least, fill in some gaps that always seem to be present in his movies.
At The Hoosies 
You must be logged in to post a comment.