Dracula Rising

Customer Reviews:

Boring enough to induce sleep.......2006-02-20

I bought this film partially because it starred Stacey Travis, who was great in HARDWARE (a wonderfully stylish post-apocalyptic TERMINATOR ripoff). I also liked her in GHOST WORLD (a poignant coming-of-age story co-starring the always interesting Steve Buscemi).

But DRACULA RISING falls far short of the quality of these two films.

Released in 1992, DRACULA RISING seems "inspired" by BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA, Coppola's film about Dracula seeking the reincarnation of his ancient love. DRACULA RISING was produced by Roger Corman's New Concorde Productions, and it's typical of Corman to rush out knockoffs of recent hits. This is one of Corman's more boring knockoffs.

In DRACULA RISING, Dracula's son (played by the guy from BLUE LAGOON) seeks the reincarnation of his ancient love (Stacey Travis). He meet her in some ultra-low budget Los Angeles warehouse party. She then flies to Transylvania (the film was shot in Bulgaria) to restore a painting in a monestary.

Not much happens after that. Lots of flashbacks to their initial love. An evil vampire (sort of a friend/foe of Dracula's son) menaces Travis for a while, but promises to leave her for Dracula's son, who in turn does nothing much. He just mopes and moans and bares his fangs in angst, wanting Travis but not wanting to condemn her to a life of vampirism. Lots of boring soul-searching as the characters wander in the night, wander in the monestary, wander in catacombs, wander as they dream or experience flashbacks.

Travis is just sort of ... there. Not doing much. There is some soft-core porn, shots of Travis and the guy filmmed underwater while they swim nude.

The Bulgarian location looks authenticly Transylvanian, but the place is deserted aside from a servant girl. This low budget film couldn't afford many extras, aside from some angry villagers in a flashback.

I know a film is bad when I keep looking at the time, wondering how much longer the film will last, and am dejected that only a half hour has elapsed when it feels more like an hour.

The actors playing the two vampires aren't great. They bare their fangs and look menacing or angst-ridden, in a kooky unconvincing way. What's worse, their hair is cut short and looks stylishly blow-dried. Even in the flashback scenes set in the late 1400s, their hair is short and stylishly blow-dried!

Travis is pretty, but lacks charisma. (She was better in HARDWARE and GHOST WORLD, really.)

Film reminds me of EMBRACE OF THE VAMPIRE, another low budget, soft-core vampire film that really dragged and dragged and bored the hell out of me.

FANGS FOR NOTHING.......2004-12-12

Poor Count Dracula. In over 70 years of moviemaking, the bloody vampire has been played by everyone from Bela Lugosi to Leslie Nielsen; Gerard Butler to Frank Langella; Christopher Lee to David Peel; and so on and so on. Now, Christopher Atkins from THE BLUE LAGOON plays the vampire's son, a blond charmer who doesn't really want to be a vampire, and who is mooning over his lost love from 500 years ago. She is now embodied in an art restorer's persona, played lazily and lifeless by Stacey Travis. Doug Wert plays the bad vampire as if he was in a Saturday Night Live skit, which would have worked had the movie had its tongue in its cheek. Alas, though, it tries to be a Gothic romance horror film, and doesn't capture the essence of any of them.
Burdened with repetitive flashback scenes that tell us how Atkins and Wert became vampires, the movie lopes along at a snail's pace, and the climax is amazingly funny. With special effects straight from the dark age, we are treated to Atkins who is now dressed in white and who can shoot sparks from his hands, and summon demonic bats.
DRACULA RISING joins the countless vampire movies that just don't have any bite!

Don't expect a typical Dracula.......2002-12-06

I bet you Bram Stoker is rolling in his grave. This vampire movie may put you to sleep, especially the main character. At times he is convincing, then he gets this crazed look in his eyes which makes you giggle. The storyline is surprising though, a new look at a Dracula tale. Don't expect to much, but, if you are a vampire fan and have nothing to do watch it....

Love is Eternal . . ........2002-08-02

A brilliant art restorer is called to work on an ancient painting that has been badly burned. Little does she know that she looks exactly like the woman that Dracula's son loved a century ago and was burned at the stake, falsely accused of witchcraft. It's a story of eternal love and conflict. Modern vampire lore with the flavor of classic gothic vampire tales mingled into it. It therefore may be a little slow paced for people who only like the "Blade" speed of films but I think most folks who enjoy vampire films will find something to like about this one.

Terrible.......2002-04-06

The movie's occasionally interesting cinematography cannot make up for its unfocused and ridiculous story of Dracula's son. Such a premise could definitely have yielded a good movie, but it's doubtful to me that the filmmakers really tried to make the most of the idea. Overall, this is a poorly executed film that is so bad it might be better off getting the Mystery Science Theater 3000 treatment.

DVD:

DVD

DVD