33 reviews
Great concept, horrible movie
Well, this is one movie that in my opinion really sucked. It could have had all the potential of being great, but instead it turned out to be everything else but. The acting wasn't terrible, but the story was. At least the cutting and the way in which the story proceeded.
A lot of side stories were never followed up, and I can think of a thousand other things that would have been much more relevant to the story that they could have included in this movie. I like, or rather love, a good movie about Vlad, Dracula or vampires, but in this case I was really disappointed. Vlad wasn't even scary.
This could have been a good movie, but the script totally f**ked it up. The love affair between Justin and that old-english dead babe was totally uncalled for and just felt unnecessary. A lot of things didn't make sense at all and... well, I don't know what I'm saying anymore.
Oh yeah, one more thing: how cool is it to have the main villain (and in this case it is goddamn DRACULA) strangling his victims??? Not cool at all. This definitely made Vlad seem weaker than he really should be.
Yeah yeah. The movie sucked. So be it.
A lot of side stories were never followed up, and I can think of a thousand other things that would have been much more relevant to the story that they could have included in this movie. I like, or rather love, a good movie about Vlad, Dracula or vampires, but in this case I was really disappointed. Vlad wasn't even scary.
This could have been a good movie, but the script totally f**ked it up. The love affair between Justin and that old-english dead babe was totally uncalled for and just felt unnecessary. A lot of things didn't make sense at all and... well, I don't know what I'm saying anymore.
Oh yeah, one more thing: how cool is it to have the main villain (and in this case it is goddamn DRACULA) strangling his victims??? Not cool at all. This definitely made Vlad seem weaker than he really should be.
Yeah yeah. The movie sucked. So be it.
- letterbox_of_kj
- Nov 7, 2003
- Permalink
Ambition Should Not Necessarily Raise the Rating of the Film
A lot of people in the comments are giving this movie more stars than it deserves for ideas, or a different approach to the Dracula mythos than the usual vampire schlock. And in fact the makers of this film reached similar points to the novel "The Historian" from different paths. It is obvious from their dates of publication that both researched the topic heavily but neither influenced the other.
Anyway, perhaps it started out with a stronger script and got destroyed in editing, but the mess that we're left with at the end is pretty bad. Unforgivably bad plot movement, TV-movie cinematography and terrible editing whack this film in the end. You might enjoy parts of it, but the end result is a confused mess. There are good performances - by the entire cast, mind you - and lovely, appropriate locations. Certainly better than the abysmal 2005 "Way of the Vampire", but unfortunately the shortcomings outweigh the positives here.
Anyway, perhaps it started out with a stronger script and got destroyed in editing, but the mess that we're left with at the end is pretty bad. Unforgivably bad plot movement, TV-movie cinematography and terrible editing whack this film in the end. You might enjoy parts of it, but the end result is a confused mess. There are good performances - by the entire cast, mind you - and lovely, appropriate locations. Certainly better than the abysmal 2005 "Way of the Vampire", but unfortunately the shortcomings outweigh the positives here.
the return of goat-boy!
I just saw this movie last night, cause it look interesting. An award-winning and critically acclaimed b-movie. It should work as a warning call, i know... Because if it won an award at some horror movie festival... and some critics liked it... there's a good chance it's really really pretentious! And what do you know? It was! Ha HA HAA! Some people say here on IMDb that it is an "intellegent vampire movie". This movie has the same problems most Asian horror movies has. Its too damn "smart" for its own good. And its also supposed to be romantic and sexy, because anyone with half a brain knows that the whole vampire mythology and Dracula is all about sex. But this was more like watching one of those Harlequin movies my mother likes. I'm not banging independent vampire flicks... but i've seen better ones... and worse... Vlad is better then say... way of the vampire. And in i'ts defense i can say that Hollywood hasn't put out a decent vampire movie in... well... i guess the early 70's. And yes i am counting the chick flick "bram stokers Dracula".
Oh, and if they ever make a movie about Lenin, Billy Zane should play the lead! Anyway, don't rent or buy this... pick up a copy of "dracula 2001"... it's rubbish too... but you can always amuse yourself by staring at Jeri Ryans tits. Unless you're in to the whole goat boy look, then Vlad is the movie for you!
Oh, and if they ever make a movie about Lenin, Billy Zane should play the lead! Anyway, don't rent or buy this... pick up a copy of "dracula 2001"... it's rubbish too... but you can always amuse yourself by staring at Jeri Ryans tits. Unless you're in to the whole goat boy look, then Vlad is the movie for you!
- industrygeek
- Apr 1, 2006
- Permalink
Simply put, average
I read a couple of the other reviews of this movie and didn't think that most of them were fair. I really think this was just an average movie, not a good or bad movie, just average.
I watch a lot of movies and love anything about vampires, but this movie didn't really do it for me. There was a lot of information about Vlad, but there wasn't a whole lot of info about vampires. Without giving anything away, I'll just say that the causes are Vlad's vampirism were nothing you haven't heard before if you've seen more than one vampire movie. With all the build up about Vlad, I was hoping for a more original plot. However, I don't think that because the movie failed to be original that it should count against it, I just think it shouldn't be praised for it either.
Besides the plot, the movies did have a pretty good production value. I'd say that it was a bit better than a made-for-TV movie but obviously not a big budget film. Just because it's an independent movie doesn't mean that its great. Independent companies put out plenty of bad movies, but this falls somewhere in-between.
I wouldn't say this movie is worth watching, but I don't regret watching it either.
I watch a lot of movies and love anything about vampires, but this movie didn't really do it for me. There was a lot of information about Vlad, but there wasn't a whole lot of info about vampires. Without giving anything away, I'll just say that the causes are Vlad's vampirism were nothing you haven't heard before if you've seen more than one vampire movie. With all the build up about Vlad, I was hoping for a more original plot. However, I don't think that because the movie failed to be original that it should count against it, I just think it shouldn't be praised for it either.
Besides the plot, the movies did have a pretty good production value. I'd say that it was a bit better than a made-for-TV movie but obviously not a big budget film. Just because it's an independent movie doesn't mean that its great. Independent companies put out plenty of bad movies, but this falls somewhere in-between.
I wouldn't say this movie is worth watching, but I don't regret watching it either.
- krotkruton
- Jan 17, 2006
- Permalink
It shows something not revealed in other movies (AT FIRST!!!)
bad like the bit of a drunken vampire....
tsk tsk
Tsk tsk Billy Zane! I am horrified by this flick and some of the comments it has gotten. Original storyline in some aspects but the filmmakers could have done much better if they had put any thought at all into it. I just can't believe that anyone would like this... the only positive things I can say is that the locations were nice. The actors were horrible and completely unbelievable. I love Brad Dourif and I know that he sometimes makes odd choices as to his work so I can't fault him or his performance but there is just not enough of him. But Billy Zane : what were you thinking? The role is not good and you didn't even give a decent performance! Don't see this film... rent anything else in fact. Anything, really, trust me on this. I am a huge fans of all vampire flicks and this one has the honor of being the worst one I have ever seen.
Worst. Movie. Ever.
- seth_simes
- Aug 31, 2006
- Permalink
A Dracula film with no bite.
- poolandrews
- Jan 10, 2009
- Permalink
i thought it was pretty bad all around
i will be fair here and say that i didn't watch the whole movie.the reason is i found it way too slow and boring,plus it just looked too low budget.low budget isn't always a bad thing,when the rest of the movie is good.sometimes you don't even notice the budget.for me that is not the case with this movie.i have heard of some of the actors in this movie,and they've done some good work in the past.but in tis movie,it just seemed like no one wanted to be there.this is just my opinion and i could be wrong,but that's how i saw things.anyway,the bottom line is,from what i saw,this movie wasn't going anywhere fast.i give Vlad a 3/10
- disdressed12
- Nov 6, 2007
- Permalink
Vlad is the perfect mixture
I've read other people's comments and I'm surprised that a couple had so many problems with this movie. Vlad is the perfect mixture of historical fact and Romanian myth. It takes the whole vampire myth and returns it to it's rightful owner. Vlad Tepes was the basis of Stoker's Dracula and the vampire myth started in Romania and it's surrounding countries. I really liked how this movie didn't have the cinematic bloodsucker that we are all too used to, but instead had a tortured spirit that was doomed to wander the earth. The photography and locations are impressive (shot in the Carpathians) and the characters are believable. I'd definitely recommend this intelligent vampire story to anyone who is a genre fan, into historical pieces, or even just needs something to watch on a Friday night. I think that anyone who comes into this movie looking to see it for what it is, not some hack and slash horror film but a look into the historical Vlad mixed with a modern day adventure element, will enjoy the movie.
- divinethomas
- Aug 25, 2004
- Permalink
A remarkable and sadly overlooked vampire movie
First of all, "Vlad" is a different kind vampire movie. It has almost nothing in common with the typical vampire movie and moves further in the Gothic fantasy genre, horror-fantasy would be a better term. Far away from typical clichés of the genre, this movie presents us a twist in the well known history of Count Dracula as it removes any link to Bram Stoker's novel and focuses on the myths that inspired Stoker's novel. This movie is a tale of Romanian vampires.
The plot is a bit confusing, but at its core, it is about four graduated students who are selected by a Rumanian organization that will fund their research for their final thesis as their projects deal with Rumanian folklore and/or Vlad Tepes, the legendary ruler of Valachia who inspired Stoker to write the famous novel. The organization, lead by Radescu (Brad Douriff), is in fact a facade for an ancient order created by Tepes centuries ago, and their purposes will reveal when one of the students, Linsey (Monica Davidescu), reveals her secret: Her family had stolen a medallion from Vlad's grave.
The secret powers of the medallion will create chaos as the members of the order try to find it, for different purposes everyone, and the students are in the middle of the struggle aided by Adrian (Billy Zane), a loyal agent of Radescu who tries to avoid the rebirth of Vlad.
Now, the plot is for once very clever and quite interesting. The writers really did a great research when they wrote the story as it includes pieces of real history, Romanian folklore and Vlad Tepes' biography. Of course, spiced with fantasy and horror elements. Nevertheless, this is also its big problem, the movie tries to accomplish many tasks and this creates a confusing script. Certainly, a bigger budget would have resulted in a longer movie, and a longer movie would have fixed the confusion.
Depsite that huge problem, the movie works at its level, with an incredibly looking visuals, thanks to the beautiful Romanian locations and the amazing camera-work. It's indeed surprising how much they could make with so small budget.
Sadly, the budget hurts the SFX and they look as if they came from a cheap TV series. This indeed decreases a work of good quality, but fortunately, they focus on acting and not in SFX, so it is not that notorious.
The acting is very good, and the young actors show promise. While some of the characters were not very developed, the actors did a good job with the little they had and the result is pretty good. Again, a bit more of care in the script would have resulted in outstanding performances, but yet, the actors carry the film with grace.
Last but not least, the most remarkable feature of this movie is without a doubt the music. It is an outstanding work and it is a shame that the movie had not been more known, because the music is really outstanding. Few times a b-movie has a score this good and the movie really makes the most of it.
While probably this movie is not Oscar material, it is certainly among the best vampire movies of this decade. Or at least, among the most original. A great fantasy movie. 6.5/10
The plot is a bit confusing, but at its core, it is about four graduated students who are selected by a Rumanian organization that will fund their research for their final thesis as their projects deal with Rumanian folklore and/or Vlad Tepes, the legendary ruler of Valachia who inspired Stoker to write the famous novel. The organization, lead by Radescu (Brad Douriff), is in fact a facade for an ancient order created by Tepes centuries ago, and their purposes will reveal when one of the students, Linsey (Monica Davidescu), reveals her secret: Her family had stolen a medallion from Vlad's grave.
The secret powers of the medallion will create chaos as the members of the order try to find it, for different purposes everyone, and the students are in the middle of the struggle aided by Adrian (Billy Zane), a loyal agent of Radescu who tries to avoid the rebirth of Vlad.
Now, the plot is for once very clever and quite interesting. The writers really did a great research when they wrote the story as it includes pieces of real history, Romanian folklore and Vlad Tepes' biography. Of course, spiced with fantasy and horror elements. Nevertheless, this is also its big problem, the movie tries to accomplish many tasks and this creates a confusing script. Certainly, a bigger budget would have resulted in a longer movie, and a longer movie would have fixed the confusion.
Depsite that huge problem, the movie works at its level, with an incredibly looking visuals, thanks to the beautiful Romanian locations and the amazing camera-work. It's indeed surprising how much they could make with so small budget.
Sadly, the budget hurts the SFX and they look as if they came from a cheap TV series. This indeed decreases a work of good quality, but fortunately, they focus on acting and not in SFX, so it is not that notorious.
The acting is very good, and the young actors show promise. While some of the characters were not very developed, the actors did a good job with the little they had and the result is pretty good. Again, a bit more of care in the script would have resulted in outstanding performances, but yet, the actors carry the film with grace.
Last but not least, the most remarkable feature of this movie is without a doubt the music. It is an outstanding work and it is a shame that the movie had not been more known, because the music is really outstanding. Few times a b-movie has a score this good and the movie really makes the most of it.
While probably this movie is not Oscar material, it is certainly among the best vampire movies of this decade. Or at least, among the most original. A great fantasy movie. 6.5/10
It's alright
I watched Vlad not once, but twice. I love vampire movies, but this was just one of many that was less than thrilling. It wasn't the worst, but it wasn't the best either.
I tried to give it another chance and I admit that I understood it better the second time around, but like so many others before this, it just didn't do it for me.
I enjoyed Brad Dourif and Billy Zane, but there roles weren't quite what I expected. I'm fans of their work, but not really of this film.
If you're a hardcore vampire movie buff, I would probably say that you will get bored with portions of this film. Again, it's not the worst, but it's a little dry....
I tried to give it another chance and I admit that I understood it better the second time around, but like so many others before this, it just didn't do it for me.
I enjoyed Brad Dourif and Billy Zane, but there roles weren't quite what I expected. I'm fans of their work, but not really of this film.
If you're a hardcore vampire movie buff, I would probably say that you will get bored with portions of this film. Again, it's not the worst, but it's a little dry....
"Vlad, Vlad, Vlad the impaler! Vlad, Vlad, he could have been a sailor!"
Go google the 'summary' above and find out which song by whom these lyrics are from. Hèhèh.
Okay, never mind that, I'll get to the point and keep it a simple one: VLAD's a pretty lame and pointless movie about... ehrr, yeah, well, actually, what was it about again? Let's see: a group of students are sent off to study the myth of Vlad Tepes, aka Dracula. They visit some historical sites. Then a girl from a few centuries ago shows up and so does the ancient Vlad, through a portal in time, or something. Apparently, one of the students has this amulet that should be buried again to lay the evil Vlad to rest... Pretty boring movie where nothing really happens and one that occasionally shoves some historical facts concerning Vlad The Impaler down our throats, instead of showing him committing his vile acts. Vlad just seems to be nothing else but a fool in love... Billy Zane was a hoot with his Rrrrrroumanian accent. I had quite a laugh with the scene where he unsuspectingly encounters Dracula in the woods. Without any hesitation whatsoever, Mr. Zane starts hitting Mr. Tepes in the face, real hard. Pretty funny. Brad Douriff was wasted on this film and really hasn't got that much screen time. This flick is for Vlad Tepes-completists only...
Okay, never mind that, I'll get to the point and keep it a simple one: VLAD's a pretty lame and pointless movie about... ehrr, yeah, well, actually, what was it about again? Let's see: a group of students are sent off to study the myth of Vlad Tepes, aka Dracula. They visit some historical sites. Then a girl from a few centuries ago shows up and so does the ancient Vlad, through a portal in time, or something. Apparently, one of the students has this amulet that should be buried again to lay the evil Vlad to rest... Pretty boring movie where nothing really happens and one that occasionally shoves some historical facts concerning Vlad The Impaler down our throats, instead of showing him committing his vile acts. Vlad just seems to be nothing else but a fool in love... Billy Zane was a hoot with his Rrrrrroumanian accent. I had quite a laugh with the scene where he unsuspectingly encounters Dracula in the woods. Without any hesitation whatsoever, Mr. Zane starts hitting Mr. Tepes in the face, real hard. Pretty funny. Brad Douriff was wasted on this film and really hasn't got that much screen time. This flick is for Vlad Tepes-completists only...
- Vomitron_G
- Feb 20, 2010
- Permalink
terrible script
Most published novels and short stories are pretty good.
Sure there are a few stinkers, but on the whole the stories are worth your time.
The same certainly can't be said for the boat load of poor movie scripts out there, and Vlad proudly continues that trend. A promising storyline with a terrible script and acting. Many of the actor's lines were laughable, and numerous scenes didn't flow properly.
Whether it's independent or big budget, I can't believe a studio would make a film such as Vlad, with a script that could be outdone by many high school English students.
Sure there are a few stinkers, but on the whole the stories are worth your time.
The same certainly can't be said for the boat load of poor movie scripts out there, and Vlad proudly continues that trend. A promising storyline with a terrible script and acting. Many of the actor's lines were laughable, and numerous scenes didn't flow properly.
Whether it's independent or big budget, I can't believe a studio would make a film such as Vlad, with a script that could be outdone by many high school English students.
- darrenbarnes
- Sep 25, 2006
- Permalink
Unbelievably good, great musical score
This movie kept my attention, and kept it till the end. The actors all did a solid job of making their parts live. Brad Dourif and Billy Zane gave the film class and credibility. Kam Heskin is a hottie, and carried her part well. Francesco Quinn makes your skin crawl in this horror genre tale, admirably making the role of Vlad the Impaler come to life and chilling you down to your socks! (He looks a lot like his dad Anthony Quinn in some of the scenes) The Romanian actress (whom I've never seen before) did a great job of looking terrified & sexy. I wonder if she speaks any English? If not, she did a great job of handling the wordy role. The musical score really punches up the terror in the scary scenes, and sounds like a score from a Hollywood major film. This movie was filmed on location in Romania, with the major horror parts actually filmed in the Carpathians at Vlad's real castle. The Dracula character takes on a new & completely different direction, which in no way mimics former Dracula movies. I enjoyed this one....
A Very Confused Story
In Romania, four students (two Americans Jeff Meyer (Paul Popowich) and his sister Alexa (Kam Heskin); one British Justin (Nicholas Iron); and one Romanian Linsey (Monica Davidescu)) are selected by Radescu (Brad Dourif), the dean of a local university, and his assistant Adrian (Billy Zane) for a research about the life of the prince Vlad (Francesco Quinn). Linsey has a powerful necklace that belonged to Vlad, which was stolen many years ago by a former relative of her from the grave of Vlad. She intends to return it to the tomb. Meanwhile, a society that worships Vlad wants to retrieve the necklace. While in their way to the castle of Vlad, the group meets Ilona (Iva Hasperger), a woman from the Middle Ages, who was brought to the present days by the power of the necklace. Later they fight against the evil Vlad. Although having wonderful locations, photography and soundtrack and a cast with beautiful women, this movie does not work well, having a very confused story. With some improvements in the screenplay, it would be a good movie. The director and writer could at least spare the viewers from such a corny end. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): `Vlad O Cavaleiro das Trevas' (`Vlad The Knight of the Darkness')
Title (Brazil): `Vlad O Cavaleiro das Trevas' (`Vlad The Knight of the Darkness')
- claudio_carvalho
- Jul 4, 2004
- Permalink
Re: Where will it end.... ? by einherjer9
I'd like to make a few points to einherjer9. First of all, it's obvious by his "review" that he didn't see the movie, but instead read the synopsis and made a judgment... Second, this is a fun movie to watch that does delve quite a bit into the historical "Vlad Tepes", more so than any other fantasy/horror film ever has. If he wants to see a historical film about the actual "Impaler" then he should check out "Dark Prince: The True Story of Dracula (2000)", which I'm sure he would trash too. Last... This is NOT a "Hollywood" film in my opinion. "Hollywood" films are the big studio movies that are cranked out without care for much more the making money. "Vlad" was made by an independent production company, in the vein of when independent meant something, not in the sense of independent like Miramax and Dreamworks. "Vlad" was made for what studios pay one actor to appear for five minutes in a "Friends" episode... Yet it looks better than most $50 million dollar movies. So all I can say to our friend "einherjer9" is that before he trashes "the independent film maker" he should at least have the courtesy to see the movie.
- divinethomas
- Sep 8, 2004
- Permalink
A cut above the run-of-the-mill horror film
Vlad doesn't turn out to be the film you'd expect when you see that name, and it's much better and much more interesting than its cable/TiVo synopsis might lead one to believe. Because it's not just another vampire movie, or even a restless, tragic spirit movie. Vlad is an intriguing blend of historical fact and supernatural fiction. It's a movie with both a brain and a heart; the script believes its audience is at least IQ 80 and it doesn't treat the viewer as an imbecile, or an ADHD blood-and-guts freak who needs some lame-brained pseudo-action sequence every 7.5 seconds in order to stay interested in a film. Don't get me wrong; there's action, and there's plenty of supernatural trappings to Vlad. But there's also knowledge to be gained from the literate script, and heartstrings to be (rightfully) tugged by the backstory and plight of the tragic eponymous character. Good acting, superior writing and a marvelous grace note ending make Vlad a film that will stay with you long after you've first viewed it, and that only improves on repeat viewings. It's certainly not for everybody, but if you enjoy a film that doesn't insult your intelligence whilst telling you a fascinating story, then Vlad is the film for you. It could well become a classic if only more people were to take that chance and give it a try. It's really *that* good.
- grammarbitch
- Oct 25, 2005
- Permalink
not a brainless teenage horror movie
This one kept my attention and is based more on the actual Vlad Tepes (Dracula) rather than Bram Stoker's version of the 15th century Prince. The movie is set in present day. Four graduate students venture to the Carpathian mountains of Romania to conduct research on the historical Vlad, one of them bears a necklace that Vlad was buried in. The group begins a two day 50 mile hiking trek through forests and mountains to a little known and inaccessible set of crumbling ruins at Poenari, a fortress built by the historical Vlad Tepes. The artifact, a 15th century necklace, brings Vlad back from the past along with several frightening experiences and inner visions. The acting is good and the movie is filmed on location in Romania where Vlad actually existed. Vlad is both historically accurate and a horror fantasy and is not your typical mindless horror film. This one is worth seeing and the musical score by Christopher Fields is fabulous.
A Quality, Intellectual, Immersive Dracula
24 May 2005. This version of Dracula uses authentic location and the people of Romania to the best effect in this quality, independent production. With a sincerity and viciousness, Dracula is portrayed in historic terms without a soul or humanity. The acting is honest and mostly pure. With a limited budget, the special effects at times are a distraction while the music, however, resonates and merges with the mystical tension that surrounds this movie. At times, the dialogue and the characters tend to shade into stereotypical two-dimensions but only bits. Overall, this movie is superior to most flat attempts to recreate the Dracula mystique. Vlad has successfully caught the images, the historical context, the seductive power and vibrant horror/attraction of an age that appears in the present. This is an enjoyable, informative, and powerful movie that didn't quite have the resources to carry off a great movie. Seven out of Ten Stars.
A Must-See!
I was lucky enough to catch this film at a screening in Los Angeles and enjoyed it immensely. What I liked most was the way the film blends all the classic elements in a traditional vampire film, but remains unique in its approach. Rather than relying on blood and gore, it portrays Vlad the Impaler as more than a monster. We're shown glimpses of his past and quickly empathize with his pain, even as we're terrified by his brutality.
The love stories woven into the film and the pace at which it's told keep you emotionally invested and on the edge of your seat. The tone and feel of romance, aided by the beautiful backdrop of the Carpathian mountains, is undeniable and moving.
The film carefully balances love and anguish while merging past and present worlds. Even though it's set in modern day, the film shows how we as people face the same struggles throughout our history. Vlad is incredibly well thought out and acted, and should be enjoyable to a wide range of people. The nudity and violence in the film is done with taste and purpose and I'd recommend this film to anyone that wants a romantic saga about one of the world's most notorious monsters.
The love stories woven into the film and the pace at which it's told keep you emotionally invested and on the edge of your seat. The tone and feel of romance, aided by the beautiful backdrop of the Carpathian mountains, is undeniable and moving.
The film carefully balances love and anguish while merging past and present worlds. Even though it's set in modern day, the film shows how we as people face the same struggles throughout our history. Vlad is incredibly well thought out and acted, and should be enjoyable to a wide range of people. The nudity and violence in the film is done with taste and purpose and I'd recommend this film to anyone that wants a romantic saga about one of the world's most notorious monsters.
- tedbrooks47
- Aug 30, 2004
- Permalink
Such unrealized promise!
well worth watching
- SaxxoneGirly
- Jan 10, 2006
- Permalink
Intelligent vampire movie
- slayrrr666
- Jan 8, 2006
- Permalink