Considering that pretty much every film that involves vampires recently has been dominated by the gay, teen angst, sparkly shit, it is a blessing that Dracula Untold got funding. Something that portrays the king of vampires as a real monster rather than a sex symbol is a good start in my book and hell, I'd hope it would be in everyone else's. Rather than drag on about how much I hate modern vampire culture in media of recent, I shall simply sum it up in a small little section. Twilight is the scourge of modern media and its butchering of vampires actions infuriates me. As for True Blood, I find it piss poor. With some rather shocking motion blur and the constant barrage of sex, it leaves me begging for the return of Buffy and Angel.
Now to the real question. Is Dracula Untold good? Yes, in fact it is brilliant. Origin stories can go drastically wrong, especially when the history behind it from decades of film and TV appearances have shaped generations of media. Dracula Untold is the origin story of the one and only Vlad The Impaler who was turned into Count Dracula by author Bram Stoker. In the movie, much like the described events of his life, Vlad was enslaved at a young age by the Ottoman empire who he later fought against when he regained his power. Although what happens in Dracula Untold is not exactly what happened according to the history records, the simplified "Ottomans stole him, used him for war and Vlad killing a load of them" was actually true. This time around, Vlad was given 2 options, give up 1000 children or face the wrath of the Ottoman empire. Vlad had no choice considering the fact that he had no army to fight alongside, he agrees but soon retaliates once they threaten to take his son along with the other 1000. This eventually leads to Vlad becoming the vampire we all know and love in his attempt to save his people and more importantly, his family. Many writers tend to simply ignore history when the create a story but this way its refreshing to see someone consider the history behind the man but also tweak it a little to bring in the element of fantasy.
So we have a good story. Do we have good acting? Meeeh. Its alright. As per usual we get a unrecognisable child with the likeability Kim Jong Un to his republic. Vlad's wife spends more time looking clueless and vacant with absolutely no stage presence among the rest of the cast. As for the rest of the cast, it felt like they just didn't exist. We didn't particularly meet any of these but towards the end we are meeting a lot of people who are so anonymous, not even the NSA know who they are. I guess in reality, the movie wasn't about these people. After all it is named after him. I've been waiting for a good Dracula since Blade 3 (Also the reason I like to go by the name Drake!). Luke Evans isn't a man of incredible talent. Its safe to say that he is good, just good. In this, I feel he has actually managed to fill the role of a character that has a lot of heritage and actually make a character I would like to follow further. Now once again we meet Dominic Cooper. An actor who has appeared in many movies as of recently and typically plays the bad guy. Funnily enough, he still is playing the bad guy but now as the Ottoman leader. There's not a lot to really say about Cooper. He just about suffices as an evil doer but I want someone I can really hate or someone who can scare the audience. The one that was actually able to do so was the one who gifts his power unto Dracula; Charles Dance.
Visually the movie had a lot of work to do to create good scenes look even better. Unfortunately a lo of the screen had very little depth and it was obvious that most of it, if not all of it was recorded on a green screen. Apart from that, the action was great fun. A lot of the time it didn't appear very clear but it was very well choreographed considering some of the movements that would take place when Dracula would morph into different states to travel the battlefield. If you're an action junkie, you will love it. The general action is an almost constant state of brutality which has me giggling with glee from the get-go.
Sure, we didn't know many characters, those we did weren't particularly well acted and the real villain wasn't scary by any means. A little of the story didn't mean anything and some things didn't exactly work out correctly. However, its ending was something enjoyed. It left on a note that meant that we could be seeing a return of Luke Evans' Dracula with the Master Vampire, Charles Dance. If real vampires are your thing, you will get jiggy with this. Many complain about Dracula not needing an origin, but in reality, what's the point in just refreshing him without exploring something about him with a bit of history. I guess that's what you get from the Daily Mail and its ilk. Its a movie of good fun, violence and real vampires. 7.5/10!
No comments:
Post a Comment