Dracula Untold (2014)
Writers: Matt Sazama, Burk Sharpless
Characters: Bram Stoker
Cast: Luke Evens (Vlad), Dominic Cooper (Mehmed), Sarah Gadon (Mirena), Art Parkinson (Ingeras), Charles Dance (Master Vampire), Diarmaid Murtagh (Dumitru), Paul Kaye (Brother Lucian), William Houston (Cazan), and Noah Huntley as Captain Petru.
"I have been waiting for an eternity for a man of your strength to arrive. But what kind of man crawls into his own grave in search of hope,"-Master Vampire
The film starts off with Vlad's (Luke Evens) son, Ingeras (Art Parkinson). He narrates the story form the beginning, before Vlad became the infamous Dracula, to where it all started. The great Sultan of Turkey takes young boys from the enemy camps and trains them to become perfect soldiers that obey him alone, that imperfection will be his demise, because one of those boys became the Transylvania prince. Vlad "the impaler," would scare his enemies by using wooden stakes, they would protrude, after impaling his victim through the heart.
A search party going to the cave in the mountains, after finding remnants of a Turkish army passing through Transylvania territory, Vlad decides to retrace the steps of the enemy which takes Vlad and some men to the Master Vampire, sorcerers lair. Cold, a dark damp effect gives off a crude stench that drives Vlad and his men away. The figure with long talons, came at them to fast to understand what is happening, the sheer cry of help takes one of Vlad's men away, the only escape is to turn around and run as fast as you can, before the creature, sorcerer realizes their plans. Only eyes peer at them from the darkness, he has been inside for to long, the stench of fear is strong, but, there is something else, a confusing smell, hope...
The film was great despite the historical flaws, but it is a vampire film, not a History channel special. As far as the story is concerned, it was more than what i expected. The start of the film was narrated by Vlad's son, which i love films that start off this way, it takes you in the story. The special effects did not ruin the story, in fact it moved along, only when Vlad used his power did the special effects flashed before you, and even then it was used conservatively. The film's pace was done well, it never felt like it was boring or to long, the scenes were smooth, a nice pacing for a vampire film, and that's saying a lot because vampire film are usually either to long or considerably short. The film was intended to be a reboot of universal's "Monsters Universe," this was a hit back in the 1930 and 40's, but i believe it wouldn't have a thread now, why? because audiences want more in there horror films, especially vampire films, a big example of this could be Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992), Gary Oldman (Dracula), Winona Ryder (Mina), and Anthony Hopkins as Professor Abraham. A Francis Ford Coppola film, i respectfully did not like that film, first off Keanu Reeves as Jonathon Harker didn't do it for me, he acted badly as well as the badly written screenplay. Second the film's special effect were great in some scenes and horrible in others. In comparison between Coppola's film and Gary Shore's film i give Shore a huge applaud, Shore's film had substance while the 1992 drag fest, was boring and uninteresting, despite Gary Oldman's wonderful played Dracula, probably the best Dracula acted film, only the character, but the 1992 film lacked a story, and some of the actors did not have any direction. Just my opinion. Dracula Untold had a story, the pacing was perfect, acting was superb; you could feel the emotion Vlad felt, it was conveyed well in all the acting. The master vampire was scary, you knew Vlad would except the invitation that would lead him to becoming the monster, all the way to the end. Coppola's film did not even reach the height of acting the way Shore's film did, even with Gary Oldman playing the iconic character, the film was boring, it should've never been made, but not to knock Coppola, a great director, but Dracula Untold was much better than the 1992 film, hands down.
What made this film, and i give it a lot of props, is the acting, the actors played their roles well, they were believable, you could see them through the eyes of Ingeras, the way he told the story. The special effects were only there to ride along with the story, not take over. The characters had a connection with each other, even the lonely vampire in the cave which resulted in a dangerous situation which turned out to be very interesting later as the story progressed. Loved the fact that a vampire could control so much but yet his power was limited to the dark cave, he longed for someone to free him, and yet when freedom was near, that master vampire was the unique part of the tale. Something was up, it was transformed, notice the story went right back to Vlad, until he had to make his ultimate decision. The price Vlad had to pay bigger than the whole story itself, it was the transformation from human to monster that makes this story so good.
After three nights, Vlad will become human, but he must resist the thirst, a well placed word that to me made the film. Why would a man take such an offer? Only to find the act was so unbalanced, that in the end his choice would make him the legend we know as Dracula, even though he had lost his love forever. What i loved the most was not just the choice, but the love he had for his family, he had to commit the horrible act of destroying the best within him, he gave his only son to a monk, who he knew would keep him save. Ingeras became a political figure with the help of the monk, somehow his ambitions served him well, his son became the man to lead the people of Transylvania.
Out of many vampire films, this film brings out the best in Dracula, a wonderful beginning that brings us to another film, hopefully the sequel will be as good as this one. Vampire films are not hard to bring to life on film, but with that being said, its the content, way it's done, and depending what mythology you use behind it. Probably the most important, because it gives you the sense of wholeness i guess. The fact that holy water can kill a vampire in some mythologies and in others it doesn't is a very important factor, because it could make or break the film, using the right story can either make or break the film. My opinion of the film is high, it takes a historical, real life person from the past and places him in a fictitious story, which by the way is very difficult to pull off, and the writers did well. Other vampire films i suggest is, The Lost Boys, Blade movies, Nosferatu (1979), Interview with a Vampire (1994), and Near Dark (1987).
Comments