Dracula Untold (2014)

nDracula Untold (2014)

nDirector: Gary Shore

nCast: Luke Evans, Sarah Gadon, Charles Dance, DominicnCooper, Art Parkinson

nOf course I gave this one a chance, it’s Dracula and I lovenDracula movies. True, Dracula movies can be a bit repetitive, because filmmakersnalways decide to retell the story, so it’s always some sort of variation onnBram Stokers novel, but I love to see these different takes on the story. Inenjoy seeing how different creative teams give their own twist to the story, tellnit in their own way. Unfortunately, I’d never heard of the guys behind thisnparticular film. Gary Shore, the director, had never made a full length featurenfilm before this one, yet here he is directing this big budget version ofnDracula. That of course, immediately raised a red flag for me, because whilenI’m all for upcoming new directors making films, I prefer it when they’venproven themselves via some independent film they’ve made before tackling a 70nmillion dollar film like this one. When a new director pops out of the bluenlike that, well, I don’t know what to expect, but as always, I have no problemsnin giving them the benefit of the doubt. Well, at least the director behindnthis film shows his influenced by the right movie; one or two visual referencesnare made to Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992). Same goes fornthe writers who’d never written a film before this one. So that’s a couple ofnred flags right there. But the trailer made it look like it had one or two newnideas squeezed in there worth watching. So I gave it a shot. Plus, it wasnDracula.

nAnd it’s not just me that has a thing for Dracula films. LikenJames Bond or Godzilla, Dracula is an icon, a household name that brings thenmasses to the theater. I mean, it had been a while since I’d seen a line formnat my local theater. It’s only household names like Star Wars and Indiana Jonesnthat do this. And so, there I was, making this huge ass line to go see this newnversion of Dracula, hoping it wouldn’t disappoint me. Did it? Well, sorry to saynmy dear readers that it did disappoint me. Why you may ask? Well, for starters,nto me Dracula is something special, a story meant to be treated with care bynfilmmakers. It’s an ancient tale that has been passed on from generation tongeneration. Like the titular character in Bram Stokers novel, Dracula moviesnnever seem to die. So of course I hate it when studios don’t treat the storynwith the proper care. And it sucks even more that Universal Studios has donenthis because they are the ones known for their famous ‘Universal Monsters’nmovies. I speak of course of the classics like Dracula (1931), The Wolf Mann(1941), The Mummy (1959) and so forth. If there’s a studio that should havenbeen concerned with making a proper Dracula movie, it was this one. Unfortunately,nthey’ve changed Dracula to fit the current common Hollywood practice ofnsoftening up horror films. Ugh. I hate this new trend in Hollywood. Why does itnanger me so? Well, for starters, we’re talking about one of the famousn‘Universal Monsters’ here; key work being ‘monster’. And here’s the first thingnI hated about this movie, this is a monster movie without a monster, not onlynvisually, but also as a character.

nI mean, I always saw monsters movies, and this is the waynmonster movies where for the longest time; as a way to showcase some awesomenartistry in terms of makeup effects. Sadly, make up effects works seems to havendisappeared from filmmaking. Remember those golden days, when the awesome makenup effects work of Stan Winston, Rob Bottin and Rick Baker reigned supreme inncinemas? Those days yielded such awesomencreations as the ones seen in films likenAliens (1979), The Thing (1982), Predator (1987), Jurassic Park (1993), ThenTerminator (1984), Legend (1986), Harry and the Hendersons (1987)….I mean, thesenwere films in which make up effects work really shined. And monster films meantnmake up effects, once upon a time. I always looked forward to seeing how makenup effects artist would try to wow me with their work. Sadly that’s all beennreplaced by CGI…and sadly, it does not have the same effect. It does not feelntangible…or real, not like the monsters we’d see in for example Coppola’snDracula (1992) now there’s a film that displayed some amazing make up effectsnwork! That was a monster movie! That was a sensual yet monstrous Dracula! WhilenDracula Untold throws a few homage’s down Coppola’s way, it clearly doesn’tneven come close to being as awesome as Coppola’s film. It needed that extranoomph, that extra emotion, that intensity that Coppola’s film had. It seems that Hollywood simply doesn’t want to give us truly monstrous creatures, but more on this softening of the horror movie later.

nThe thing about Dracula is that the story is a passionatenlove story; Dracula is always sexual, passionate. He loves Mina, but he is alsona monster. Dracula has always been a character with a dual personality, onenthat displays incredible amounts of passion and love, but one that also displays a horrifying, monstrous side; his vampire side, the side that feeds on humannblood. So of course I was let down when I discovered in horror that in this version of Dracula, he has been turned into a family man, complete with scenes of him being all lovablenand father like, which was something that was never part of the Dracula story.nSo that was step 2 of softening up Dracula, making him a dad. See a patternnhere? First he isn’t monstrous or demonic or even evil looking, and second theynturn him into a dad. Third he wants to save his people. Fourth? Thenscreenwriters found a way to make him actually not want to drink blood for mostnof the movie! So here we can see how they’ve turned Dracula from anti-hero tonoutright hero, period. This goes completely against what Dracula is all about.nDracula is supposed to be the bad guy, the one that scares you and gives younthe willies. Not the savior of his people, not the loving father. And certainlynNOT the guy who goes to church to pray to god for help! For Christ sake,nDracula sells his soul to the devil, how can you have a scene of him going tonchurch to pray to god for guidance, when he is a vampire, and vampires have annaversion to crosses and all things religious?

nWhat the hell Hollywood? So my question is this, why is Hollywoodnso hell bent on softening up horror movies and icons? Suddenly vampires sparklenin the daytime, zombies are falling in love and turning human and Frankensteinnisn’t even monstrous looking? Of course I talk of Twilight (2008), Warm Bodiesn(2013) and I Frankenstein (2014), and I’m sure there’s a couple more I’mnleaving out. Nowadays if a movie is ultra gory it is sent straight to dvd. Inmean, had this been the eighties, all those gory Hatchet (2006) movies wouldnhave been theatrically released, but not in these ultra conservative days.nToday, the only horror movies that are making it to the silver screen are thosenthat propagate superstitious, supernatural, Christian based fears. I speak ofncourse of films like The Conjuring (2013), Insidious (2010), Anabelle (2014),nQuija (2014), Paranormal Activity (20017) and the sort. If it’s a horror filmnthat will get people believing demons are real, then it’s okay. But a purelynevil horrifying monster that has nothing to do with Christian fears, nope,nthose are not being made anymore. Think about it, when was the last time younsaw a slasher in movie theaters? I rest my case. Even excellent slasher filmsnlike Maniac (2012) get the theatrical shaft. And hey, I’m all for a goodnghost/demon movie, but damn it, when that’s all that’s being made, you kind ofnfeel like they’re pushing these concepts upon you. Cause, I see thesenghost/demon movies as fun horror movies, but I can assure you there’s a myriadnother people who think things like the ones depicted in these kind of horror filmsncan happen to them for real and these movies only serve to augment those fears.

nFilms are a powerful means of spreading ideas out into thenworld, sure they are a great form of entertainment, but they also function as anway of spreading ideas quickly and effectively and currently, Hollywood wantsnthe masses to stay Christian. Which is why we get Dracula praying to God onnthis movie, it’s why he’s displayed as the hero, as the goody little two shoes. This is why we get Superman going to church to ask a priest forncounseling in Man of Steel (2013), this is why we’re getting Christian horror movies like ThenRemaining (2014) and this is why we’re getting this avalanche of Christiannfilms like Left Behind (2014) (shame on you Nicholas Cage!) God is Not Deadn(2013) and Heaven is for Real (2014). I mean, even the titles behind thesenfilms say it all. Even big time directors are bowing down to this Christianncraze, I’m talking about guys like Darren Aronofsky and his Noah (2014) andnRidley Scott with Exodus: God’s and Kings (2014). I’ll go see these moviesnbecause I see them as fairy tales, but come on, what the hell is going on innHollywood? Is there some sort of hidden agenda from somewhere high on up to spreadnChristian beliefs and to soften up both action and horror movies? Cause ifnthere is, it sucks! For years now it has been going on and now it’s hit itsnpinnacle with Dracula Untold. Not gonna say this movie is not without its coolnmoments and visuals, but I will say that this Dracula isn’t scary; we’ve lostnthe horror movie, the horror movie where that main character is the one thatngives you the hibbie jibbies, where that main monster scares your pants off.nWhere is it? I miss it. I miss the good old days when horror movies wherenactually scary.

nRating: 2 1/2 out of 5