- 9,662
- Posts
- 8
- Years
- Sootopolis City
- Seen today
Have you ever watched a movie that was panned by critics or fans, maybe even both, but you saw it and think it's gotten a worse rep than it actually deserves, and has some good in it. This is a place where you can share your appreciation for a movie that you enjoyed. A positive thread for movies that get little love. It might make an edition for TV and literature later, there's already a guilty pleasure music thread I see.
I'll be brave, and admit that I kinda like Dracula Untold. I have read reviews make rather vague criticisms that it's dull, the characters aren't complicated enough and the battles were too easy, but I think it's about as entertaining as many similar vampire titles were that were well-received honestly.
I thought the movie was visually stylish, and also an interesting take to portray Dracula as not a charismatic villain again, but instead the hero of the story. The 1992 Dracula directed by Francis Ford Coppola had a cool prologue that introduced Dracula as this passionate warrior, fiercely devoted to his wife and his church, and shows how his personal loss of both drives him to become a monster. I liked that part, a lot of people do, but it's literally just the first few minutes, before the story jumps ahead 400 years. So I appreciated that this one was a movie entirely about a Dracula fighting for a greater good. In this adaptation he is not evil, but simply a strong and practical ruler who was living in an evil age, and did what he had to do to ensure the welfare of his kingdom and family, probably not so different than many medieval monarchs.
I think Luke Evans, who stars as the titular character, played the part well, and would say the supporting cast overall was pretty good too like Sarah Gadon and Art Parkinson, and think the riveting performance of Charles Dance in particular has gotten overlooked. The only one I thought was miscast perhaps was Dominic Cooper, the accent was a little forced and he wasn't that scary as an antagonist, but it could have been far worse, I still know the guy's a decent actor.
Overall I'd probably give the movie 3 1/2 stars maybe. I thought it was decent.
What are your picks?
I'll be brave, and admit that I kinda like Dracula Untold. I have read reviews make rather vague criticisms that it's dull, the characters aren't complicated enough and the battles were too easy, but I think it's about as entertaining as many similar vampire titles were that were well-received honestly.
I thought the movie was visually stylish, and also an interesting take to portray Dracula as not a charismatic villain again, but instead the hero of the story. The 1992 Dracula directed by Francis Ford Coppola had a cool prologue that introduced Dracula as this passionate warrior, fiercely devoted to his wife and his church, and shows how his personal loss of both drives him to become a monster. I liked that part, a lot of people do, but it's literally just the first few minutes, before the story jumps ahead 400 years. So I appreciated that this one was a movie entirely about a Dracula fighting for a greater good. In this adaptation he is not evil, but simply a strong and practical ruler who was living in an evil age, and did what he had to do to ensure the welfare of his kingdom and family, probably not so different than many medieval monarchs.
I think Luke Evans, who stars as the titular character, played the part well, and would say the supporting cast overall was pretty good too like Sarah Gadon and Art Parkinson, and think the riveting performance of Charles Dance in particular has gotten overlooked. The only one I thought was miscast perhaps was Dominic Cooper, the accent was a little forced and he wasn't that scary as an antagonist, but it could have been far worse, I still know the guy's a decent actor.
Overall I'd probably give the movie 3 1/2 stars maybe. I thought it was decent.
What are your picks?
Last edited:
