this cultural clash, if not outright mishmash, of conventional literature and eurocentric mythology (Dracula) and post-post-modernist, dyonisan styled Bruce Willis in a vest genre cross-overs (Die Hard, Harder, With A Vengeance, ad nauseum) was not doubt a very good idea to someone. someone with, no matter how limited the budget was, far too much money for their own good.
the mind boggles how any of the cast and crew stayed on long enough to finish the film - i assume, and i would be willing to wager notes as opposed to coins on this, that the numerous actors used as Dracula did not leave or be replaced because the script dictated it. i mean, as an artistic statement, it stands above that lad in england who passes of slightly soiled toilet paper as a work of art, and as a humorous escapade it can be said to be the equal of the latter Police Academy films.
basically, in a plot which now that i think about it Hostel borrowed from slightly, the film concerns some lad who fancies this lass, gets led to some Eastern European hotel or public house, and wouldn't you know it, that's where Dracula hangs out. so he decides to kill him.
"repetition works, David" said Robert Downey jnr in Natural Born Killers, and indeed it does for the plot here. obviously this lad does not kill Dracula, but each attempt to kill Dracula somehow involves the Prince of Darkness conveniently being stood at the same window all the time, each attempt being something damaging and hostile being sent in that direction. other than that, the film seems to consist of any one of the several actors playing Dracula fannying about with what could be sunscreen across their faces, but in fact looks like the most unpleasant cottage cheese you are ever likely to bear witness to.
the ending is, well.......no, i shall not say anymore on the subject. if you get as far as the ending, you deserve to find out yourself. is it worth the stress and strain of getting to the end? in short, no. in long, not really not really not really no. i paid the equivalent of US$ 6.00 to see this film. i am not sure how much that is worth in the scheme of things, but i am sure i could have spent it on something considerably more interesting.
it's either a sublime masterpiece that i have completely misunderstood. my learned and considered opinion, however, would be that it most certainly is not a sublime masterpiece and i have truly watched a really awful private joke that probably was not that funny for the intended recipients in the first place.
the mind boggles how any of the cast and crew stayed on long enough to finish the film - i assume, and i would be willing to wager notes as opposed to coins on this, that the numerous actors used as Dracula did not leave or be replaced because the script dictated it. i mean, as an artistic statement, it stands above that lad in england who passes of slightly soiled toilet paper as a work of art, and as a humorous escapade it can be said to be the equal of the latter Police Academy films.
basically, in a plot which now that i think about it Hostel borrowed from slightly, the film concerns some lad who fancies this lass, gets led to some Eastern European hotel or public house, and wouldn't you know it, that's where Dracula hangs out. so he decides to kill him.
"repetition works, David" said Robert Downey jnr in Natural Born Killers, and indeed it does for the plot here. obviously this lad does not kill Dracula, but each attempt to kill Dracula somehow involves the Prince of Darkness conveniently being stood at the same window all the time, each attempt being something damaging and hostile being sent in that direction. other than that, the film seems to consist of any one of the several actors playing Dracula fannying about with what could be sunscreen across their faces, but in fact looks like the most unpleasant cottage cheese you are ever likely to bear witness to.
the ending is, well.......no, i shall not say anymore on the subject. if you get as far as the ending, you deserve to find out yourself. is it worth the stress and strain of getting to the end? in short, no. in long, not really not really not really no. i paid the equivalent of US$ 6.00 to see this film. i am not sure how much that is worth in the scheme of things, but i am sure i could have spent it on something considerably more interesting.
it's either a sublime masterpiece that i have completely misunderstood. my learned and considered opinion, however, would be that it most certainly is not a sublime masterpiece and i have truly watched a really awful private joke that probably was not that funny for the intended recipients in the first place.