★ 1 / 10
A good movie could be made about the
tmdb28039023
A good movie could be made about the goings-on in the Demeter (the Russian ship that brings Count Dracula to England in Bram Stoker's novel), which could play…
A good movie could be made about the goings-on in the Demeter (the Russian ship that brings Count Dracula to England in Bram Stoker's novel), which could play out as a sort of Ur-Alien. Now, the latter doesn’t mean that it would perforce have to occur in space; it’s never a good idea to put an earthbound monster in orbit (1985’s Lifeforce kinda went there, though not all the way, with mixed but mostly good results).
According to AllMovie, Dracula 3000 "includes a stellar exploitation cast, including Casper Van Dien, Erika Eleniak, Coolio, Tommy "Tiny" Lister Jr., and a special guest appearance from Udo Kier." I can’t decide if the «stellar» is meant to be ironic or not; on the other hand, any appearance by Kier is bound to be special — not to say almost obligatory in a vampire movie.
If the revered German actor played the titular character, there might be hope yet for this movie; Kier, however, or anyone else for that matter, can’t play the titular character because the villain is not Dracula but Orlock (like the antagonist in Nosferatu only with an extra 'c').
An intergalactic salvage team finds a seemingly abandoned spaceship adrift in space. The salvage ship's crew consists of Captain Van Helsing (Van Dien), Arthur Holmwood (Grant Swanby) — called "Professor" despite being named after the character in the novel who is an aristocrat —, navigator and "intern" Mina Murr[a]y (Alexandra Kamp), "vice-captain" Aurora Ash (Erika Eleniak), Humvee (Lister), and 187 (Coolio).
To call this movie chauvinistic would be an understatement. It’s not so much that 187 tells Aurora that he would like to "ejaculate on [her] bazongas;" it’s that she’d probably enjoy that, considering that her character, more than being sexually objectified, turns out to be a literal sex object (a "pleasure-bot," to be exact).
Read full review
★ 1 / 10
Wow. Astoundingly bad.
TensersFloatingDisk
My goodness. And here I thought that there were no directors worse than Uwe Boll. Imagine the number of decisions necessary to produce a motion picture.…
My goodness. And here I thought that there were no directors worse than Uwe Boll.
Imagine the number of decisions necessary to produce a motion picture. Conceptual approval. Scriptwriting. Dialogue editing. Casting. Set and prop design. Location selection. Acting. Timing. Cinematography. Lighting. Music. Sound and video editing. Direction.
Now imagine that every single one of those decisions was made wrong.
Result: Dracula 3000.
For a film supposedly set in the 2900s, this movie looks surprisingly like a cheap gangsta flick of the 1970's. The set is ridiculous for the period. The dialogue is atrocious. The timing of each scene is ludicrous. The acting is beyond abysmal. Everything stinks.
Let's just take props, for example. If you have a movie set on a space freighter built in 2900, how likely is it that it will have the exposed piping and hydraulic doors of a 1960's era oil tanker? What, technology hasn't changed in 900 years? The 'Professor' uses a standard tandy keyboard and Radio-Shack flipswitches to "reprogram" the computer. What, they haven't figured out voice control yet? Of course, the Prof is tethered to a wheelchair. With wheels. Even though, you know, they've got intergalactic hyperdrive...but apparently not even a motorized wheelchair, much less a floating one, or bionic legs or something. And apparently this freighter was carrying an intergalactic consignment of rosewood caskets. How convenient. Then there are the weapons -- the crew carry standard late 20th-century firearms. In a ship. In the vacuum of space, where one bullethole would kill them all. Nice planning there, prop department.
Oh, why go on.
Read full review
•••
this movie looks so bad i cant wait to watch it over and over