Dracula 3D (2012) - 1/10
A 3D retelling of the 1897 Bram Stoker novel.
This ensemble cast features Unax Ugalde as Jonathan Harker, who in this version is a librarian is hired by Count Dracula (Thomas Kretchamann) to tend to the library in his castle. Harker's wife Mina (Marta Gastini) arrives in the same village shortly after, but is unable to locate her husband. Worse, there has been a series of unexplained deaths in the area. Mina seeks the help of Dr. Abraham Van Helsing (Rutger Hauer), a vampire expert who has just arrived in the village...
Dracula 3D was written and directed by Dario Argento. In a 2013 interview, Argento was quoted as saying he had wanted to direct a Dracula film for a long time, and could now find a way to do a unique take on the story thanks to the updates in 3D advancements. However, the film was maligned upon release, and currently sports a 3.6 rating on IMDB. Despite the poor reputation, this reviewer went in with an open mind. How did it fare?
This movie does literally everything wrong.
The plot is a chopped down version of Dracula, foregoing the portions of the story in England in favor of taking place exclusively in Transylvania. Similar to 1980's Inferno, the audience spends each of the three acts with a different protagonist (Jonathan -> Mina -> Van Helsing), which makes things feel clunky. But that's the least of this film's problems.
Visually, the film looks horrible. Though the sets in Dracula's castle aren't bad, the lighting in the film is too bright and gives the movie the appearance of a stage play. Adding to that is the poor cinematography, which often features stagnant camera work. There's one moment where Marta Gastini and Rutger Hauer are talking to each other and the camera is just pointed at their profiles as they make eye contact with each other. I cannot stress enough how much this movie looks like a play.
In at least once instance though, I would've preferred more stagnant camera work. There's a scene where Mina is investigating Dracula's castle and there are
way too many cuts, causing the audiences to lose all sense of direction and space. It is an extremely poorly directed sequence by Argento, who also turns in a bad effort overall.
The acting in Dracula 3D is also very rough, but it's hard to blame the performers considering how poor the writing is. A lot of the dialogue, especially earlier in the film, is completely pointless and filled with characters simply exchanging pleasantries. The film is also needlessly sexualized, with Argento once again being unable to resist having daughter Asian Argento - who plays Lucy - bare all. With how bad literally everything else is, if Dracula 3D were just a bit more gratuitous, I'd swear this was an adult version of the Stoker novel.
Possibly worst of all is the special effects, which are unacceptable and at times hilariously bad. There's one scene in which a character catches on fire, and it is hands down the worst "fire" scene you'll ever see in a serious movie. There is also a scene in which someone is attacked by a computer generated mantis, which looks like it was drawn in Microsoft Paint. I did not watch the film in 3D, but from what I could tell, the most dramatic 3D effect involved a big fly randomly hovering around Jonathan Harker. Dracula 3D did not have a large budget ($7.7M USD), but it looks like his cost about as much as a Big Mac to make.
The final sin committed by Dracula 3D is that it's nearly 2 hours long, and feels even longer. The first hour in particular moves extremely slow and is an absolute chore to get though. Things pick up a bit once Rutger Hauer appears in the film, but not by much. Even though the audience spends so much time with the characters, thanks to the lack of horror and tension, you're never even remotely invested in what happens to any of the characters in this film.
Overall, Dracula 3D is one of the worst movies I've ever watched. Legendary director Dario Argento has had a rough last 20 years, but this film managed to fall below my already extremely low expectations. I have no idea what Argento was going for here, as it's neither scary or stylish. It's the type of film where you start to ask yourself questions like "Did this guy
really direct Suspiria?" as you're watching it. I've seen some reviewers say Dracula 3D is bad, but has some redeemable qualities and is a better film than 2009's Giallo (which I rated 3/10). I could not disagree strongly enough, and in hindsight feel as though I was too hard on Giallo. Only watch Dracula 3D out of morbid curiosity, or if you're interested in seeing the worst special effects to be featured in a mainstream film.
