Was not expecting to see Panda here, shout out

His best role is an schizophrenic Rachel Dawes in the Dark Knight.

For me it’s in THE SUICIDE SQUAD !

And "Prisoners" ^^

​@powerguiller none of this is true or even legible.

I've read the chapter. The character isn't exactly a ravenous force of nature. He's just a mystery to the Captain. If he weren't, and the Captain got to know him, he'd discover a character that was both a monster and a man. I think this will be a problem for the movie if it shows too much of the character. If he's kept in the shadows an is unknowable it's okay for him to lack humanity, because we're in the character's POV and they don't know him. However, if they show a lot of him and he remains alien and animalistic, that ain't Dracula. The guy is a sorcerer who is desperately trying to reach a woman he is obsessed with. He can control weather. Turn into other animals. Most importantly, he's kind of a... guy. Hardly showing him and making him animalistic and primal is fine. Showing him a lot and keeping him that way, however, is an issue.

@@Ben-pd2bx Ummm… What? 😆 Dracula didn’t care about any woman in the novel.

@@dantebanducci235 Hey, you know what? Ya got me. I've read the novel a coupla times, and yet I've also seen many of the movies and my impression of the story has obviously been influenced by them. Probably Nosferatu in particular. Fair call! Even so, I think the general principle that depicting Dracula exclusively as an animalistic force of nature takes a lot away from him is still correct. In particular, I want sorcery. If I see this movie and we don't get a scene where they plan to expose him to sunlight, only to have a deep fog roll in at Dracula's command, I'm gonna be disappointed.

@@dantebanducci235 Nah, the contrast of Dracula to Alien is a very salient point. Alien is just an “organism” so foreign that the crew has nothing to relate it to. Dracula is much more than that… he has a very rich and well developed persona. The Count is a hedonistic aristocrat, and (as with ALL vampiric figures) he has a vaguely erotic quality which hapless mortals are allured by. It is a valid criticism. Why have the creature be Dracula at all if the film isn’t going to focus on those very standard character traits?

@@jabrokneetoeknee6448 Because that's not the aspect of the character the film is focusing on. The aristocratic stuff is for later when he's already in London. For now, it's hunting time.

Of coursed you did, because it was a faithful representation of the character. Personally, I believe this reviewer watched some trailers, interviews and reviews but never actually watched the movie. There's a lot of that on KZfaq. But be careful because it you criticize or otherwise challenge him, he will pretend that he doesn't know what you mean.

That movie was meh

agreed, movie was amazing

especially to support danny and michael, as another youtuber turned horror filmmaker just like them

Lol I was looking for that review too

Good horror flick.

I like it cause it’s a rare glimpse into Dracula’s true nature. THIS is what he’d be like if he didn’t have to worry about blending in or avoiding hunters. The bestial, primal joy in killing prey - relishing his total control of the situation.

@@harmonlanager2670 indeed 👍

Yeah, in the sections of the Demeter, the Count is just a monster that stalks and kills and never interacts with his prey beyond that (edit: the reason is obviously because there is no escape and thus no potential witnesses, so he doesn’t need to pretend to be human). His personality is better expressed when he is in the castle and when he arrives to London.

Agree

@@harmonlanager2670 for me I would assume having a human like body would be easier to get around and be more articulate. it’s easier to kill something big and clunky that’s what I don’t understand about his true nature.

Ditto. That smile was sick. Scarier that he's a beast but more and we are nothing to him. However the entire film has contradictions for superficial reasons. Like keeping him gollum looking at the end (which is entire third ruins the film) but in the novel he can change, and is a man (or appears like one). Defeats the purpose for a cane and hat. Seems it was more for an attempt at thematic wealth and power. Which is why I believe he was kept more gollum and weak, almost helpless, was for that theme. 🙄. Was almost a great movie

@@digit861 Yeah I loved this depiction of Dracula as "The Beast" but I do find it strange that they choose to still show him still looking like Nosferatu even when he was in London. It would have definitely been better if we saw Dracula "The Man" at the ending, looking like handsome gentlemen like Gary Oldman's Dracula, which would have been more impactful imo since we would know how terrifying Dracula really is under his mask of humanity and civility.

@@smuggrog9821 Some people have theorized they didn't want to give him a human look and lock in the casting for a future film. With how they did it, it means they can cast anyone in the human role and don't have to worry about too much about being consistent with a past film. Personally, I just handwave it that since Clemmens knows what Dracula "looks" like, no matter the disguise Dracula takes, to Clemmens he will always be that beast on the boat. So to everyone else, Dracula probably looks like a normal gentleman.

+1

@@smuggrog9821 That’s because this is closer to the book and Dracula is always ugly. Him being attractive and handsome wasn’t added until Bela Lugosi portrayed him. “How would no one notice him?” It’s Victorian England. Everyone is ugly cause the air is 89% coal dust and sewage line doubles as tap water

​@@AlecJulianGarzaYes its a 3 part series. Claes Bang plays Dracula. Pretty good show

​@@AlecJulianGarzaIt was an awful show by yet another person who clearly hasn't read the book.

​@@DrDoom931You wrote "It's a pretty shit show" wrong.

@@englishatheart are you blind? I clearly said pretty good show. Stfu

I like that as it can leave room for creativity

One of the first adult books I read as a child. We could buy Scholastic books at school back then. I think I was in 3rd grade and I got Dracula and some Agatha Christie. It began a life long love of vampires lol.

Whats the book called?

@@victoralvarez9459 Bram stoker’s Dracula. There is also a really good movie with the exact same title although it’s not 100% accurate it is still really good

Exactly! He has, as Van Helsing describes, "a child-brain."

It is included in the Nosferatu movie

Agreed, the book is so good

Yeah! I can't believe it's taken this long to get this chapter into a movie, let alone as it's own, stand-alone feature film. I am SO looking forward to this. 🙂

It's not even really a chapter in the book, and it's been adapted before. It's a small like 5 pages section in the book that mentions Dracula on the Demeter. Therefore most the things in the film are just straight up made up

@@milestejano2672It’s all second hand through the Captain’s Log. The Dracula Netflix series did an episode on this as well which is pretty great,

Completely agree, I especially liked how when he ate people he would temp take on traits like accents etc

First episode of BBC Dracula was fantastic….the second was great but the third ruined everything

How can I find that? Sounds good!

BBC Dracula was perfection (episode 3 almost ruined it, but 1 and 2 were that good and bulletproof). No one will ever do it better than Claes Bang.

@@Anna-wd8ox I would assume BBC I player would still have it, It was a 3 part series made by the same makes as the Sherlock bbc show

I loved it too!

Same I really enjoyed it I dont get the lack of hype

Yeah this ones next to 30 days of night for me

I definitely watched a different movie. Characters were incredibly stupid, the girls saying "he's here" instead of "there is a monster in the ship that will kill us all, AMA!"... They could've quickly left the ship early in the morning while seeing it burn on top and sinking in the bottom, what's Dracula gonna do..? Start flying midway!? Nah

Yeah i liked it alot the visuals were very well done hope we get a sequel otherwise i will be pissed.

The boat is the perfect setting to hat he can let loose and not worry about his reputation as he gonna murder everyone in the boat.

That makes sense . Vampires when deprived of blood can go primal and look more like a monster. And if I recall correctly, when I read the book, they didn’t mention Dracula too much in the Captains Log or something. I could be wrong tho.

Yes

So every character in this movie dies.

Precisely - the chapter that describes the voyage in the book is made up of excerpts from the logs of the captain of the Demeter, and it doesn't describe Dracula talking to anyone or really making any effort to masquerade as a human. It instead references various crew members and even ultimately the captain himself seeing an unidentified, sinister wraith-like figure half glimpsed in the unnatural pall of fog and darkness that surrounds the Demeter as crew members start to go missing one by one. There are no radios when this books is set, no real means for a ship out at sea to communicate with shore or with any other vessel that is not within sight, so Dracula has his prey trapped on the Demeter with nowhere to run and no means to call for help. Even if they abandoned ship on a small boat, their odds of survival would be poor at best in an age before search and rescue and GPS beacons out on the open sea. Simply jumping overboard and swimming for it would be an even worse prospect. The vampires in the original novel are also much given to cruelty even if they were good people in their mortal lives, so enjoying the fear and desperation of his trapped prey, and indulging his true monstrous nature since he knows there will be no survivors and so no witnesses to carry the tale and damage his ability to conceal himself in society, is entirely in keeping with how Dracula is described in the book.

Right, he has no need to be charismatic here. It makes sense for this section of the story. I do think it would be cool to see a movie about Harker being trapped at Castle Dracula and you could see the more charismatic side of this Dracula in that film.

@@rockytopbrittExactly! Being suave and charismatic isn’t a part of his personality, it’s a tool to help hunt. If he doesn’t need it, he abandons attempts at being social.

​@@harmonlanager2670also Dracula isn't suave and charismatic in the book, he's a weird and rapey creep.

​@@rockytopbritt Episode 1 of the new BBC adaptation (from Moffat) is kinda that.

And by the way, throughout the film, Dracula was rationing and feeding on them one man every single day. His first man kill, he was very weak as he came out from the shadow crawling weakly then jumped forward as a surprise attack and licked the blood from the floor before crawling towards the victim. I don't know how him being charismatic will work in the movie as that meant there's a random dude in the ship and they have the rule of throwing such people to the sea to die which was almost the fate of Anna. It's a good movie overall but I can't help to be stressed out by series of dumb decisions that eventually got most of the crew killed. 😩

As others have pointed out, it's like the very first "found footage" story.

Dracula is this year's Pinocchio

@@LuisSierra42 accurate

Isn’t Robert Egger’s Dracula movie coming out soon too?

@@excusethebloodhe's making a Nosferatu movie, but Nosferatu was technically the first ripoff of Dracula

Same

You should go ahead and try to make a short film based on that yourself. I think it would be fun.

@@Alucard-lz2hb And probably better than this stinker.

Chris has pretty good taste. If he says it's good I'll believe him over someone calling it a stinker with zero explanation as to why or any effort put into explaining themselves. @@greggibson33

@@greggibson33you haven’t seen it dumbo

I assume your script is better than this shit of a movie.

I disagree. I loved the treatment in Coppola’s version. Something unknown aboard which butchered them one by one, and ended with a floating slaughterhouse gliding silently into port was perfect.

Yeah it was not a good time for them on there. Literally stuck at sea with a blood hungry creature that has survived for thousands of years? Nope.

​@@Lurkai not thousands, lol... Dracula was born in 15th century, so he's not even half a millennia at that point.

@@grim_2000 oh yeah in the story that makes sense Tho in reality I imagine a vampire may have the ability to live for thousands of years being an apex predator like it is

@@Lurkai That's what they made of 'Dracula' in Blade 3, where he was few thousand years old, going back to ancient Babylon or something. But classic interpretation of Dracula is him being historical _Vlad the Impaler_ first, originating in 15 century

Pretty sure he doesn't have a choice. Those reviews are prolly the only source of income he has at the moment. And even if that's not the case, you always need more money for a movie. I'm still sad about no more hilariocities

I agree, plus seeing him in Suicide Squad was a treat, he's actually done a lot of talks on addiction and other topics on his own and is someone who I think deserves the success coming his way. He seems to have been through a lot and has come out the other side swinging.

He also plays a great part in Denis Villeneuve's Prisoners

I wasn't quite sure who you were talking about, then I looked him up and recognized him instantly. Yeah, he's great in everything I've seen him in.

I’ve seen a trailer before a few movies this summer Indiana jones, mission impossible and transformers

One minor disagreement. He already knew English, in order to communicate with the law firm in London.

I'm excited to see it also

You perfectly described how i feel about this movie too

im also into the same genre and subgenre! would you mind sharing some recommendations?

@@missrabbit5583 The Fly (1986) The Birds The Blob (1954) Invisible Man (Both the 1933 and 2020 versions, they each tell a completely different story and they’re both amazing) The Monster (2016) An American Werewolf In London Crawl (More of a man vs nature type of movie I guess but it’s still classified as horror) Dracula (1931) Frankenstein (1931) Bride Of Frankenstein (1935) The Wolfman (1941) Creature From The Black Lagoon (1954) Slither They Live Overlord The Thing (1982 & 2011) (A lot of people didn’t like the 2011 movie but I thought it was awesome, P.S, watch the 2011 movie first because it takes place before the 1982 movie)

@benm5970 omg, thankyouuu! I've watched a few movies on this list, and my fav out of this list was Frankenstein. I'm about to get on this list right away lol!

Same

That’s prob why he won’t review tbh, could be some bitterness that he wasn’t the first KZfaqr to make a serious horror movie. Could be wrong, but I can imagine he’d feel a type of way about it and therefor wouldn’t review it

@@WinedandDined27 doubt that

@@Groov3_ why do you think he hasn’t reviewed it then?

@@jacobcudney either waiting or maybe he didn't enjoy it or he could be jealous he just doesn't strike me as that type

Especially when he reviewed haunted mansion and popes exorcist 🤔something smells fishy

Well, the film said Talk to me. And he said, "Later".

Because it's the same style of his film but obviously FAR superior to his... and he knows it.

​@@greggibson33 Talk to me is 4/10 fr.

especially considering its a film made by two youtubers

Especially when he has reviewed insidious 5, popes exorcist, and haunted mansion 🤔seems fishy to me

Especially when he has reviewed insidious 5, popes exorcist, and haunted mansion 🤔seems fishy to me

Especially when he reviewed haunted mansion and popes exorcist 🤔something smells fishy

That's why I never watch Trailers!

Spoiled it A LOT. You don't show an entire shot of the monster. Dumb dumbs.

It can be fancy but this is only because it has observed humans for thousands of years, amongst other cryptid creatures im sure But I enjoy this primal version as we technically already got a fancy and fun version of Dracula in the Netflix: Dracula series Which imo is the best version of fancy Dracula ever

Primal force means nothing. This Dracula could be replaced by ANY run of the mill, nameless monster from ANY other horror film..... boring.

​@@greggibson33 they went with a less sophisticated Dracula for a reason. He's not really mentioned much in the chapters the way one might traditionally think if they were to actually read the book. and of course you can replace Dracula with almost any monster. so long as the story/screenplay is intact which it seems like Chris noted work really good for the characters, y'know considering this whole part of the book is from THIER perspective. But hey, I get it, we all love a fancy Dracula who is smart, witty and fun....not like some haven't seen/read that a thousand times before *yawn*

@@Lurkai I could care less about fancy (whatever that means).This Dracula could be replaced by any of the hundreds of vampires in the background of any of the Underworld movies.... talk about yawn.

@@greggibson33 I’m not exactly sure what you’re statement entails Are you implying that a generic monster movie is not exciting? If so then I feel like all monster movies could be considered a yawn fest with that sentiment what would make it more exciting, to your standards? Also what is your favorite monster movie if I might ask?

Especially when he reviewed haunted mansion and popes exorcist 🤔something smells fishy

@@jacobcudney That fishy thing you smell is 'Shelby Oaks.' 😆

Looks like a formulaic D tier movie.

@@liamnissanS2K it is the most unique possession movie we have had in a long time, very refreshing. Don’t judge it from the trailer before seeing it

Especially when he reviewed haunted mansion and popes exorcist 🤔something smells fishy

Especially when he has reviewed insidious 5, popes exorcist, and haunted mansion 🤔seems fishy to me

Especially when he has reviewed insidious 5, popes exorcist, and haunted mansion 🤔seems fishy to me

Sounds like a good plot for a more psychological Batman comic/the part of the new film series

Are you talking about drcl midnight children

@@urielandbb9725 I don’t think so. It was an adaptation that seemed to be part of a series of famous Western stories adapted into manga

Which manga was this?

@@Gadget-Walkmen it was just called “Bram Stoker’s Dracula,” and the cover showed Dracula, drawn like the Castlevania version , about to bite the neck of a blonde woman in a white dress, maybe a nightgown. Sorry if it’s not descriptive enough, I checked it out from my library. If you manage to find it, I highly recommend it. The art is amazing

Do you know whose the artist is? It can be easier to find the manga if you tell me their name at least.@@squatch1565

Yeah it's like alien, the thing and Jeepers creepers, deep rising, a quiet place and they're all amazing. But there's one thing they all have this movie is missing. It doesn't really have a third act where they fight Dracula and win. They just get picked off one by one but can't put up a fight. Usually humans fight the monster and wins but like in Jeepers creepers it's okay to lose but they put up one helluva fight. You don't see the crew do much other than scream and get eaten.

Yes... They did a good job with the score

He also reviews haunted mansion and popes exorcist, something smells fishy 🤔

@@jacobcudney very weird that he doesn’t review the best horror movie of the year

Great analogy

Except Rotten, IMDb, and Metacritic didnt hammer Shawshank.... this is a stinkeroo about to die on the vine.

@@greggibson33 there was no Rotten tomatoes or metacritic when Shawshank came out

@@m_tal939 But they've done subsequent reviews... I have to admit, you comping this bomb that's gonna vanish in 3 weeks with Shawshank is hilarious.

@@greggibson33 have you seen it