4/10
Transylvania again...
12 October 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I know Transylvania is a cool name and sounds very interesting, but really people, when are you going to get the simplest of facts straight?

I know this is a movie, and perhaps I could get past all the wrong years and characters' age inconsistencies. But when are you American film-makers going to grab a history book and read that Vlad Tepes had nothing to do with Transylvania?

Basic historical facts: - Vlad Tepes, son of Vlad Dracul, was a ruler in Wallachia (NOT Transylvania) - his castle is named Bran (not Castle Dracula, wtf!) and is in the mountains indeed, but still belongs to Wallachia, not Transylvania

+1 for mentioning that "Dracul" meant "The Dragon" in old Romanian language, referring to the Order of Dragon that Vlad's father was part of. Only in the recent history has "Dracul" become a synonym for "The Devil".

Anyway, I was ready to accept all historically wrong facts and enjoy the movie. But I could not.

The plot was so bad with so many inconsistencies and underdeveloped characters that I don't know what to begin with.

I don't want to spoil so I will not bring exact details, but here's what happens in this movie: - there are characters who appear out of nowhere in 1 or 2 scenes, who apparently have an important part in the story, but we get to know absolutely NOTHING about them - nobody in the Turkish army seems to have any fear whatsoever after witnessing an extremely powerful, supernatural force; they see Dracula killing soldiers like crushing ant with a boot, yet the Turkish generals remain cocky and eager to fight him with... well... a sword. - the dumbest idea I have ever seen of how to prevent soldiers fear Dracula before going to fight him... watch and amaze

Overall, a very bad movie. I can't remember the last time I've seen such an awful piece of cinema... makes you wonder what was going on in filmmakers' heads.
64 out of 123 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed