Title: Dario Argento’s Dracula 3-D (2012)
Director: Dario Argento
Cast: Rutger Hauer, Asia Argento, Thomas Kretschmann, Marta
Gastini, Unax Agalde, Giovanni Franzoni
There’s this idea amongst film buffs that directors tend to make
worse films the older they get; and I think it's true, with very few exceptions, as directors get older,
they lose that magic that made their first films great. Case in point: Dario Argento
who had his golden age back in the 70’s and 80’s when he made films like
Suspiria (1977), Deep Red (1975) and Opera (1987). I remember those movies
being awesome because of their atmosphere, the over the top violence and those
special camera angles that Argento was so fond of. But somewhere around the
late 80’s and early 90’s Argento was showing signs of fatigue, his films just
weren’t the same. I guess when I started to notice something was off with Argento
was around the time he made his version of Phantom of the Opera (1998) which
was just a goofy, goofy film. Trying to be all serious and romantic, yet
failing horribly at it. After that one, he’s never really ever given us
anything as remotely good as his early stuff. Seeing Argento’s Dracula cements the idea that Argento is totally done for as a director. Sadly.
I get what Argento was trying to do with his take on Stoker’s
Dracula; simply put Argento was going for a tribute to Hammer’s Dracula films,
you know the ones that starred Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee. Specifically,
Argento’s Dracula plays out a lot like Terrence Fisher’s Horror of Dracula (1958),
the very first Hammer Dracula film, it even uses that idea that Terrence Fisher
used in Horror of Dracula were Jonathan Harker travels to Dracula’s castle to
function as a librarian. The film feels like it’s trying to be purposely old
school, right down to this silly sounding Halloween soundtrack that it has. The
film looks and feels pretty much like a Hammer film, the difference lies in the
graphic gore which was something that Hammer films never dabbled too deeply
into. I mean, Hammer films had their blood, but they were never too graphic,
not like Argento’s Dracula which goes over the top at some points. That’s right
my friends, on this one Argento amps up the levels of gore, which is always fun
in my book. There’s this moment where Dracula goes nuts and starts slicing off
heads like there’s no tomorrow, I have to admit, those were some cool scenes. But
gore alone does not make a good horror film; we gotta have other things thrown
in there, like for example some common sense, which Argento has always loved to
throw out the window. Did you ever think you’d end up seeing Dracula transform
into a giant Praying Mantis? No? Well, after you see Argento’s Dracula you can
scratch that one off your bucket list!
So this film has enough gore and nonsensical elements to get
the fan boys talking on the net, what else do we need to make this one stand
out? Oh yeah, how about some good old fashion nudity? Well, there’s tons of it
as well. I mean, five minutes into the film two young lovers are making out in
a barn and there’s flesh everywhere! If you ever wanted to get a good look at
Asia Argento’s nakedness, this is your chance! Don’t worry about it, her dad is
okay with it, he’s the film’s director! So yeah, this one has all the shocking
elements necessary to get fan boys attention. Problem is that along with all
these ‘goodies’ we get some really terrible elements to this film, which sadly
brings it really down or makes it cheesier, which some folks don’t mind. For
example, the computer animation is just freaking terrible. God! How can a
director like Argento look at this footage and say “were good to go”? I mean,
the digital stunt doubles on this one? So laughable! But then again, even the
real actors are terrible! There’s this actress that plays Mina Harker (Marta
Gastini), she has these scenes where Dracula and her are all emotional about
their love for one another and all that…you should see that scene, it’s the
most shameless rip off! She’s imitating Wynona Ryder in Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992)!
She uses the same facial gestures, the same everything, her performance was Xeroxed,
it made me want to puke because it was such a shameless copy/paste! Asia
Argento herself turns in a terrible performance, but she was never much of an
actress if you ask me. Not even Rutger Hauer can save this one, sorry.
Overall, even though this movie isn’t what I’d call a good
Argento film, I’d say that it retains a certain cheesy watchability to it which
reminded me of another one of Argento’s goofy yet enjoyable films: The Phantom
of the Opera (1998). Argento’s Dracula is a train wreck of a film, but it’s a
fun train wreck. It has all the things you’d expect in a Dracula film, the full
moon, the spooky woods, the mist, the castles, the big breasted vampire ladies,
crosses, stakes, coffins and lots of blood! It really is trying to be an old
fashioned horror movie, and I have to give it props for that. It’s kind of like
a modern day Hammer film, but cheesy to the max, with bad dialog and acting, and
Argento’s unique brand of weirdness. For example, Argento’s obsession with insects returns! I’ve
already mentioned the giant Praying Mantis, but he also plays with some images
he’d played with before in Phenomena (1985), namely, a horde of insects
swarming outside of a house. Yup, on this one Dracula can also turn into a
bunch of flies! In many ways, this is a fun movie, because hearing this dialog
is a trip, but also because it’s trying so hard to be spooky and old school
that it’s kind of endearing in that way. I’d say this one would make a fun
watch come Halloween night, but that’s all its good for because no matter how
hard it might try, Dracula 3-D won’t be reminding you of Argento’s glory days; those days are long, long gone.
Rating: 2 out of 5