Dracula Untold - Analysis and Review

The untold story... but you already know the ending

When I was little, I had an obsession with the Universal Movie monsters. Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, The Wolfman, and The Creature from the Black Lagoon. I knew them all, I watched them all, but I didn't stop there. I would look for books that had more information about them, while also searching for other movies dealing with these monsters. But probably my favorite among them was always Dracula.

The Plot

After years of serving the Turkish Army, the notorious warrior Vlad the Impaler (Luke Evans) has taken a life of peace and away from the violent life he once had. But after 10 years of peace, The Sultan, Mehmed the Conqueror (Dominic Cooper) demands that Vlad gives 1000 boys from his kingdom to serve in his army. Including his son. Not wanting to put his son through the ordeal that he went through as  child, Vlad seeks out an ancient evil (Charles Dance) to grant him the power to save his people and battle his former friend. But with great cost.

Analysis

As I've stated before, one of my primary obsessions as a child was Dracula. I know the character inside and out. I've read the classic books. I've watched the Universal films starring Bela Lugosi, the far superior Hammer films starring Christopher Lee and the supreme adaptation of the navel by Francis Ford Coppola with Gary Oldman. I even read every biography and almost every documentary I could get my hands on about his real life counterpart, Vlad The Impaler. Needless to say, I consider myself not just a vampire expert, but a Dracula expert. Whether this knowledge will come in handy in the future, I don't know, but I know everything there is to know about him.

Which also puts me in this strange position the exact same way I was with Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson's Hercules. I know so much about the character that one would probably expect me to be very critical about how he is portrayed onscreen. The thing about Dracula though is that unlike Hercules who has been portrayed as sort of one note through the decades, Dracula has evolved and changed in so many directions. This is mainly because, besides Sherlock Holmes, Dracula is the most adapted literary character in over a century. Because there are so many portrayals, it is hard to lock down which one is the definitive one. And it is this reason that I'm usually open to new takes and renditions because it has become a tradition to always reinvent the character for the past century.

However if there is one aspect that I gotta point out about this film, that is not really a valid criticism, but rather a geeky one. Since this film is suppose to be about how Vlad The Impaler, the historical figure, becomes Dracula, the fictional figure, there was one opportunity that the filmmakers missed out on. That would be Vlad The Impaler's brother, Radu, who along with him was given to the Turks. But unlike Vlad who would be returned to his Romanian kingdom, Radu remained to become a supreme Muslim commander of the Turk army. This would've presented a really great opportunity of having a brother versus brother story. I state this as a complaint mainly because Dominic Cooper's character, Mehmed The Conqueror, is notorious as the man who kills Vlad the Impaler. So from a story point of view, it would be more interesting to have Vlad battle his brother Radu and would leave it in a position that would set things up. But I'm not the writer, and again, this isn't really a valid criticism because the average movie goer would not be thinking that Radu should be the villain, or that Radu is Vlad's brother. Only a select few know this part of history. I wished that was in this movie.

Review

If you have an idea of how this story will play out, it will play out exactly as you think it will. Believe me, the movie is extremely predictable. Cliches are everywhere, and not in the subtle sense but in the in your face sense. Which is a real shame because there are a lot of interesting ideas in here while at the same time a little bit of history thrown in as well.

The best way to describe it is it is a remake of the prologue in Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula, but what was only a few minutes in that movie has been extended into an entire 90 minute movie. Now for a cliche movie like this, 90 minutes actually is more of a favor to it than a derision. This keeps the plot tight and has things moving quickly in hopes that the audience will look past all the plot holes and obvious problems in the film. And it will mostly succeed for the general audience, but for a movie buff or Dracula aficionado, it won't work. 

If you have read a previous entry in my blog, you'll know that I am a huge fan of Luke Evans. And honestly, he is an amazing Dracula. The guy fits the bill of being both the sexy monster that girls love while at the same time appearing to be the savage beast that guys wish vampires would be. This role specifically seems perfect for him, and honestly he was the only well written part in the movie. Which is a shame because everyone else is poorly written and not given enough.

Sarah Gadon plays his wife Mirena, whose sole purpose is to be one of his motivations for remaining a good man. However, her dialogue is overtly cheesy and it really is a shame because she was amazing in Cosmopolis. Then of course there is Dominic Cooper playing Mehmed the Conqueror. I strongly believe that Cooper, along with Evans, is a highly underrated actor. The guy can morph into different roles and is extremely versatile. However his performance as Mehmed is pretty one note and cliche villain territory. There was an attempt to make Mehmed and Vlad have this almost brother like relationship, but it was only for one scene and quickly dissolves due to Mehmed being a dick.  And if one wants the very definition of cliche evil, then there is Charles Dance as the First Vampire. He is everything people remember about classic vampires as monsters, not sex symbols. And he plays it perfectly. So much so that one would wish he was the main villain instead of just a catalyst for Dracula's change.

The rest of the supporting cast falls into the same category of not well written and cliche. Character motivations seem to change in a heartbeat. One moment the people love Vlad, the next moment they want to kill him for being a vampire despite just saving their lives, then immediately go back to loving him again. There is even one character who is obsessed with wanting to be Vlad's servant, who appears three times and in those three times there was nothing that establishes why he wants to be Vlad's servant. 

But with cliche story and mediocre character aside, the cinematography and action sequences in this film are incredible. However, because this is a Dracula movie, one would think that this should be Rated R in order to get the full effect of how dangerous Dracula is. The action is very PG-13 with being incredible yet also filmed in a way to hide how gory Dracula's kills really are. But then again, this film is more like a superhero movie set in ancient times than the horror movie Dracula fans would probably want.

Final Thoughts

Despite all of its problems, and there are a lot, I walked away enjoying the picture. I would never recommend it as a must watch, but I do believe the average person can watch it and find it entertaining for a short while. For movie buffs though, it will definitely not be for them. This movie is not good yet at the same time it is not terrible. It is just an entertaining picture that would've benefited more had it embraced a more violent portrayal of Dracula's attacks with an R Rating. What concerns me though is how this film is suppose to be the first step in reviving the Universal Monster Universe. If you want to jump start your universe, this is not the film to do it. But Luke Evans is perfect as Dracula, so who knows, maybe the other ones might work.

SCORE: 6.5/10 - A fairly predictable yet entertaining look at a really cool Dracula