Average Reviews:
(More customer reviews)Well, I got suckered into buying this one on the strength of its catchy title and the resemblance of the cover photos to my favourite female vamp of all time, Ingrid Pitt of "The Vampire Lovers" fame.
--But it turned out that in fact the main character's hair colour actually didn't look like the cover and was dyed an unnatural red to match some kitschy "Scarlet" theme they had going on with her. Oh well, at least they got the hairstyle right -- for which I am properly grateful!
As for the movie itself, well the producers boast that it was shot in only 5 days, and all I can say is that it looks like it. What we have here is an ultra-low-budget effort with half the actors volunteers and the other half just whoever happened to be scrounging for work at their Hollywood & Vine offices. Although they also boast that it "looks like it was shot on film", to me it looks every inch the el cheapo video that it is.
Now onto the topic that most people reading this are REALLY interested in: da wimmin! Well, I'm sorry to report that Brick Randall, who plays the title role, is the only decent looking woman in the whole movie. She does look great in her scarlet robe (--and out! ;) ), and in a couple of scenes when the lighting is just right, for a moment here and there she actually does look quite like the legendary Ms. Pitt. Randall also tries in her acting, but I still found somehow I missed the exotic flavour of Pitt's accent.
But what was really missing for me here was more vicious and bloody vampire action. The Countess only has one real attack scene in the whole movie (which I loved and wanted to see MORE scenes like). But then the lame-o plot has her plagued by conscience and trying to live on by drinking bagged blood provided by her loyal servant Renfield (played by a TERRIBLE so-called "actor"!!) instead.
And the shots showing the Countess baring her fangs are disappointingly brief, probably because as the filmmakers tell us, the lone set of fangs they had to be shared between all actors didn't fit her properly. Next time SPEND SOME MONEY FOR PROPER FANGS!!!
Later on in the movie she also gets to bite some female "virgins", but this is really just an excuse for some pretty boring and poorly shot lesbian scenes with ugly women. Thus ultimately, this movie is unsatisfying both as horror and as soft porn.
But an unexpected plus for me here was the commentary track from the filmmakers. It was actually pretty interesting listening to the background of how they made this movie, and really gives an insight into the low-budget underbelly of Hollywood filmmaking today. Little details -- like how they had to give one of their two cameras to one of the film's "investors" so he could pose as a cameraman in order to be present at the bedside during the filming of a lesbian nude scene -- provide us with a glimpse into the seamier side of the film industry. I'd say I enjoyed the film twice as much watching it the second time round with the commentary track turned on -- not so much as a movie, but more as an "educational experience" on this type of film-making, and how they see themselves as carrying on the B-movie traditions of the likes of Roger Corman into the new millennium.
So overall I guess I'd give the movie itself 1/2 star, plus 1 star for Brick Randall, plus another 1/2 star for the commentary.
Probably 1 star is all it really deserves but what the heck, I'm a "sucker" (ouch!) when it comes to lesbian vampires!
Click Here to see more reviews about: The Erotic Rites of Countess Dracula (2001)
Click here for more information about The Erotic Rites of Countess Dracula (2001)
0 comments:
Post a Comment