Based on the untold story of Dracula that somebody
at Universal just made up, “Dracula Untold” is about Luke Evans as Vlad Tepes,
the lord that would become Dracula, who must fend off invaders in a 1½ hours
long video game cutscene that tactically strikes every played out superhero
trope of the last decade.
Tragic background setting the handsome protagonist
apart from the rest of the world? Check. Dropping the luxuries of their present
life in favor of using their newfound gifts to pursue a new agenda? Check.
Somehow maintaining a “secret identity” when all is said and done? Somehow and
unbelievably, check.
There’s style over substance, and then there’s “Dracula
Untold.” I understand that not all action movies are necessarily trying to be “John
Wick” but the waste of talent in this movie is like buying $30 worth of gas for
a trip to the corner store within a 20 minute walking distance. Evans gives a
solid performance, though nothing particularly noteworthy as the film wastes
little time throwing him into the fray and exploring his newfound vampiric
capabilities granted to him by a mysterious ancient vampire played by Tywin
Lannister on “Game of Thrones” in unrecognizable ghoul makeup.
The more powerful he becomes the less interesting
that he becomes and the sillier attempts to combat him become.
While a weakness to silver may be something of a
classical vampire weakness but there’s just something inherently silly about
watching a virtual god among men succumb to pocket change lying on the ground
like kryptonite and his fellow cast members fare no better. Watching Dominic
Cooper phone his way through a throwaway role that is clearly below his pay
grade as Mehmed the Conqueror can be draining sometimes and Charles Dance is wasted
in a role that I can only assume is designed to introduce a mythology arc for potential
sequels.
That’s not even to say that it’s all bad, just
really hollow. So what is worthwhile about “Dracula Untold?” At least it’s kind
of fun to watch.
Lacking in substance aside, the film isn't particularly terrible as a popcorn matinee flick that passes the time. None of
the action sequences are particularly fresh but for what they are, they’re well
shot, decently choreographed and fun to watch. If anything, its emotional coldness
and calculated pacing that has more in common with a mediocre television series
pilot than a big screen picture, is probably better suited for home media than
a theater experience.
“Dracula Untold” is like a lesser version of “Underworld;”
stylish action and atmosphere are the emphasis over strong storytelling. While “Dracula
Untold” is far thinner however, there’s nothing to really detest about it
outside of a general misunderstanding of the Dracula concept that can be chocked
up more to reinterpretation than adaptation decay.
On the other side of the coin however…
Aaron Eckhart plays a Frankenstein Monster whose character
is defined by his abs, caught in the middle of a war between gargoyles and
demons for control of mankind. In other words, nothing relating to “Frankenstein”
whatsoever.
If “Dracula Untold” is the bumbling but well meaning
competent worker that puts the work in to skate by, “I, Frankenstein” is the pretentious
slacker whose work, what little ultimately gets done is nowhere near as
impressive as they seem to think it is. I strive to summarize most films to provide context
but “I, Frankenstein” is nigh plotless. Its style of filmmaking is thin on any
form of significant meaning; I get that and don’t hold its nonsensical events
of the Frankenstein Monster’s recruitment by the gargoyles to fight demons over
human souls against it. I don’t even hold Eckhart’s dead expressions and Bill
Nighy’s embarrassing performance against the film, grating as they are. What I
do hold against the movie is that it isn’t even remotely cool.
The world is oversaturated with CGI and a stylistic
cinematography evocative of comic book panels, clearly meant to lend itself to
the action. However the choppy fights regularly shuffle between poorly shot,
poorly paced or just unimaginably choreographed to begin with.
Not even the visual effects are really worth seeing
in action. Most of them are standard fare for Hollywood but even then,
consistency goes out the window as the gargoyle effects are more often than
not, terrible. Sometimes they look worse than CGI cartoons on television.
"I, Frankenstein" is the high end of everything that
most of the worst films of 2014 have to offer. After 10 minutes, you know there’s
no reason to continue watching, yet they continue to subject you to an
agonizingly long length that they utterly fail to fill out.
The only things saving
it from my unbridled wrath is that it was inoffensive and a box office disappointment.
Sadly, it was also the last of 2014’s awfulness in cinema to not test my sanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment