Dracula 2000 (2000)
Average Rating: 3.6/10
Reviews Counted: 65
Fresh: 10 | Rotten: 55
This retelling trys to offer a different spin on the origin of Dracula. Unfortunately, there's nothing here audiences haven't seen before.
Average Rating: 3/10
Critic Reviews: 19
Fresh: 2 | Rotten: 17
This retelling trys to offer a different spin on the origin of Dracula. Unfortunately, there's nothing here audiences haven't seen before.
liked it
Average Rating: 2.8/5
User Ratings: 69,314
My Rating
Movie Info
In this loose reinvention of the classic Bram Stoker novel, the Count (Gerard Butler) is transplanted to the present day, after a brief prologue where Van Helsing (Christopher Plummer) captures Dracula and conceals him in Carfax Abbey, where he remains for many years. In the future, Carfax Abbey is contained within an office building where Van Helsing's been using Dracula's blood to stay alive in order to guard the evil secret. After a band of thieves, led by the malevolent Marcus (Omar Epps),
Watch It Now
Cast
-
Christopher Plummer
Van Helsing -
Gerard Butler
The Count -
Jonny Lee Miller
Simon -
Justine Waddell
Mary Van Helsing -
Jennifer Esposito
Solina -
Omar Epps
Marcus -
Danny Masterson
Nightshade -
Lochlyn Munro
Eddie -
Jeri Ryan
Valerie Sharp -
Colleen Fitzpatrick
Lucy -
Sean Patrick Thomas
Trick -
-
-
ADVERTISEMENT
All Critics (66) | Top Critics (20) | Fresh (11) | Rotten (56) | DVD (21)
Mary, a descendant of the prototypical vampire slayer, works at a Virgin megastore in New Orleans, and the gratuitous use of the city during Mardi Gras is the least of this movie's unoriginal sins.
One half-expects a sexually subversive, blood-soaked gay carnival. Instead, Simon makes the effete Dracula (Butler) suck on some abuse.
Top CriticDracula may stay undead in the new millennium, but there's not a sign of life -- oh, that bloodless acting -- in this sorry mess.
Even true believers will have a hard time sinking their fangs into this thoroughly perfunctory affair.
Wilts when compared in the light with other Dracula films.
A perfect example of the kind of rigidly conventional vampire movie that wearies contemporary horror buffs.
It's still a fun bit of "Matrix" lite horror fare...
Too scary, too gory, too gross.
Without a single scare to its credit nor a particularly inspired storyline, this film fails to justify its existence.
While the result certainly doesn't suck, it does lack any real bite.
The use of Craven's name in the title is a cheesy marketing ploy and the secret to the fanged suitor's aversion to all things Christian is an even cheesier hoot.
We're talking 5,940 seconds better spent doing anything else under the sun, including but not limited to pulling out one's toenails one by one.
[It] will be consigned to the bin with all the other Dracula rejects.
There's enough holes in the plot to drive a 40-foot hearse through.
There are precious few good performances in this movie, and it would be really great if the title character were one of them.
The filmmakers were stuck with a script containing good ideas poorly executed.
While not a truly terrible vampire movie like The Forsaken, Dracula 2000 could have been so much more.
Director Patrick Lussier has a keen eye for color and knows how to compose a great-looking shot; unfortunately, Lussier also co-wrote and edited the film, effectively undermining his talent.
The film concentrates more on the gore and less on fright and suspense.
...little here we haven't seen before, a mere rehash.
Unable to add a single new thought or shot to the tired vampire genre.
Audience Reviews for Dracula 2000
Super Reviewer
Super Reviewer
-
- Trick: Sorry sport, I'm an atheist.
- Simon: God loves you anyway!
-
- Lucy: He is better than chocolate.
-
- Simon: Never, ever fuck with an antiques dealer.
-
- The Count: We are so much more complicated than our names, Lucy.
- Lucy: I was named after the 'Peanuts' character.
-
- The Count: I don't drink...coffee.
-
- Solina: It's a special thing to be chosen. It feels like being born.
- The Count: You haven't been feeding her.
Discussion Forum
There are no discussion threads for Dracula 2000 yet.
Latest News on Dracula 2000
July 12, 2006:
Who Wants ANOTHER Slice of "American Pie"?It's a bizarre way for a movie studio to show its appreciation for a mega-successful trilogy, but...
April 26, 2006:
"White Noise 2" Set Visit: Patrick Lussier Promises Twists, Talks HorrorOur "White Noise 2" set coverage continues with RT's conversation with director Patrick...
December 22, 2005:
"White Noise 2" Hires a Sequel-Centric DirectorHollywood North Report brings some Canadian movie news that'll thrill all you fans of PG-13 horror...
What's Hot On RT
Bradley Cooper's Best Movies
Fast & Furious 6 is Certified Fresh
Fast & Furious cars gallery
Blockbusters ranked!
Featured on RT
- Critics Consensus: Fast & Furious 6 is Certified Fresh 22
- Red Carpet Photos with Vin Diesel, Michelle Rodriguez, Gina Carano and More 0
- Video: The Hangover Part III Cast Interviews 0
- Total Recall: Bradley Cooper's Best Movies 39
- Parental Guidance: Epic and Beautiful Creatures 2
- Comic Book Movies You Can Watch Online 9
- In Pictures: The Cars of Fast & Furious 0
Top Headlines
-
Evan Peters Joins X-Men: Days of Future Past
0
-
Toby Jones Talks Captain America: The Winter Soldier
0
-
The Poltergeist Reboot May Actually Be a Sequel
9
-
Will Forte Promises MacGruber 2
1
-
Universal Plans Timecop Reboot
2
-
Return of the Jedi Turns 30
1
-
Vin Diesel Says Fast & Furious 7 Will Take Place in L.A.
0


"19th Century Chills Terrify The 21st Century"
Dracula 2000 is bad. It's the worst Dracula related film I have seen, yet it has some entertainment value in its awfulness. You know those movies that are bad, but are so bad, they are good. Well, this isn't one of those, but it isn't so bad that it is unwatchable. Actually there are some decent ideas in the film. I really liked the connection between Judas and Dracula. Had it been used in a better way, it could have been much better. But the whole idea was executed in a hurried and sloppy way, that made it come of as idiotic, when it should have been inventive. It is easy to see that Dracula 2000 wants to reinvent the Dracula-vampire genre. It wants to be the Scream of the vampire genre. It wants to use humor and predictability as an advantage, but it never even gets close to doing that as well as what Scream did for the slasher genre.
There are some points of interest with the movie though. Christopher Plummer plays Van Helsing, which was a great casting decision. It's too bad that he was mostly wasted though. Gerard Butler plays Dracula and he isn't terrible, but like normal, he is appearing in a movie that is beneath him. There's some well done scenes, some cool images, and I liked the use of Christianity, but on a whole it never gets to where it needs to be. The acting for the most part is pretty lifeless. There are some beautiful women that are there just because they are beautiful.
Where this movie fails the most at is with the fact that it isn't a horror film. Sure that's what it's classified as, but never in the movie does it seem like it's even trying to be scary. It may, in fact be trying, but it never appears that way to the viewer. It seems like an hour and a half of failed laughs and suspense. I'm fine with horror movies that try to create laughs, but there has to be a sense of something in the way of horror, and Dracula 2000 just doesn't have that. In the end, it is just a failed attempt at recreating a Dracula story for a new generation.