Dark Prince: The True Story of Dracula - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Dark Prince: The True Story of Dracula Reviews

Page 1 of 8
November 9, 2012
Though there are some historical inaccuracies I found Rudolf Martin's portrayal of Dracula to be incredibly good. It is no wonder he reprised the role for TV's Buffy verses Dracula (Season 5, episode 1 of Buffy The Vampire Slayer).

This is a very good movie that looks at the good and bad of the historical Dracula and at the end of the film even ties in some of the vampire story so that the film works as a loose prequel to Bram Stoker's Dracula starring Gray Oldman. I strongly recommend this film for any fan of Dracula or of the history of the middle ages. The film is very well done, very moody, very atmospheric and surprisingly educational.
½ August 23, 2012
Vlad Dracula, the Historical legend thereof.????
July 10, 2012
Very good historically.
July 3, 2012
Though not released in theaters I believe this is the only worthy tale of the historical Draculea. If it had only been given a bigger budget and perhaps had someone other than Jane March play Elizabeta it would've been as big as Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula. The historical Prince is someone that is often distorted into whatever Hollywood needs at the time. This doesn't gloss over the hard stuff (nor does it do more than brush the surface). Vlad Draculea III is considered a hero to the Romanian people even today. If you think about it, there is a reason for this- which the movie points out clearly. Rudolf Martin does justice to the role and captures the more pensive side of the 15th century warlord prince. If you're interested in what's behind Bram Stoker's story then see this movie!
May 24, 2012
A fun dramatic cultural materialist reappropriation of the historic Dracula, spoilt only by the constant references to the then Hungarian voivodeship as Romania, anachronistic since Transylvania was not part of Romania until 1918.
May 24, 2012
While they take thier libertys to make it intresting probably the closest histrical Vlad the Impaler movie you will ever see!
April 17, 2012
...pretty cool if youve seen Buffy Vs. Dracula
March 31, 2012
This had its moments, but overall, felt too tv-ish.
October 25, 2011
Finally a movie about the actual myth and its origins! could have been better but I have yet to see anyone else take on this story
Super Reviewer
December 27, 2010
This had its moments, but overall, felt too tv-ish.
December 23, 2010
it's a nice effort, and thus it has many downsides still it's a different approach to one of the most common horror myths of all times, first of all i have a vampire fetish and i admit it, any movie with vampires i try to own (even if they are not good), second this it's a real character, movie it's based on the real story of Vlad Dracul III AKA Vlad the Impaler, who was ruler of Walachia (romania) around 1456-1476 (not all of the time), so for me it's a very interesting story, cause he actually did impaled people, regain the crown and fought the turkish out of romania.

It's loosely biographic, some parts are very true tough they seem incredible, - SPOILERS COMING - like his younger brother Radu becoming to muslim and commanding the ottomans in the romanian invasion, yet there are omitted characters (his elder brother, two of his sons and nobleman corvinus), twisted facts like his kidnapping, that was in fact most of an exchange between his fater Vlad II dracul and king of turks. and his dead that it's not at radu´s hands but at a battle (radu has died already), and most of all the very end of the movie in wich he resurrects as a vampire, it's really a shame they went that way i don think it was necessary and it takes much of the seriousness of the movie leading you to think it's all Bullshit when most of it is actually real and documented facts.

The acting it's generally lame, and so are many of other elements like direction, costumes, makeup and score (oh my god so bad). Yet this it's a TV movie, and i wasn't expecting much of it, so it was surprisingly engaging even with his many flaws... nice effort but hope some day they make a more real and better movie about Vlad 'cause i did like the story a lot.
July 31, 2010
I disliked this movie SO much, I couldn't finish it. Not only was it riddled with historical inaccuracies, but the actor they casted as Dracula was terrible! His attempt at a Romanian accent was so poor, he was better off not even trying! (His 'accent', by the way, faded in and out with every other word--as though he couldn't decide between trying to attempt an accent or just talking normally.) I also disliked the portrayal of Dracula--it came off very unstable, as though there was confusion with how to portray the man. I have no problem with the actor, but I feel he just isn't "Dracula" material.

And don't get me started on the absence of Dracula's infamous mustache!
½ July 26, 2010
Not too bad. I rather enjoyed the creepiness and realistic take on Dracula's historical origins. Aside from the final scene, the whole film is pretty much entirely historically accurate, which get's an added bonus for me and adds to the creepy vibe. It's a somewhat cheap looking production, but entertaining and creepy. Not bad at all.
½ January 23, 2010
January 21, 2010
love this film, saw it about 6 times although the dubbing voice of Rudolph Martin sounds like tranquillizer abuse.
November 22, 2009
pefect story about Vlad temples
Super Reviewer
October 7, 2009
I thought this was a vampire film, nevertheless I watched the whole thing. I thought it was pretty good for what it was a historical / horror film.
½ September 24, 2009
Could have done better on the effects, but overall my favorite Dracula movie.
July 8, 2009
Basically the title of the film says it all.
July 5, 2009
Good movie, the guy who plays Drak in this once is just damned good looking
Page 1 of 8