The special effects are really weak...

Seamus 2022-03-21 09:01:24

I heard about this movie a long time ago, so I watched it while I was bored, a little interested, and patient. I'm not a person who often watches movies, and my understanding of the movie star director Shenma is basically the same as that of Xiaobai. But that doesn't stop me from commenting on this movie. Judging this movie only from the point of view of a layman, a person who just watches the movie.
This is a movie from 1992, but when I watch it, I always feel like I'm watching an old movie in the 1930s and 1940s. I remember the "Million Pounds" that the teacher played to us in English class was exactly the same. It gave me the feeling that either the director used an antique camera or the film was damp. You know, "Million Pounds" is a 1953 movie. They are almost forty years apart, but the technology used in them seems to be only four months apart.
Maybe the director deliberately highlighted the decadent atmosphere of London at that time, so he adopted such a retro shooting method. I think he would be more immersive if he used the black and white effect. The part of the film that plays the black and white silent movie clip is the most ironic in my opinion. Because the whole movie is just adding vulgar colors to the black and white movie.
The special effects in the film are the most unbearable, the blue flame aperture is an antique of which era, how can it be a fake word. You must know that "Jurassic Park" is a movie from 1993, but the special effects in it don't seem like a technology that is a year apart. The gap between them is like the Decepticons showing their laser cannons to stupid earthlings.
Well, maybe it's a low-budget movie, and God would forgive it for being poorly made if it didn't have the money. Maybe I'm too picky.
But I really don't quite understand why the old Count Dracula was designed with such a moaning and powerless haircut. Is it inspired by Sailor Moon or the hilarious manga Hiyori? Or is the earl the originator of everything? Can't the stylist spend more time designing a more mysterious, evil and normal look for the old earl? Was he designed as a funny character from the beginning? Vampires all over the world cry.
Also, I'm very skeptical about the charm of young Count Dracula. Does adding politeness, suits, and civility all together make a person appear attractive? Wearing such a pair of blue glasses, he looks either a non-mainstream or a second-class youth, and it gives him a lot of face if he doesn't call him blaming Shu Mi. This honorable face still wants to soak up a wife? Are all British women mentally handicapped at the time? Or does the director think that the Prince Charming in the minds of American women in 1992 is this type? I fully realized the difference in values ​​between me and the American imperial people.
Also, Dr. Van Helsing reminds me of Mad-Eye Moody, which is insane and has never played a key role.
Well, the above are all nitpicking, just to express my personal dissatisfaction, everyone can take a look. After all, special effects are secondary factors, and the plot and connotation are the focus of a movie.
I feel like this movie has a good script and it might be more appealing if it was expressed in words. Whether it is a director or an actor, it can only be considered mediocre, not to mention the special effects.
This movie has blood, but it can't be said to be bloody. The film is colored, but not pornographic. Although it is contained and not revealed, it is a good habit to point to the end, and it can also allow more audiences to enjoy the movie. But I feel that the biggest failure also stems from this. The director did not fully highlight the elegance and blood, nor did he highlight the lewdness of the dark aristocracy. This kind of feeling is like receiving a birthday gift in a big box, opening it with expectation, only to find that there is only a pencil and an eraser or something worthless in it.
As for the key description of this film, it is also a love that is talked about with relish, I don't think there is anything special.
This is just a story of an uncle who relied on the fate of his previous life to seduce his wife. Moreover, the uncle succeeded easily, such a thing as fate is really wonderful. On the contrary, it warns us that love is very unreliable, even if your fiancee, if you leave for nearly a month, she may be hooked up by her ex-boyfriend. Never trust the loyalty of the other half, even if she loves you, she will be easily fooled and even draw the sword against you for the sake of others.
However, I still admire the count for maintaining his thoughts of love for more than four hundred years. He is simply a model of an infatuated man. Although he sacrificed his life for love, he was the victor after all.
Finally, oh poor Jonathan, what a misfortune.

View more about Dracula reviews

Extended Reading
  • Hilton 2021-10-22 14:40:43

    Business card of the 90s. A story that has been repeatedly interpreted, and the narrative itself is quite satisfactory. But the interesting part is actually those miniature scenes that are too fake (consciously distanced from reality) (the same is true for the Grand Budapest Hotel), as well as various unreasonable editing, weightlessness, and audio-visual language combinations. Coppola obviously wants to play something non-mainstream. As for whether it's a success, it's just a matter of opinion. . .

  • Marilie 2022-04-24 07:01:03

    Keanu Reeves is a bit blunt but very handsome ^_^ After the logic of the storyline is a bit unreasonable, "The Mummy" is a bit similar to this story

Dracula quotes

  • Renfield: I'm no lunatic man. I'm a sane man fighting for his soul.

  • Van Helsing: We've all become God's madmen, all of us.