Very well executed

Too much of everything

As Good As It Gets

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

After arriving at a morgue in New Orleans, an anatomy teacher and his students conduct a series of tests to see if it's really Dracula, but when the reborn Dracula begins turning them into vampires themselves, it's a race against time with a vampire hunter in tow to stop him.This one wasn't all that bad and was a pleasant surprise. One of the more enjoyable elements here is the decent pace to it, which means that it pretty much stayed the same on an even pace and knew when to throw in an action sequence to keep it upbeat. That goes a long way, and it goes right from the opening scene chase through the old-town streets in a clever reversal of expectations that gives the film a great start while setting up one of the best mirror gags in the genre that gets a great jump along with the action, the revival in the bathtub at their house is handled well and is a disorienting and hyperactive sequence that leads nicely into the later battle with the police officers who arrive. It does tend to load up on action near the end, and the scenes there are it's best as the alleyway sequence is the clear highlight with a clever jump, impressive weaponry on display, a nice smattering of gore, and a great conclusion, their second revival attempt on the creature that leads into all the fine brawls and battles throughout the pool with the scores of vampires which really sets this one off into an incredibly fun final fight that brings plenty of historical significance from the flashbacks to settle this one off rather nicely. Along with some pretty nice gore in here and the clever use of more obscure vampire rules that offers a little creativity into the mix, there's very little to complain about in this one. Among the few problems here is that after an entertaining opening of the film, the middle section gets a little too slow for its own good. Most of this is relegated to the discovering sequences when the vampire is trapped and all of the experiments are being conducted where it's all the waiting around for results that get in the way of the truly exciting vampire story around it. There's not a whole lot wrong with them, it's just that they slow the film down when it should've just been let loose and really flew with abandon. Most of this is due to the fact that the main vampire, Dracula, is tied up and bound to a single position for the majority of the film, and only at the end is he actually freed. Not having its main source of horror there to do what it does best makes the middle largely hard to get through, with the only sparingly action scenes keeping it awake. That's really the only two complaints against this one.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language and Brief Nudity.

There are three reasons to watch this film:1. It's a Dracula/Vampire Film. 2. Jason Scott Lee is in it. 3. Roy Scheider is in it. I actually liked this movie better than the first one (Dracula 2000). I loved to watch Jason Scott Lee as Father Uffizi -- he reminded me of Van Helsing mixed with Bruce Lee. That provided most of the entertainment for me. I loved Roy Scheider since I was a young girl in the 70s - Jaws! Roy did a good acting job as Cardinal Siqueros although his part was a bit smaller than I would have liked. No, it's not the greatest Dracula film but it is quite entertaining to watch! 6/10

Oh, I am confused, the way I read some of these comments here on IMDb, I was thinking that Dracula 2 was going to be a decent horror movie. I had recorded this film expecting at least a good story. But honestly, the reason why I can't enjoy Wes Craven's take on Dracula is because it seems like he has no clever way of telling this classic story. Dracula is one of history's most famous villains and Wes Craven has made him into nothing but a joke. I don't like the new characters, they're clichéd and boring not to mention that they're horrible actors. The effects, the characters and the story just didn't work with me. Not to mention that I don't know where the heck they got the idea that mustard seeds and rope weaken Dracula? Why not just squeeze a mustard bottle on him? Then I can take a hot dog and rub the mustard off Dracula's body with it and have some dinner. I can't take this stupid story seriously and I don't know how anyone really could.A small group of scientists hope to use Dracula's desiccated body to discover the secret of immortality. Elizabeth who examines the corpse, leads her to alert her boyfriend Lowell, who is suffering from an ultimately fatal degenerative sickness. Lowell claims a wealthy investor wants to fund their research into the mysterious corpse. They take the body away. On their heels is Father Uffizi, seemingly the Vatican's official vampire hunter. He has been given the task of not only killing Dracula, but granting him absolution. This will allow the vampire to rest in peace. What the Cardinal giving Uffizi this task may or may not know is that the priest was scratched by a vampire fang in a previous hunt. Each day he exposes himself to the sun. But one of the scientific team, Luke, doubts Dracula is a purely natural phenomenon. He surrounds the now-awake vampire with folkloric wards like mustard seeds and knots. Elizabeth, meanwhile, feels increasingly strange as the infection in her grows, as does her attraction/bond to Dracula.Well, like Dracula 2000, I just couldn't stand this film. Nothing about this story made sense and all the folklore that fascinates me about Dracula does not exist here. Now the movie could have worked a lot better if it dealt with a better director and different actors, not to mention that they shouldn't make the characters so clichéd, it could have been better. I also don't like the way they handled how you become a vampire, it seemed like the most small bite in the world, that doesn't even require your blood to be drained, just get a little nip and you're becoming a vampire. The "love" story that was incredibly random between Elizabeth and Dracula didn't make any sense, their connection didn't seem real at all. Uffizi is another character that didn't make any sense and once again the actor was just horrible. Nothing about this movie made me think that it could be good, I couldn't wait for it to be over and I don't get how anyone could think that this was a decent horror movie.1/10

While "Dracula 2000" didn't quite set the box office on fire, it did well enough to warrant a sequel – two, as a matter of fact. Released straight to video, "Dracula II: Ascension," finds everyone's favorite bloodsucker in the custody of a group of med students, following the events of the first movie. When experimenting with his charred corpse in hopes of helping their crippled professor turns out to be a bad idea, all Hell breaks loose and things get rather nasty, as you would expect.Director Patrick Lussier returns to the director's chair, and perhaps the biggest difference with this installment is its surprisingly restrained style. Less action packed and not as flashy in the visual department, the film is a more straight-up Dracula flick that gets its job done efficiently and in a timely manner. It also boasts a lot less star-power, in spite of a brief appearance by the late Roy Scheider. You'll spot a few C-list stars (Jason London, anyone?) but the big surprise is Jason Scott Lee, who plays a vampire hunter and virtually carries the film on his shoulders. It's a crime, then, that his character isn't given as much time as the over-dramatic students that drive the plot.Of course, the film was shot back-to-back with the third sequel, and it shows. The thing that keeps it from being as good and as complete as it should is that too much time is spent setting up the next installment and not enough time giving the film enough meat and potatoes to stand alone. Also, it doesn't help that this version of Dracula (re-casted from Gerard Butler to Stephen Billington) is slightly neutered and isn't given much to do. If you can forgive its shortcomings, though, you'll find it to be a fair sequel that is at least a lot better than a lot of direct-to-video fare and serves as a decent enough way to whittle away 80 spare minutes.