ThiefHott Too much of everything

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Eric Stevenson I admit that I was too hard on the original "Dracula 2000" even though I still believe I didn't like it. This is a fairly pointless movie. It features an entirely new cast and there's no real main revelations about Dracula. The first one at least had an interesting twist. The worst part of this movie is probably the ending. It features the main hero being defeated and Dracula just leaves and doesn't kill him.The entire movie comes off as pointless. There's this other guy who deliberately becomes a vampire because he just wants to be immortal or something. This is one of the few times it's mentioned vampires are obsessed with counting. That's how we got the Count from "Sesame Street"! The characters bring Dracula back and it's mostly out of stupidity. I wish they'd thought this more through. *1/2

elderado66-1 The movie was OK. The problem I had was that it was to be a sequel to Drac 2000. Problem was...no carry over characters and most importantly totally ignored how the first one ended. The only thing that attached was a brief flash back to the first one and that is it. No continuity. I can overlook a lot but continuity between sequels and prequels drives me bonkers. I can forgive editing errors. I can even forgive when things like a mic drop in a scene but if you are going to do multiples you must must must have concept and script continuity. If you don't you might as well have them as entirely different movies. I can understand why butler wasn't in this $$$$. I would have liked to seen Johnny Lee Miller and Justine Waddell. To some it up what do I know I am just a movie junkie with all the training and no place to use it

Boba_Fett1138 This is one of those movies that is only a sequel by name really. It's a sequel to the 2000 movie "Dracula 2000" but it basically has very little till nothing to do with this movie, that features new and different characters and a different story it follows.Nothing about this movie is too impressive or spectacular and you can perhaps even call this movie a bit of a lackluster but it's simply good enough for what it is. It didn't had a too high budget and got probably shot on a tight schedule but the end result is certainly a watchable and good enough movie.The story is far from convincing or greatly written but at least it's being somewhat original. At least this movie is not being a typical vampire flick with all of the usual clichés and lack of original ideas and creativity of its own.The movie features some of the typical B-movie flick actors. Jason Scott Lee is the vampire killer and Roy Scheider also makes a small appearance. Obviously the acting is not the movie its strongest point. As a matter of fact, the movie doesn't really have any strong points at all but it simply serves its purpose well enough, making this a good watch throughout.6/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

disdressed12 this is a sequel to Dracula 2000,but not completely.it's still about Dracula,but it begins shortly after the first one ended.the thing is,***spoiler ahead*** it ignores the ending of 2000.if you paid attention to the very end of that film,you'll realize that the events in this one couldn't happen the way they do.end of spoiler***oh,well,that's life.it still has the same biblical bent to it.but this one lacks many of the things 2000 had.gone is Gerard Butler as the title character,a fairly big loss,in my opinion.this Dracula(the character)is not as compelling,nor did i feel he was seductive or charming.gone is also the visual style of 2000.there's also no macabre humour here.nor is there much action.what is added is some overacting by many of the cast involved.While i don't have anything against Jason Scott Lee,i feel he was trying way too hard to make the character serious.***minor spoiler***oh,and if you're expecting to see Roy Schieder(he is billed as being one of the stars of the movie)then you better not blink,or you'll miss him.overall,this entry is not as fun as Dracula 2000,but i still thought it was OK.For me,Dracula II:Ascension is a 6.6/10