|Index||5 reviews in total|
My criticism of Bonnie and Clyde vs. Dracula might be a tad-bit unfair
as one probably isn't supposed to complain much about a movie called
Bonnie and Clyde vs. Dracula.
Going into it, I knew it was a D-List B-Movie with a preposterous premise ... and it is. The film has "decent" acting from some no-name-never-will-be-a-name actors who do the most with their cheesy dialogue and the grotesque situations in which they find themselves. Simply because someone believed a confrontation between the notorious gangster-duo and Dracula would make for an interesting movie, Bonnie and Clyde vs. Dracula was made.
It doesn't really matter how Bonnie and Clyde end up in the same house as Dracula (a mad doctor with a burlap sack over his head -- Dr. Loveless -- is harboring the bloodsucker in his basement ... yep, hahaha, sure thing!); all that does matter is that the two sides confront each other ... and nobody else (the supporting players) really stand a chance.
This is an "ignorance-is-bliss" kind of a film ... the audience is simply supposed to enjoy the stupidity on screen. I was able to ... some.
What bothered me was that the remarkably bad screenwriter apparently knew next-to-nothing of Ms. Parker and Mr. Barrow. They are pretty-much Bonnie and Clyde in name ONLY as their behavior, action and motivation in THIS film are nothing-at-all like they were in real life (it could have been worse, though, as Hilary Duff doesn't play THIS film's Bonnie). I am sure I shouldn't have cared; and I only did a little bit ... because, seriously, get something right! (I'm not asking for 100% historical accuracy in ANY film; but I'd have accepted a mere 05% here)
It can be difficult to blend real-life characters with fiction in something like this. I read and accepted the recent Pride & Prejudice and Zombies lately and did NOT mind Lizzie Bennett and her sisters being ninja-trained warriors (as they are fiction-upon-fiction); but having Bonnie Parker go medieval with a razor blade (before they even encounter Fangs McGhee) was just too much (as it is still debated whether or not the REAL Bonnie Parker ever pulled a trigger).
The movie is supposed to be a brainless/thoughtless, fun-time. For this to happen the movie should be watched with one's brain turned completely off as ANY kind of thinking will mar the film. How is that possible?!? Actually ... I don't know as I haven't turned my brain back on yet.
If you like B-horror movies, &/or campy horror (Zombieland, or Shawn of
the Dead), you'll definitely enjoy this film.
I do not particularly care for horror, campy or otherwise, but am always interested in Indie flicks. So I had the opportunity to see this at a film festival, and am glad I did. It got lots of laughs, and even had some decent special effects.
To briefly summarize: the setting is early 20th century, where the fugitives Bonnie & Clyde meet up with some supernatural forces, including Count Dracula. The film definitely had the feel of a comic book dramatization or graphic novel, perhaps inspired by League of Extraordinary Gentlemen or something like that.
The acting by Tiffany Shepis was brilliant, and the rest of the acting was pretty decent. The doctor's sidekick Annabelle also got lots of laughs.
My only complaint is that a few scenes dragged on, and a few too many lulls in the flow of the film. I think the writer/director might have been trying to cram too much story into the 2 hours. But frankly, I was more impressed with this low budget film than most of the movies in the theater currently, so I can hardly complain.
If you are just looking for Hollywood gore with fast-paced special effects, then look elsewhere. But if you are interested in out-of-the-box storytelling, original scripts, and independent film making with an eccentric flair, Bonnie & Clyde vs. Dracula will not disappoint.
Bonnie and Clyde vs. Dracula is a better film than the title suggests.
I have mixed emotions about this as I normally like for my bad films to
be truly bad, but will admit to being pleasantly surprised by the story
and production values.
Keep in mind I am reviewing a low budget film here. The acting was surprisingly good and, at 90 minutes, the story was neither too short nor too long. I thought Tiffany Shepis as the murderous Bonnie made the film and the other players, all unknowns (at least, unknown to me) were surprisingly colorful and good. Jennifer Friend as the dim-witted Annabel was a treat as well.
The plot is about what you would expect with a title such as this one. Bonnie and Clyde are out in the country hiding from the law and planning their next heist when they unexpectedly meet up with the evil Dr. Loveless and, you guessed it, the Prince of Darkness himself. This is as far as I will go on story explanation, the title says it all.
It doesn't matter to me if the story makes sense or is historically factual in regards to Bonnie and Clyde, but I was a bit frustrated by the fact that I had trouble determining whether this was (a) horror, (b) comedy horror spoof or (c) a gangster film. It is hard to mix genres within one production and that was, at times, uncomfortably apparent. But, it was not so bad as to ruin the production and, aside from that, Bonnie and Clyde vs.Dracula is a delightful film and nice addition to my library of B-horror.
Shot in 2008 around the St. Joseph, MO. area, near my home, I looked for this one on DVD for a long time. Per its website, it made the rounds of the film festival circuit in Kansas and Missouri before being offered on DVD. It was worth the wait. It fits nicely with such 1960s films as Billy the Kid vs. Dracula and Jesse James Meets Frankenstein's Daughter. I am very pleased to see films such as these back in production. If you, as I, love films such as this one, I encourage you to add it to your library. I got my DVD from Amazon and it costs around $10.00, including shipping.
How did this get a 4.9. There have been a lot of very great Dracula movies. And this is not one of them. This is one Dracula sequel you need to skip. The acting is awful. The story line is awful. The ending is awful. I think it is supposed to be funny but it is not. And if it is trying to be scary. It is not scary. Do not waste your money. And do not waste your time. Do not see this movie. I do not knew why it got a 4.9. It is just an awful awful movie. See Dracula vs Frankenstein. That is one of the great Dracula sequels and it is very underrated. And this is just overrated. I do not Knew why people like this awful horror movie. Dracula (March 1931) is a great movie. This movie has an awful ending. Do not see this movie. You have been warned.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I have a very keen interest on the real killers Bonnie & Clyde plus
Vlad the Impaler AKA Dracula. However I thought this film didn't cover
much of the two! It really didn't match them up very well.
Tiffany Shepis and Trent Haaga were just excellent at playing their roles as Bonnie & Clyde. They really look like the real ones but only more modern. I suppose it was back in 2008 so obviously they looked like they were at this present!
I was really disappointed how Dracula came on the scene late. He didn't really appear much. Honestly why the hell did they add Annabelle as an Igor like type! She just was pointless to be in the film to be honest. It would've been better if she hadn't existed in the first place. It seem like the design crew just didn't bother to think on how it would turn out. Believe me, it turned out wrong. I found her to be annoying then funny....
Some of the scenes but the rest was OK. I wouldn't call it great either!
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|