Dracula 3000 (2004)

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

It is not deep, but it is fun to watch. It does have a bit more of an edge to it than other similar films.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

This is a cheap looking, corny as hell bad movie, no question. But it really doesn't deserve it's current 2/10 score, I have seen much worse than this. I don't recall seeing a Dracula movie set in the future before, certainly not in space, so some credit for that (though yes, it's very silly, but hey, what about Jason X?)Langley Kirkwood does make a feeble Count & Udo Kier looks embarrassed but there's some fun with Coolio & Tommy Lister, plus Erika Eleniak is very easy on the eye. The spaceships like they came from a 1970's TV show but that added to it's charm. I found it to be bad but in an amusing way & at 83 minutes it passes quite quickly.

Unintentionally satirical? That's what I thought when I saw this movie. Let me explain: it's the year 3000 and a motley salvage crew believes they have hit pay dirt with this mother lode. Then they find out about their unwanted visitor. A huge space craft that the estimate is worth a lot of money. The dialogue was at times painfully crude. The acting is often cringe worthily funny. There is a plot twist or two, but, uh.but even that does not help thicken the pap thin plot. Their is eye candy for the guys and comic relief for all. The actor chosen to play Dracula was hilarious (as was his outfit, which looked like a Halloween costume). My first time seeing an almost slap stick version of Dracula with gore. Three stars

After watching this movie, I can only say that cinema is truly truly dead. In the year 3000, a space salvage crew comes upon an abandoned space ship and accidentally revive Dracula. The shorter the explanation, the better.Letting mentally challenged children do a cold read of the script would've given a better performance that the actors in this movie. I recognize Coolio, Erika Eleniak and Tommy Lister in the cast; I don't know anyone else and can only assume that they are one-shot actors. I would imagine the entire cast being tossed out of the screen actors' guild for their performances.The first ten minutes of this film was something out of the Exposition Handbook. It consisted of ten minutes of the captain's log, telling us who the crewmembers. I guess the writer never learned... well... anything about storytelling.About the only thing I found remotely amusing about this film was Erika Eleniak's man-hands. They're huge! Like flesh-colored oven mitts.

Never heard of this film before starting it on TMC on demand. Had I seen the reviews, I may have never had the opportunity to see what I will call, the worst film I have ever seen, including Troll 2. Dracula 3000 makes that bearable. This is my first IMDb review. I was compelled review this, even with my busy schedule, to warn people of the complete waste of however many minutes this film is, their life could be spent doing something better, like sucking boils from a homeless man's butt hole, for charity. 1 minute into the title sequence, I knew I was in trouble. It was a close up of what I could only guess was a blob of blood? For the entire sequence. My finger was poised on the remote for shutting it down in anticipation of B movie squalor. That is an insult to B movies!then I saw Erika Elaniak's name in the credits. I went to school with her so I decided I would watch a little to see how she was holding up. I also saw Casper Van Dien's name. His career hasn't been Pacino's but he has worked a bit. Can't be too bad, right? WRONG! Film schools should show this as an example of how not to make a film. I am a bit of an amateur film maker myself. I made a short, (awhile ago) written, shot, edited by and starring myself (and my mother's dog), but my 9 minutes short, shot while training myself how to use Sony Vegas editing software, for that sole purpose, was superior in many ways. I am not tooting my horn. I am really wondering how in the world something with a budget, albeit probably small, could be as bad as Dracula 3000! But I digress…Again, there are many bad points from the average movie goer standpoint but from a "filmmaker's" standpoint, it's probably worse. I will point out a few.The Set: This was either an abandoned Russian oil refinery or ship. The sea kind of ship, not the space kind. This was a film set in the range of years 2050ish to 3000. Interestingly, there was no effort made to hide this fact. Maybe the production/set designer had to take the day off for his kids little league game and they didn't want to lose their $200 deposit for the location?Acting: Yeah…I have seen 10 year old kids on YouTube make better films with better acting. Enough said there. Coolio SHOULD NEVER try to act. EVER! I won't even mention the other actors. I am surprised, Casper or Erika didn't just walk off the set early in the production for the sake of their pride, if not their 'career'. There's no way someone working on this could have possibly had illusions that this was going to be a decent film. I would have to blame the director. I have seen films where some of THIS cast was better. Not A-List good but better than this. Maybe the director was smoking some of Coolio's pot (which was one of the many poorly thought out, plot points of this film)?Sound design: Most people don't think of sound design. It's usually so well done, people who are not "in the know" don't even know someone spends countless hours creating Foley, sound effects,mixing and perfecting audio, etc. Anytime someone in this film runs,there is the sound of what literally I believe to be the sound effects from Donkey Kong, when Mario is running across the metal beams. If there was sound design (i was blissfully asleep by the end credits), I think they took a large pipe wrench and banged it against one of the large steel pipes in the space ship/factory/oil rig they were filming in and used one strike of the pipe as a footfall for the "actors" running across the steel floors.Screenplay: OMG! The dialog was terrible, racist, sexist, stereotypical, offensively bad. No thought what-so-ever was put into characters. They just went, "we cast a black guy so he will want to f*ck white woman and use dirty language and be disrespectful of whitey!", was their character development strategy. Costume: If you lookup "cheap Dracula costume", you will indeed find a better version of the costume than was used on 'Dracula' in this film. I swear! I did it myself. A large black cape, with a HUGE standing collar, probably twice the size of Bela Lugosi's and even Leslie Nielson's in Dracula: Dead and Loving It, and a white shirt that looked like it came from the thrift store used Tux section.I posted in groups on Facebook about how bad this film is: Someone asked me if it was worse than Terror At Blood Fart Lake. YES! Without a doubt. Blood Fart Lake deserves an Oscar vs. this!The only good that has come out of this film is the hilarious reviews and I wanted to be part of history in reviewing the worst film ever made. My 15 minutes?I could go on but I will leave you with this. As far as I know, this IS THE WORST film ever made. I haven't seen every film but I have seen a lot and many bad ones. Films like the aforementioned Horror At Blood Fart Lake was actually funny and meant to be. Zombie Ass: The Toilet Of The Dead -was a terribly stupid and ridiculous film but funny and meant to be. Dracula 3000 is actually meant to be serious, has zero redeeming qualities and is not funny.