Son of Darkness: To Die For II (1991)

To me, this movie is perfection.

As Good As It Gets

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

This a great horror movie. It is very scary. It has a great story. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. It a Dracula movie and they are very scary most of the time. This is a sequel to Dracula. 3.8 is underrating this movie. This a great movie. It is scarier then the Exorcist. I give it 10 out 10. If you like good horror movies from the 80's you like this movie. This a great movie. It is very scary. Dracula (March 1931) is better. Still this a great movie. It is scary. Dracula (1992) is also better. So Dracula (1979) is also better. Dracula (1958) is also better. Still this a great horror movie. See it. It is one of the best movies ever.

Medieval torturer Vlad Tepesh as soft, romantic humanitarian?! Whose next, Mengele? If the hero's very unfortunate identity is forgotten, this sequel for To die for is nice, unpretentious vampire romance. It has stylish Gothic touches - old mansion, flying white curtains during romantic sex scene - and decent photography: no CGI, no draining of colors etc. Michael Praed plays Fabio look-a-like Vlad Tepish (sic) who works as a doctor and falls for a human heroine. Villains of earlier film are there, too. Full moon shines, Vlad can turn to a wolf and no one uses PVC costumes, thank God! (I am probably only person in the world who thinks that PVC looks just terribly ugly and unerotic, like a material for trash sacks.) All and all, pretty good B-movie, pleasant minor effort and notably better than overrated Underworld series or garbage like From dusk till dawn.

Two things I like, Micheal Praed and vampire flicks but when I saw this movie, I found out that the two just did not mix well together. Micheal Praed is one person that I'm used to seeing in his older more prominent role as Robin Hood and when I see him in this film as a vampire, his character seemed more like a sympathetic character than a character of mystery and that sense of allurement that most vampires seem to possess. He had a little mystery in the movie but I just couldn't see him playing this role as a kind, caring loving vampire. And the British accent didn't help either. I was also lost in the explanation of the movie when all of the sudden the victims brother knows the vampire and what he's all about and begins to tell this tale to his sister that I just couldn't see fit in this movie. This is not the worst of vampire flicks but it's not the best.

Now, when we rented this film, we thought it would be a cheesy vampire flick. Well, it wasn't cheesy at all. It was just plain boring. I have no intentions of seeing the first one now. This movie was horrible. I give it credit for being shot well, but the plot was boring. The acting wasn't all that bad. It just makes me wonder why someone would want to make such a boring movie.