MovieChat Forums > Dracula II: Ascension (2003) Discussion > FALSE ADVERTISING!

FALSE ADVERTISING!

posted 21 years ago by togolane
8 replies | jump to latest

I can imagine the producer thinking "gee, I've only got 2 million dollars, how can I get people to watch this movie" He cheats!1# Wes Craven had nothing to do with this movie, they just paid him for the copyright.2# This is not a sequel to DRACULA 2000, they just paid for the copyright.3# Jason Scott Lee is not the star of the movie, he only appears at the begining and end and briefly in between.4# Roy Schieder's cameo couldn't have taken more than a day to shoot. 5# Brandy Rodericke doesn't get naked and only appears in the begining of the movie.They do a good job of distacting the audience from noticing that the whole movie is filmed on 3 sets and nothing really happens.There is no begining or end to this movie, Dracula's charred remains just appear at he morgue and the group of medical students and teacher revive him and pretty much just stand around screaming at each other.This appears to be a Canadian production but it was shot in Romania to save money! On the plus side the production values are decent and the cast is competent.

[–] NateF88 21 years ago

Um, It's a sequel to dracula 2000, and just to let you know, the most important job of a movie set is the executive producer, so if Wes Craven is the executive producer, he had something to do with the film, so they have a right to call it Wes Craven's Dracula II: Ascension. The reason why there really isn't an end is because it leaves an opening for Dracula III: Legacy. Also, To attract viewers, even if it's a cameo, they list famous stars first. For instance in Scream, Drew Barrymore was listed in the top five and was in the cover, but she was only in the beginning of the movie. And in Halloween: Ressurection, Jaimie Lee Curtis was one of the top billed and was on the cover. And where in the advertisements did it say anyone got naked? It says Rated R for violence/gore and language.

[–] bcw1119 20 years ago

Actually, all the executive producer is good for is the money. Wes was the one who gave them the money to shoot it. The most important job on the set is somewhere between the producer and the director.

Also, the beginning of this film was shitty. They really messed up the continuity with how the last film ended. This film sucked ass. First, they used a different actor for Dracula who couldn't pull off the part. Second, the character who came in with the gun demanding he knew everything about the Dracula, ended up knowing nothing. Third, the whole med school thing was ricockulous. And lastly, it was just a teaser.

Although, this movie sucked ass compared to the first one which I felt was pretty good, I will still go and see the final one just to see how they end it. If you ask me they should have just left off with the first one and said hell with the trilogy.

[–] Prince Prospero 20 years ago

Wes Craven isnt even listed in the credits anymore, anyway executive producer is most certainly NOT the most important job on the set, most of the time the exeuctives aren't even on the set at all! Although if you want, you could say its an important job sicne the executive producers are often the people who kick the film into production and give it a chance of ever happening, but in terms of artistic involvement, somebody being an executive producer doesnt mean s*t.

www.timburtoncollective.com

[–] NateF88 20 years ago

I take film classes and I was tought that the executive producer is the most important person on the set. Everybody in the film industry says that, and that's why executive producers names are sometimes included in the titles.

[–] grimacemusically 20 years ago

Not to be mean, but whoever tought you that was probably an executive producer...
Sometimes they actually contribute, but it is mostly about money when you are dealing with these kind of Direct-to-Video flops.

[–] sessa1969 20 years ago

Yeah the Executive Producer is really just an honorary title. Usually it's used to woo an investor.

[–] Orgazmo 20 years ago

When the executive producer's a studio head, then he actually does something, however in most cases, an Executive Producer credit is a payment for the rights to use a certain property of character. For example, in movies featuring The Rock, Vince McMahon is listed as Executive Producer. Now, McMahon doesnt actually DO anything, but the EP credit is payment for the movie being able to bill Johnson as The Rock. Craven's EP credit in this peice of crap was probably just payment for being able to use his Dracula character. Even though Drac is public domain and ANYONE can do a Drac movie, Craven technically came up with the character's continuity in this and 2000. So yeah, he didnt do anything.

Your film teacher is incorrect. I went to school for film, and I'm currently active in the film industry and I can say for a fact that the EP is not the most important person on the set.. in fact, they're not really ever ON set. So yeah, change the "everyone" part in your statement.

[–] sessa1969 20 years ago

Excellent clarification. Thanks bro.