New Dracula, a chick?
Not to sound sexist or anything like that, but Dracula is a guy. Historically he's a guy. From the books and plays, he's a guy. I don't think this is a wise idea to have a woman play Dracula. Dracula maybe smart like a woman, could make a convincing lesbian, but biologically it doesn't work.
"All you need is love. John Lennon, shot in the back, very sad."
I think this might be a *gasp* lesbian erotic film. I just clicked on all of their names and uh...theyare all females and most of them were in sex films i think, but i'm not to sure since i don't watch porno.
shareI'm not sure about the rest of the listed cast, but I know Darian Caine and Misty Mundae are B-movie/softcore actresses. I think this is intended as another one of those movies like Play-Mate of the Apes or Lord of the G-String. They're softcore, but also play out like Scary Movie-type spoofs. With that in mind, don't take the concept at all seriously.
----
Formless, faithless, and free.
Don't forget GLADIATOR EROTICUS!
BAD KITTY...
>^..^< MEOW
Didn't they already do this with Vampire Vixens?
"I've lost my sexy phlegm!"
Vampire Vixens was alot more erotic and much better grtil on girl action.
What I want to know is why was the the chick that apparently runs the pharmaceutical being called Jonathan (real name Julian?) I thought at first the girl was so crazy that she thought it was a man and she thought she had a baby up in the crib, but what was with her reaction when she oulled her shirt open. Yeah, they're breasts, that's what women have? Her and her sister are nuts because they call two different people Jonathan? That made no sense at all. I did like the one chick that the had huge, pierced nipples - nice. Oh yeah, this movie has one of the most retarded, plotles ending ever. But it had nudity, so who cares. lol
____________________________________
If you watch it, they'll make a sequel to ruin it.
They also did Satan's School for Lust
I don't watch too many soft-core movies, but I've seen a couple of their films
Dracula has had many different strange and unusual incarnations (Dracula 3000, Blacula, Nosferatu), none of which is based strictly on the real character of Vlad the Impailer. So why not a "chick" playing Dracula? In my opinion, you have to keep re-inventing the character to keep people interested. Just compare the 1931 version to the 1992 version.
Biologically it doesn't work? What does that mean? How can you say something like that and not back it up?
Actually Blacula was a Black Prince who was bitten and turned into vampire by the Count with the curious taste, who mockingly dubbed him Blacula...
Plus Dracula in Stoker's novel isn't really based on Vlad Tepes III The Impaler) he had already worked out much of the story and came across a picture and story of the Walachian prince, and basically used him as a kind of window dressing.
But yes I totally agree with you what is the big deal about making Dracula a female? Especially when this movie is a softcore b-movie!
Well it maybe because the title of Dracula means 'Son of The Dragon' (Dracul, meaning The Dragon)....
I haven't seen this by the way. I'm not sure if I wish to.
"The face of evil is ugly to look upon. And as the pleasures increase, the face becomes uglier."
[deleted]
[deleted]