Saturday, May 15, 2021

Waiting for Dracula – review

Directors: Domiziano Arcangeli & Steve Oakley 

 Release date: 2012

Contains spoilers

Part filmed in low-budget filmmaker David DeCoteau’s house (or so it appeared to be), which he himself used as the set for films such as 1313: Boy Crazies and Immortal Kiss: Queen of the Night, this has the distinction of having less story than one of the householder’s films and yet there was an element to this that was both savvy and did bring to mind a later film… I’ll get to that.

One of the directors, Steve Oakley, is apparently involved in reality shows and so the fact that an aspect of that is inserted into the film is not surprising.

Baptiste introduces himself

So the opening shot has no real establishing and we cut in abruptly, as though part way through the film... a woman stands before a man, they are outside (and near a hot tub that we don’t see) and she removes her robe. They laugh, hoping that the new owner lets them use the hot tub like the old one did – he died during sex with her after taking Viagra. A man, Baptiste (Kerr Lordygan), comes over, he isn’t the new owner rather he works for Renfield (Domiziano Arcangeli, Brides of Sodom). He asks if they are there for the vampire Halloween party and tells them he’ll get them goth clothes.

bath scene

After Renfield pulls up to see how things are going we meet a couple of male vampires who are dressed in black and whose purpose in film seems to be to have an in bathroom/in bath sex scene. There is some dialogue suggesting they are 300 years old each and have the same maker. On that scene we can clearly see one of them reflected in a mirror – error or deliberate lore… who knows? We also get a goth girl coming on to Baptiste and he complaining that she is objectifying him. It is a neat gender turnaround but goes nowhere.

Brian Graham as Drack

Elsewhere Renfield (the man with an endless supply of drugs) has rented a space for Drack (Brian Graham). In the scenes around this we get reality TV talking head moments with characters talking straight to camera. Drack explains, in one of these, that Van Helsing (Alexander von Roon) killed most of his clan but he is going to make a new collection of 'vampiress brides' and take LA. They have set up a pay-per-view website and Megan (Manori Chakra) is hunting the new recruits. This side of the film reminded me, in some respects, of Dracula is not Dead and kudos must be given for this film displaying an early savvy insight into tying vampires and digital exploitation together, along with the rudimentary ‘talking head’ moments. However, this film was very limited in what they did with it and had none of the classy photography of the later film.

broadcast turning

The scenes ran a little like this. The first woman Megan brings back is Natasha (Mila Musiyenko), she uses some of Renfield’s drugs, strips and then we see her bound by her wrists and Drack feeds from her and turns her – this is ostensibly live on camera. Megan has gone to find another (and Natasha joins her at the exact location used for their meeting, and used for every encounter) they bring back the next and this time (and each subsequent time) it is naked vampire women feeding from and turning the naked, bound victim. There is no variation or real story element beyond this – though we do hear that the views online are impressively high and people are paying through the nose for the live-feeds.


At the party (alleged party anyway, a sense of a party is never offered) we essentially (after a softcore shot threesome between three vampires) simply get a vampire (or two) meeting a human guest, drugs offered and then a bite. Sometimes there is a reciprocal offer of blood to turn the victim, sometimes not. We also hear that the vampires are waiting for Dracula (hence the name of the film). Van Helsing comes into this late into the film, hiring an assistant, Michelle (Dawna Lee Heising) whose mother was killed by Dracula. We are told the vampires must be staked and then squirted with holy water (from a water gun). The hunters attack the party but we see very little and it is hardly a finale.


So that’s the film – not brilliantly photographed with an excuse for various bite scenes and little story. There was the exploitation of the digital, which was interesting for when it was made, but little else to make this one you’d seek out. That said, there was a sense of fun in some of the scenes, or a sense that the filmmakers and cast were having fun, at the very least. 2.5 out of 10.

The imdb page is here.

On DVD @ Amazon US

On Demand @ Amazon UK

No comments: