Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Nayan Gough A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Boba_Fett1138 The story of Dracula is one of the best horror stories of all time but the story of the historical figure, Vlad the Impaler, on which Dracula is partly based, is at least just as good and interesting. This movie presents itself as the true story of Vlad the Impaler, or Dracula as they say but the movie has neither the quality, story or resources to really be considered to be the definitive story about Vlad the Impaler, or Dracula's origins.But most important thing; it isn't really being historically accurate in the first place. It doesn't do the true story of Vlad much justice and while watching this movie you're being left puzzled as to why he is still considered to be a national hero by the Romanian people. You can blame it on the budget really. Because the movie didn't had lots of money to spend, it sticked more to some of its melodrama and talking moments, while ignoring all of the important battles fought and the monstrosities committed by Vlad the Impaler.The movie seems to be afraid of it that we might start hating on the main characters. It's the reason why it makes Vlad look like a reasonable family man, while he in fact was a cruel, sadistic man, responsible for the death of tens of thousands, also mostly innocents. It might also be because of the miscast Rudolf Martin, who looks far too gentle and sophisticated for the main role of the villain-hero Vlad. He never comes across as a strong, powerful leader, that strikes fear into people's hearts.It's also quite puzzling as to why if this movie wanted to tell the true story of Vlad the Impaler, why does he end up becoming Dracula by the end, while of course in fact the historical person Vlad had nothing to do with the character Dracula. Perhaps they were planning or secretly hoping on doing on sequel, telling the Dracula tale with some of the same actors out of this movie.But there is really more wrong with the story, or rather said the way the story gets told. It's a quite short movie and this can be seen back in its way of storytelling. The movie too often makes sudden jumps, especially toward the end. It's quite ridicules at times, for instance when Vlad bans his wife from his castle. 2 minutes later he is asking her for forgiveness and 5 minutes later again they are living together again happily, like nothing ever happened. Or when Vald gets captured and set free again, in the time-span of maybe just 2 minutes. This approach completely ruins some of the movie its potential good dramatic or powerful moments.However when taking into consideration that this is a low-budget TV production, I have to say that it's really not a bad one. Sure it tells a kind of weak story but the movie at least never becomes a bad or uninteresting one to watch. I have seen far worse, that's for sure!6/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

barnchick831 *May contain spoilers in reference to thematically important quotes*What first caught my eye about this movie was the title: Dark Prince: The "True" Story of Dracula. After watching the film, and doing research on my own, I have found that this was not the historically accurate movie I was anticipating. However, in the respect of creating a movie based on some historical events and linking them to present day folklore about the literary figure, well done. I will admit that if the movie was made to be totally accurate, I probably would not have liked it as much as I did. To comment on the plot line, by making this movie action packed, romantic, and dramatic in illustrating the possible goodness within a man who has been known for terrible deeds, this satisfied many of the characteristics that I like to see in a movie. The casting was also excellent, especially for Vlad, the attractive Rudolf Martin whose looks scream Dracula in this movie as they did in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"; and Lidia, the petite Jane March whose voice and looks expertly display the quiet yet strong religious character. The personalities of Vlad and Lidia perfectly compliment one another to create the drama the two share and show the power of love between them. *I loved the constant reference of walking with each other in the providing a good romantic connection as well.Another merit for the movie was the soundtrack: a well selected arrangement of background music that seemed to fit perfectly whenever it was played. Whether it is the acting, the plot line, or just the general topic of Dracula, I always come back to this movie as being one of my favorites. I would have loved to see it go on for more than 90 minutes, but at face value, a definite must see film for entertainment purposes, which is why it receives a 9 from me. However, do not let the "true" story fool you, for being a biography, this would get a 4 or 5.

wizzard_bane As an avid reader of Romanian history, I held great expectations from this movie. I understood the movie lacked the necessary resources to stage the great battles that took place, but I was still hoping for a fair portray of Vlad and his environment. I was therefore greatly disappointed when both Vlad and one of his closest servants wore skin pants, almost resembling the rock-and-roll days of the 80s. The movie enforces a Gothic impression of Wallachia, following the stereotype created by vampire movies instead of offering a true historical depiction of the country.The battles are embarrassing to watch. In 1467, Mehmed II invaded Wallachia with up to 90,000 men. Vlad possessed over some 22,000 men, while 7,000 were sent to defend Chilia against his cousin, Stephen, who ruled Moldavia. In the movie, the battle is presented with the Ottomans skirmishing the army of what someone would believe to be Van Halen. Apart from the ahistorical depiction of the costumes, Hollywood added things that have no bearing to history. Vlad's conflict with the Orthodox priests is not documented, nor is it documented that he was to be killed by a priest when he was an infant. Vlad's brother, Radu the Handsome, is more accurately portrayed, but the two never fought a duel. The presence of other historical characters which had great influence on the development of Vlad's reign, are absent.One could go on in an endless circle on why this movie is poor, ahistorical, and anachronistic; but it wouldn't be worth it. This is just a poor B-movie that failed in everything it set out to do.

aragorn_the_real_ranger OMG it was one of the best movies I have seen. Well Pirates of the Caribbean is first then Dark Prince The True Story of Dracula is the second. I loved it. Rudolf Martin was great for the part. He show anger and love and hate very well. anyway I thought Dracula was known as a vampire but when i saw this movie it changed i don't know if this is the absolute true story but it was still a very good movie. I hope that i get to see it again i just saw it on TV today and i thought it was very good I'm also the type of person to believe in that kind of stuff i like myths and true stories and vampires and people who cant die i dig that kind of stuff. i guess I'm kinda crazy but over all I LOVED IT.