Son of Darkness: To Die For II

1991
3.8| 1h35m| en
Details

Vampires come to town. Who's a vampire? Who's not? Ask our main character, who is suspicious, and our main character's brother, who gets seduced by one.

Director

Producted By

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Perry Kate Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!
Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.
Catangro After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.
Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.
jacobjohntaylor1 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.
minamurray 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.
Paul Andrews Son of Darkness: To Die for II tells the tale of of a 500 odd year old Vampire named Vlad Tepish who now goes by the name of Max Schreck (Michael Praed) & works as a doctor in a Californian hospital, apparently he is the guy whom Bram Stoker based the character of Dracula upon all those years ago... Local small town resident Nina (Rosalind Allen) takes her young baby son Tyler (Devin Sims) to the hospital because she feels something is wrong with him. Doctor Schreck takes a look at the little fella, pops out the room with him for a few minutes, comes back & gives Tyler back to his Mother as good as new. However Nina starts to become suspicious when Tyler sleeps during the day & only wakes at night, her Brother Danny (Jay Underwood) begins to undergo a sinister change as he starts to go out with a Vampire named Cellia (Amanda Wyss) & a man named Martin (Scott Jacoby) contacts her & says that Max is a Vampire & to be wary of him. Meanwhile violence breaks out because there is a power struggle in the Vampire hierarchy as Max's Brother Tom (Steve Bond) dislikes the idea that all Vampires should drink blood from blood banks in hospitals, no Tom likes the hunt & the kill of human prey too much...Directed by David Price this is the sequel to To Die For (1989) which I must admit to having not seen so I can't compare the two or how much this sequel follows on from the original. The script by Leslie King moves along at a reasonable pace, just about enough happened to stop me from getting too bored. You know I think I was put at a bit of a disadvantage by not having seen the original, certain scenes & snippets of dialogue seemed to refer to things that weren't specifically in this so I'd imagine that a few ideas & plot threads were carried over like Martin & his friend Jane (Remy O'Neill) who appear in the credit listings for the original & aren't really introduced or fleshed out that well, almost as if you should know everything about them already. At certain times it felt like I was watching an episode of a soap opera having missed the previous one & not quite getting it. Anyway, I thought it was an OK Vampire film, nothing spectacular but it passed the time harmlessly enough & there are a few decent ideas here like the Vampire working as a Doctor trying to save lives & trying to get his kind to drink from the blood bank in his hospital.Director Price does an OK job, it has a decent atmosphere & is competent. The sequence in which Tom & Cellia attack the couple in their home & kill them is nicely done & pretty unsettling. The blatant Nosferatu (1922) homage of calling it's main Vampire character Max Schreck is as self referential as it gets, right? There isn't much gore, a few bites, a few blood stained crime scenes, someone has their head chopped off with a chainsaw (it sounds better than it is), a gory hospital patient wound, death by sunlight & a couple of stakings.Technically Son of Darkness: To Die for II is OK, it's not brilliant & it ain't going to win any awards but it's competent if nothing else. The special effects are good but they could have done with a bit more blood to make it all a bit juicier. The acting was alright & Wyss makes for quite a sexy Vampire.Son of Darkness: To Die for II is an OK watch if your desperate & there's nothing else on, you could do better for sure but at the same time you could do a lot worse, the decision is yours...
iamkassandre This movie has been one of my favorite vampire movies since 1991. It's got hot vampires, twists and a love story that's doomed, of course, what more could you want from a vampire flick??? A vampire with a heart that holds humanity dear to his heart, what woman wouldn't want this vampire??? ENJOY!!!!