Thehibikiew Not even bad in a good way

BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Beulah Bram A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Cineanalyst Before Mel Brooks took on "Dracula," the story had already been parodied in "Love at First Bite" (1979) with George Hamilton, and earlier Roman Polanski lampooned Hammer's Dracula series with "Dance of the Vampires" (1967), re-titled "The Fearless Vampire Killers" in the U.S., as well as pornographic parodies, and other comedic takes from "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" (1958) to Andy Warhol's "Blood for Dracula" (1974). "Dracula: Dead and Loving It" doesn't fare well by comparison, nor does it against earlier Brooks films, including "Young Frankenstein" (1974).Like "Young Frankenstein," this spoof mostly imitates the story of a classic Universal monster movie. For the former, it was the first three Frankenstein films mainly; here, it's the 1931 Bela Lugosi version of "Dracula." Although it does get off a couple good digs at Francis Ford Coppola's 1992 version--making fun of the wig and the shadow with a mind of its own. And, if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, the ultimate dig to the 1992 movie is that the 1931 classic is mostly imitated instead. Unlike "Young Frankenstein," which was made in black and white, this one doesn't attempt a semblance of the original film's style, and, to be fair, the Frankenstein films were better looking than the stagy early-talkie "Dracula."Perhaps, most lacking in this outing is Gene Wilder, who starred in and co-wrote "Young Frankenstein." Also missing are some of the other members of the old troupe of Brooks regulars. Here, Leslie Nielsen does a faux Lugosi accent, but he mostly does his usual shtick. Peter MacNicol, as Renfield, is an amusing turn on Dwight Frye's original performance, though. Regardless, a lot of the jokes are flat and not too clever (the running gag of Seward prescribing enemas, for instance). The George Hamilton spoof had many misses, too, but it also kept the jokes coming regardless. "Dead and Loving It," however, has some stretches without any attempts at humor. The climactic fight with Dracula, for example, is dramatic for a while before Jonathan resorts to Three Stooges type violence. Finally, there's no good joke twist to the ending as there was in "Young Frankenstein," let alone the self-reflexive deconstruction at the end of "Blazing Saddles" (1974); instead, they borrow the death by sunlight part from "Nosferatu" (1922), which was neither in Bram Stoker's novel or the 1931 film, and there's nothing too funny about it.(Mirror Note: The mirror reveal in the ballroom sequence is the reverse of that in "Dance of the Vampires," which was funnier because, contrary to usual expectations, it exposed the humans' reflections rather than the vampires' lack of them.)

dglink Mel Brooks's masterwork, "Young Frankenstein," paid respectful homage to the original Universal Frankenstein classics and, with an inspired cast of comedians and a hilarious script, that classic is worthy of repeated viewing. Evidently, Brooks hoped he could work the same magic with the Dracula films, but his "Dracula, Dead and Loving It" fails to reach the same heights of comedy as his earlier film. Unfortunately, Brooks got off to a bad start by shooting his Dracula homage in color; "Young Frankenstein" was shot in glorious black and white and evoked the 1930's studio look of the original films. While his Dracula take-off resembles the rich color and production design of the British Hammer horror films, Brooks might have been better to emulate the eerie shadowy atmosphere of the Bela Lugosi classic. Brooks may also have turned to the Francis Ford Coppola "Dracula" for inspiration, because the Count's hairstyle more than resembles Gary Oldman's in that film.The Brooks film does have some amusing moments, and follows the familiar Dracula storyline from Transylvania to London. While a surprising choice for the role, Leslie Nielsen is always fun to watch as the count, who never drinks...wine; Nielsen is especially funny when he is the talking head on a flying bat. As Renfield, Peter MacNicol does a good Dwight Frye imitation, and his insect snacking is a particular highlight. Mel Brooks himself plays Professor Van Helsing as, well, Mel Brooks, but Harvey Korman is more restrained than usual as Dr Seward, and Steven Weber is no comic. The film desperately needs a Madeline Kahn or a Marty Feldman to spark the lines and soar like a bat. Although failing to produce a second comedy-horror masterpiece, Brooks made a passably entertaining movie. While viewers may not burst into laughter, many will smile from time to time at familiar Brooks routines and generally have a good time.

jacobjohntaylor1 This is close enough to the book Dracula by Bram Stoker that ti basically is a remake. But it is a comedy. It one of the funniest movies ever made. See this movie. It is a great movie. Leslie Nielsen and Peter MacNicol are very funny in this movie. This movie has a great story line. It also has great acting. Mel Brooks is also very funny in this movie. I do not find a lot of comedy movie to be very funny. I find a lot of the time they are just nobrainers. But this one is very witty. This very close to the 1931 movie. Which is why it is one of the best satires very made. I do like the 1992 version of Dracula a little more. Just because I like really scary movie. But still this is a great comedy.

willcundallreview Rating-3/10Dracula: Dead and Loving is a Mel Brooks comedy about well, yeah you guessed it, Dracula. Leslie Nielsen is our blood sucking main man and he dons his best Bela Lugosi cape and accent to boot to create a, memorable performance. Brooks uses his comedic interests well in picking the theme but not in styling the substance, and although I feel many hate this more than I do, I still thought it was pretty bad too. Now don't expect massively over the top jokes, you know the kind where Dracula turns into a bat and hits a window(although that does happen). Brooks seems to create humour which looks promising, but then waters it down for some reason, so that it doesn't fit. Now I'm not saying this isn't funny at it's certain moments, I even dare say I slightly enjoyed this movie(to say it is very poor), the movie has it's laughs and some well timed jokes not to mention crazy characters too.You might think I'd say the funny guy is Nielsen here but in truth my praise if you can call it that is all to Peter MacNicol who as Renfield is hilarious, the top person and thing about this movie. I'm not kidding when I say that Renfield is probably the reason this movie is a whole rating higher, I mean he also works well with Nielsen, the jokes run well between them and even those who are hard pressed to laugh will still I feel laugh maybe a little at MacNicol.Having said all that previously, I do however find this lazy writing and although I felt Brooks directs OK, his skill with the words is not his strongest suit in this case. In the case of the sets, you will only find horrible Hollywood staging that OK OK maybe has something to do with the comedy of It all, still didn't make me laugh. There's actually very little to say about this, in fact I think anyone who can write an essay about this is a hero, it has so little depth to it just becomes another silly joke to be tossed under the pile of films you will only watch once. Now who could I recommend this too?, ah yes those who like silly humour of course. Now Nielsen fans I hate to say that this isn't a patch on Naked Gun or Airplane but you do see some jokes along those kind of slapstick type humour lines. I think it is funny as mentioned, for me it starts to get more funny a little too late but nevertheless is still lazy work and probably too silly most of the time to create a reasonable film.Overall a Mel Brooks comedy that fails to shine, you know the type of movie that never delivers on it's promise of being hilarious, but can have it's moments in the spotlight. Watch out for Renshaw played by Peter MacNicol and a certain scenes with bugs is for me the top scene of this entire thing, in fact you could just cut all the parts out that make you laugh and that would be the best way to watch this movie.