Argento, Dracula, 3-D

Updated on May 27, 2010 By Ken Begg 17 Comments

Per Variety: “Italy is jumping on the 3-D bandwagon…[Dario] Argento is penning the script for a 3D adaptation of Bram Stoker’s Dracula to be shot in English.” The film is being pre-sold now by producer Roberto Di Girolamo, who notes, “Of course there have been dozens of Draculas done before, but Dario is really excited about doing one in 3D and putting the Argento stamp on it.”

Well, it’s got to be better than Coppola’s movie.

Pin It



Related Posts

  • Rock Baker

    Hmmm, a 3D Dracula movie. I ALMOST want to get excited.

    By the way, this latest 3D craze, anyone think it’ll gain more ground this time? Or will 3D be out of fasion again in a year or two? (I lean towards the ‘it won’t last this time either’ camp)

  • Ericb

    Is Dracula really good 3-D material? I would think it more atmospheric than kinetic hanse not really suited to 3-D pyrotechnics.

  • Rock Baker

    Well, Imagine the scene in Dracula’s crypt from the 31 film, or the castle interiors from Horror of Dracula, (or all of Brides of Dracula) with a deepness too them. Shadows way off in the back, cobwebbed arches in the FG, that sort of thing. 3D works well when used subtle (I think the best 3D effect in Creature From the Black Lagoon is watching the trees go by behind the Rita when the characters are on deck) and gothic horror settings with their graveyards and foggy woods are perfect for 3D.

    Granted, I don’t expect ‘subtle’ to be a word in a producer’s vocabulary. The idea of a 3D Dracula movie is neat-o, but I’m not holding my breath that they’d actually effectivley follow through with it.

  • P Stroud

    Er, um, Argento, eh? Not exactly confidence inspiring. Anyone want to guess who the lead female vampire will be?

  • Judging by how god-awful his Phantom Of The Opera, Giallo and Mother Of Tears were, I’m going to guess that we’ll all be wishing for Keanu Reeves about 15 minutes in. I hope not, but I have no optimism for this one.

  • I think 3D will last pretty well this time, given how much money they’re investing in it. However, two things: They won’t be able to charge like double ticket prices forever, so if that’s their scheme, they need to work on it. Second, 3D will be immensely helped if they can figure out a system that doesn’t require glasses. (Assuming that’s possible.)

  • Pip

    I put Coppola’s vampire movie in with the 5th Element – a movie worth watching for the costumes.

  • I hope it’s a deliciously bad movie. If not, and they play it straight, I really won’t be thrilled. Dracula and vampires in general are being taken much too seriously at the moment. Time for a grand parody, whether it be by intention or fate!

  • BeckoningChasm

    3D will be immensely helped if they can figure out a system that doesn’t require glasses. (Assuming that’s possible.)

    Maybe they could have a sort of stage, and they might have actual people on it reading the lines…that would be pretty convincing 3D.

    ;)

    Actually, Stan Brakhage used to project some of his experimental films on steam. I doubt that’s really practical on a large scale, though.

  • BillyBobCraven

    Well, it’s got to be better than Coppola’s movie

    Got to be? Yeah and I used to hear Obama’s GOT TO BE BETTER THAN BUSH. And you saw what happened there. Coppola’s version was bad but it wasn’t the worst version ever made.
    And actually, you can make a 3D film of anything, Ericb. As long as you throw stuff at the camera you could make a 3D version of Kramer Vs Kramer.
    I mean, bats flying toward the camera, vampires lunging at the camera with fangs bared, hands reaching out from coffins, etc. Look at JAWS 3D. They actually had frogs leaping toward the camera. Wish they had had Bess Armstrong shove her wetsuit covered butt towards the camera. Would have made the film a lot more watchable.

  • Marsden

    Ken said: Second, 3D will be immensely helped if they can figure out a system that doesn’t require glasses. (Assuming that’s possible.)”

    What if they could have another screen right in front of the first that does what the glasses would, then the whole effect would be in place without the lenses on each persons eyes the other screen would be the “lens”

    Maybe Sandy can patent this and make it happen.

  • John Nowak

    >What if they could have another screen right in front of the first that does what the glasses would, then the whole effect would be in place without the lenses on each persons eyes the other screen would be the “lens”

    Most 3-D systems (aside from holograms) work by showing one image to your left eye and a different image to your right eye (at this point someone will mention other systems that produce three-d images… still, I’m talking about movies). The two lenses in the glasses are different to block out one image or the other, so you can’t use a single screen to take the place of the glasses.

    I’m inclined to think it’s a fad, for the third time. The problem is that most of what we see beyons a few meters isn’t actually a three-d image; beyond that range we use object size to judge distance.

    Color and sound lasted because we actually perceive color and sound. Aside from close-ups, we don’t actually see 3-D.

  • Dario Argento is probably my favorite living director, and he directed or produced several (well, two) of my top 20 favorite movies of all time.

    That said, most of his best scripts were also worked on by other people, such as Dario Nicolodi.

    Yes his Phantom of the Opera was pathetic, and his misses have seemed to increase in number and depth with the years, but he also directed Jenifer in 2005, which is by far the creepiest and most effective Masters of Horror film, and in 2001 he came out with Nonhosonno which I think is a first-rate giallo. So he still has what it takes on some level – he just doesn’t show it as often.

    Even The Card Player, which is overall weak, had some good moments. I guess my point is that Argento hasn’t completely lost it after the manner of John Carpenter, who clearly has been replaced by a pod person.

  • Petoht

    3D Dracula?!

    Want some… paaaaaaaaaaaaaancakes?

  • Plissken79

    3-D seems to be everywhere these days, although I have to say Up in 3-D was fun.

    Speaking of 3-D, here is a great review of Jaws 3-D by the Nostalgia Critic:

    http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nostalgia-critic/22479-jaws-3d

    I am a bit surprised he never mentioned one of the best untentionally hilarious moments in the film, Dennis Quaid’s brief hijacking of a golf cart

  • The Rev. D.D.

    Coraline, I felt, really worked to make the 3-D a part of the movie; not just a gimmick, but something to give it more depth and visual impact. If more movies use it like that, it could indeed be more than a fad. (I did enjoy it in Up, as well.)

    Although I doubt most filmmakers these days would take the time to do that extra work.

  • GalaxyJane

    Oof, thanks for breaking my brain this morning, Ken.