Well I got to see this flick on Thursday and I must say it wasn't great or even good for that matter, but it wasn't all that horrible and bad either. It's rather a missed oportunity, leaving us with a rather mediocre film that has its ups and downs.
First the strong points:
Luke Evans delivers a great performance with what he is given. The ambiguity of his character shines through completely. We are faced with a very human Vlad, even once he goes vampire.
Spoiler
Yes, there is a vampire "form"... kinda, unfortunately the effects don't look any good and the CGI is just too outdated (more on that later)
Also all the rest of the cast bring a commendable game to the table. Sarah Gadon is effective and Charles Dance is... well he's Charles Dance, however short he's in the movie.
This ties in with another positive aspect: The relationships between the character's do get you engaged quite a bit. It is the relationship between Vlad and his family/his people that really is emphasised in this movie. There is one scene in particular that sticks out, being the most dramatic and therefore best sequence in the film:
Spoiler
Vlad is about to be put on fire by his own people, before he breaks free.
.
Cinematography, camerawork and Shots were really cool. It is exactly the kind of Transilvania that I had imagined in it's prime. The tone/feel of the movie takes you over. This is where I would give this film the most credits: There's a very very definitive overall tone and that is kept througout the entire movie. Considering that this is Gary Shore's Hollywood debut, that is actually quite an acheivement for him.
Here to the weak points:
The script might be effective and give you enough time to settle with the characters, but the plot holes are the size of a hangar once Vlad gets his nocturnal abilities. After 30 mins it just derails into a mess.
Ufff and the dialogue is abysmal at times, you'll be wishing for Star Wars Episode II instead, that's how bad it gets.
The CGI is, well how should I put it... it's the CGI you see in modern video-games. Very outdated for movie standards. It is not essentially the visuals, it's the animation that really lacks. From the "Vladsformation to Bats" to the "giant fist of bats" (which is btw the so called money-shot of the movie), it all looks so quirky and mirky. You'll think you're playing castlevania or watching a Paul W.S. Anderson movie, none of which is a compliment for a hollywood motion picture.
Soundtrack was alright, but Ramin Djawadi is one of my favourite up-and coming composers, so it left me a bit underwhelmed.
The worst part of the movie is the ending though. I'm not gonna spoil it, but it's so out of place, so different from the rest of the movie. It just falls flat, not achieving what it the writers probably set out to do.
Well there you have it, a rather mediocre and therefore disappointing version of Dracula. However I must say that the bashing this movie is getting from the american/english critics is way to harsh and unjustified (especially when they comment on the acting).
The 32 % on RT don't fit with my impression. Most of those reviewers expected a horror movie that sends shivers down your spine. They're missing the point that this film is about the story of Vlad, not the story of Dracula. It is not meant to be full of gore (there's some of it), it is to be seen as an Epic. I'd give this movie 50 %. It did certain things right, but they stand in the shadow of what went wrong. Even as an epic, it doesn't do the trick.
Luke Evans, even though he did great in this movie, will not break through with this movie into the leagues of superhero-actors. I highly doubt the crow will do that for him as well. Let's hope for the Hobbit.