GL84 Hiding out in the countryside, the notorious outlaw couple trying to find a safe space to wait for a new score end up confronting a mad doctor and his assistant in the middle of experimenting on bodies for a captive vampire and must find a way to stop their deadly plans.This was quite an enjoyable enough effort. One of the better aspects of this one is the fact that it manages to really play up it's silly and somewhat anachronistic storyline to the fullest for an enjoyable time. The idea of the famous duo coming upon a mad scientist in the middle of the countryside is a rather goofy premise already before bringing along all the different experiments and the outcome of their work makes this one even more crazy in how they get together. There's a lot of fun in how the two sides mesh, with the gangster story coming into play showing their struggles between being on the road and the stress of outlaw life which shows up in how they interact during their time in the farmhouse hiding out before their initial interaction. That coincides with the oddness shown in the laboratory with the experiments being conducted by the mysterious doctor who has a quirky habit of wearing the towel over his head with the single eye-hole or his dim-witted assistant who runs around with a goofy disposition conducting radio plays with dolls which adds a nice bit of intentional comedy during the proceeds. Once the film gets going into the final half, that's where it really gets going with some fun as it manages to offer some enjoyable elements from this setup. Starting with the dinner party and carrying over into the horde of vampires attacking in the various aspects of the house, it ends up leading to the better encounters where the creatures are involved in the battles which is rather enjoyable. These here hold it up over it's few minor problems. Among the few flaws here is the fact that there's not a whole lot of actual vampire confrontations between them which is somewhat disappointing. Rather than actually engage in a series of back-and-forth encounters between gangsters and vampires, this one tends to focus on them as two separate storylines featuring the vampire actions and then the gangster family dealing with their own issues which aren't all that well-defined in dealing with the potential of having them mixed together for the whole time. They don't even get together until the final minutes of the film and it really seems as though there are two separate films cut together into being one film yet have nothing in common with each other because they're so differently matched for so long. There's also the film's rather obvious inability to hide it's low-budget limitations, going from the cheap and flimsy setups to the low-budget tone and feel that really highlights those issues. These here are what hide this one the most.Rated Unrated/R: Graphic Language, Brief Full Nudity and mild drug use.

jacobjohntaylor1 How did this get a 4.9. There have been a lot of very great Dracula movies. And this is not one of them. This is one Dracula sequel you need to skip. The acting is awful. The story line is awful. The ending is awful. I think it is supposed to be funny but it is not. And if it is trying to be scary. It is not scary. Do not waste your money. And do not waste your time. Do not see this movie. I do not knew why it got a 4.9. It is just an awful awful movie. See Dracula vs Frankenstein. That is one of the great Dracula sequels and it is very underrated. And this is just overrated. I do not Knew why people like this awful horror movie. Dracula (March 1931) is a great movie. This movie has an awful ending. Do not see this movie. You have been warned.

Irishchatter I have a very keen interest on the real killers Bonnie & Clyde plus Vlad the Impaler AKA Dracula. However I thought this film didn't cover much of the two! It really didn't match them up very well. Tiffany Shepis and Trent Haaga were just excellent at playing their roles as Bonnie & Clyde. They really look like the real ones but only more modern. I suppose it was back in 2008 so obviously they looked like they were at this present! I was really disappointed how Dracula came on the scene late. He didn't really appear much. Honestly why the hell did they add Annabelle as an Igor like type! She just was pointless to be in the film to be honest. It would've been better if she hadn't existed in the first place. It seem like the design crew just didn't bother to think on how it would turn out. Believe me, it turned out wrong. I found her to be annoying then funny....Some of the scenes but the rest was OK. I wouldn't call it great either!

twilliams76 My criticism of Bonnie and Clyde vs. Dracula might be a tad-bit unfair as one probably isn't supposed to complain much about a movie called Bonnie and Clyde vs. Dracula.Going into it, I knew it was a D-List B-Movie with a preposterous premise ... and it is. The film has "decent" acting from some no-name-never-will-be-a-name actors who do the most with their cheesy dialogue and the grotesque situations in which they find themselves. Simply because someone believed a confrontation between the notorious gangster-duo and Dracula would make for an interesting movie, Bonnie and Clyde vs. Dracula was made.It doesn't really matter how Bonnie and Clyde end up in the same house as Dracula (a mad doctor with a burlap sack over his head -- Dr. Loveless -- is harboring the bloodsucker in his basement ... yep, hahaha, sure thing!); all that does matter is that the two sides confront each other ... and nobody else (the supporting players) really stand a chance.This is an "ignorance-is-bliss" kind of a film ... the audience is simply supposed to enjoy the stupidity on screen. I was able to ... some.What bothered me was that the remarkably bad screenwriter apparently knew next-to-nothing of Ms. Parker and Mr. Barrow. They are pretty-much Bonnie and Clyde in name ONLY as their behavior, action and motivation in THIS film are nothing-at-all like they were in real life (it could have been worse, though, as Hilary Duff doesn't play THIS film's Bonnie). I am sure I shouldn't have cared; and I only did a little bit ... because, seriously, get something right! (I'm not asking for 100% historical accuracy in ANY film; but I'd have accepted a mere 05% here) It can be difficult to blend real-life characters with fiction in something like this. I read and accepted the recent Pride & Prejudice and Zombies lately and did NOT mind Lizzie Bennett and her sisters being ninja-trained warriors (as they are fiction-upon-fiction); but having Bonnie Parker go medieval with a razor blade (before they even encounter Fangs McGhee) was just too much (as it is still debated whether or not the REAL Bonnie Parker ever pulled a trigger).The movie is supposed to be a brainless/thoughtless, fun-time. For this to happen the movie should be watched with one's brain turned completely off as ANY kind of thinking will mar the film. How is that possible?!? Actually ... I don't know as I haven't turned my brain back on yet.