brandonhelee Not too many films can claim themselves to be sequels but in reality they are Director's Cut Remakes of the film they are a sequel to well that's the case for Dracula II:Ascension.How I got around to seeing and ultimately appreciating the whole D2k trilogy was back in December 2011 I was an episode of "Good Bad Flicks" of which he was reviewing Dracula 2000 I got very interested in seeing it than I got the pleasure of coming across a four film Blu-ray pack that features the whole trilogy+They.My overall thought's on Dracula 2000 is that it rocked I enjoyed it for being a close re- vamp(pun intended) of the classic Dracula tale having being taken place in modern times,Dracula himself being attached spirituality to Mary through Blood,Judas Iscariot & etc, so many interesting and cleaver ideas being put into that film. But Dracula 2000 was an altered version of what Patrick Lussier wanted and he was forced by The Weinsteins to Hip it Up what he wanted has something like Dracula II:Ascension of which is why they both have a similar plot.Dracula II:Ascension isn't as connected to the Dracula mythos as Dracula 2000 and feels more like a vampire tale than a Dracula tale.Dracula II:Ascension starts out with a bang having the eerie atmosphere a shadowy figure slowly approaching a dismissal in distress than bam you realize that she is a vampire and has her friend come out and help her attack shadowy figure than he cuts their heads off in a very badass fashion before he than does his morning purge.I love the way this opens it's well done but not as impressive as the beginning of Dracula 2000.The film goes on to introduce us to the main characters of the film of which are still fun characters to watch but they seem more like average victims of a slasher film than the emotionally impactful characters of Part 1.The characters all are likable and have stand out traits about them Kenny is a goof-ball,Tanya reminds me a lot of Lucy(Vitamin C) in Part 1,Lowell is a wise old man, & lastly Elizabeth is a good girlfriend to Lowell. We learn that the events of this film took shortly after the events of D2k of which I like that and it set ups Dracula's corpses being in a morgue where our Elizabeth a morgue attendant and a new character Luke is introduced.They received a phone call from a potential investor for the body of Dracula and this is pretty much where the remake stuff kicks in with them stealing the corpses of Dracula from the morgue instead of Stealing it from a old antics dealer by a group of criminals as seen in Part 1 now we have a group of college med students who are misbehaving to have an scientific experiment on the body. They are following the blood transfusion resurrection that was apart of the mythology behind Part 1 and I love that they made an effort to have the New Orleans mardi gras being present in this film. Here's is when the first glaring problem comes to mind what about the much more intimate characters of Mary Van Helsing & Simon of which we have a lot more emotionally investment in what happened to them I know in the director's commentary he states they were duped by the body misplacement at the morgue but I feel as if that's not fair because Dracula having such a connection Mary in Part 1 but I think I can counteract that by him saying I release you breaking all ties to Dracula but I still think that's a bit off. Back to Dracula II:Ascension the characters take the body of Dracula to an abandon public pool for further testing which is something I like about this film is the difference between Dracula 2000 being a more spirituality religious based take on the story of Dracula while Dracula II:Ascension is a more atheistic science based take on the Dracula mythos I love the strike difference between those in contrast. Father Uffizi comes in every so often in the story so you can feel his presences is still their.The film goes on to have Kenny inject himself with Dracula's blood only to lead to Father Uffizi finding out where Dracula and the gang are.While that's going on we are given the information that Lowell & Eric have played everyone and we're just using them to get Lowell vampriized.After that we get a badass fight between Dracula and Uffzi.Dracula II:Ascension is definitely an inferior piece of work than Dracula 2000 but it still is pretty good on it's on.I enjoyed it being different and going into it's own direction despite me feeling unsatisfied by the lack of any mention of Mary Van Helsing and Simion.Still Dracula II is a good movie filled with a lot of neat twist and turns.The atmosphere is awesome in this film.I also enjoy Dracula III:Legacy but I will not be reviewing that as the next review I'll be doing is for Christmas Vaction.I'd recommend Dracula II:Ascension to people who haven't seen Dracula 2000.

Rainey Dawn There are three reasons to watch this film:1. It's a Dracula/Vampire Film. 2. Jason Scott Lee is in it. 3. Roy Scheider is in it. I actually liked this movie better than the first one (Dracula 2000). I loved to watch Jason Scott Lee as Father Uffizi -- he reminded me of Van Helsing mixed with Bruce Lee. That provided most of the entertainment for me. I loved Roy Scheider since I was a young girl in the 70s - Jaws! Roy did a good acting job as Cardinal Siqueros although his part was a bit smaller than I would have liked. No, it's not the greatest Dracula film but it is quite entertaining to watch! 6/10

lastliberal Featuring Diane Neal (A.D.A. Casey Novak from "Law & order: Special victims Unit"), this straight to DVD movie has some great special effects, brilliant cinematography, and some true jump-outta-your-skin moments.We jump from an exciting opening scene where Father Uffizi (Jason Scott Lee) beheads a couple of luscious vampires to New Orleans where medical students discover a vampire (Stephen Billington) and bring him back to life, costing the life of Playmate of the Year Brande Roderick. What a shame.This is all about getting Dracula's blood to heal a scientist, Lowell (Craig Sheffer). They need to work fast as the self-flagellating Father Uffizi is on their tail.This was one of Roy Scheider's last films. He only has a cameo, but it is still good to see him.This would have been a much better movie had there been some gratuitous nudity. There were certainly enough times that it would have been appropriate.There was some really good stuff at the end, but I'll leave that for you to see.

icfarm I remember hearing at the end of the commentary for "Dracula 2000" that there would likely be another, and I looked forward to seeing it. While this one was not quite a match for the first (it didn't have GERRY), I enjoyed it.I was somewhat disappointed upon realizing that Mr. Butler wouldn't be reprising his role, but have to say that Stephen Billington did a fine job. I found him to be a talented actor with a definite "sex appeal" factor. He also has to spend a good part of the film looking, shall we say, "less than his best" but his performance as Drac still comes through - and you still believe his seduction of Lizzie. When they got to the kissing-on-a-bed scene almost at the end of the movie, I thought, "Finally"! Anyway, this, like the first, has no pretensions of being a classic or Oscar winner; it's one to watch for love of the genre (and love of vamps, male or female, take your pick). Get both and have yourself a Halloween night (or any other night of the year) Drac-a-thon.