Renfield (1 Viewer)

[Malcolm R]

I guess you could argue ‘Dracula’s Daughter’ is a sequel because the opening scene is the aftermath of the Tod Browning movie, but Bela Lugosi’s not in it, ....

Yeah, because Lugosi's Dracula is dead at the end of the 1931 film (and most every Dracula film ever). If they're intending this as a sequel, they'll have to come up with a Hammer-style way to resurrect Dracula.

I still think this is gonna bomb HARD. I know my interest went from an initial "must see" when the project was announced, to "maybe" with the casting of Cage, then "hard pass" once I saw the first ridiculous trailer.

 

[TravisR]

I still think this is gonna bomb HARD.

The movie may be good (though the marketing isn't doing it any favors) but I think the best case financial scenario for it is that people see the movie ironically so they can laugh at Nicolas Cage. And even the number of people willing to spend $13 on a ticket to do that seems limited.

 

[Alex...]

 

[Alex...]

86% on RT

 

[Alex...]

Currently @ 95% on RT

 

[benbess]

Very mixed review from the insightful Owen Gleiberman of Variety:

‘Renfield’ Review: Nicolas Cage Is a Stylishly Overwrought Dracula, But This Ultraviolent Vampire Action Movie is Mostly a Flip Grab Bag

“Renfield” has no mystery, no poetry, no grandeur. It’s a scattershot lark jam-packed with “ideas,” none of which totally take hold.

variety.com

 

[Tino]

Very mixed review from the insightful Owen Gleiberman of Variety:

https://variety.com/2023/film/reviews/renfield-review-nicolas-cage-nicholas-hoult-awkwafina-dra

I used to like OG but don't agree with his opinions much lately.
My brother saw Renfield in LA and said it was great. I'll be seeing it Friday.

 

[benbess]

I used to like OG but don't agree with his opinions much lately.
My brother saw Renfield in LA and said it was great. I'll be seeing it Friday.

I usually agree with OG's take on a film, and even when I don't his reviews enrich my viewing of it. The review above isn't completely negative, and includes these two paragraphs:

"...It it fun to see Nicolas Cage go full vampire for the first time since “Vampire’s Kiss,” the low-budget 1988 indie in which he essentially launched himself as the Method maniac of operatic kitsch kabuki overacting? Yes, it is. In “Vampire’s Kiss,” Cage played a fusty New York literary agent who thought he was a vampire (the movie, in its maladroit shoestring way, anticipated the premise of “American Psycho”), but in “Renfield” he’s the full grand article: Dracula himself, with pasty mottled skin and hair slicked back and a scary row of teeth, every one of them a gleaming pointed fang. The makeup and costumes, like Dracula’s black velvet smoking jacket with the dark glitter lapels, liberate Cage to give an outlandish but layered performance, one that draws on the entire hallowed history of big-screen Draculas.

There’s a base layer of Bela Lugosi (early on we see Cage and Hoult digitized into black-and-white images of Tod Browning’s timeless 1931 version), and there’s a nod, in Cage’s rictus grin, to the Lon Chaney of “London After Midnight,” as well as an overtone of Christopher Lee’s imperiously gnashing, leering Dracula of the late ’50s and ’60s. On top of it all is the Cage mystique. His faux-aristocratic performance is no mere camp freakout; he sinks his acting teeth into the power of Dracula — the vampire’s addiction not only to blood but to his own megalomania, to the idea that it’s his unholy right to live this way. But, of course, there’s a comic side to the seething dynamics; Cage’s Dracula is so quick, so in thrall to his legend, that he’ll slice you with sarcasm. It’s a witty and luscious performance, unhinged but never out of control, and it deserved a movie that could serve as a pedestal for the actor’s seasoned flamboyance...."

But before and after those two paragraphs there are some serious reservations.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Cage looks like he will probably be the best thing about this. I think having him play Dracula was an inspired choice but some of the comedy around him, the cop and Renfield, that does not look great...at least in all the trailers and clips. This sentence from the review posted here seems to say exactly that:

It’s a witty and luscious performance, unhinged but never out of control, and it deserved a movie that could serve as a pedestal for the actor’s seasoned flamboyance.

 

[Keith Cobby]

Might be fun to watch, but I'm not paying to see it!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Might be fun to watch, but I'm not paying to see it!

Gonna sneak in, huh?

 

[Jason_V]

What is Renfield supposed to be?

If it's a comedy, it forgets the jokes in the second half of the movie.

If it's action/gore/"horror," it's not very scary, though there is a lot of (CGI) blood everywhere.

If it's supposed to be a commentary on self-help and abusive relationships, it uses those tropes as gags, but that's about it.

If it's a direct sequel to 1931's Dracula, everything is wrong about it.

I mean, I get the idea they're going for here. Dracula in our modern world. There's just so much trying to happen in a scant 90-something minutes, there's never time to lean into any of it. A corrupt police force, estranged sisters, the mob, Dracula being resurrected, Renfield trying to break free, Renfield's guilt over his family... Seriously, so many ideas and so much happening without a single bit of it compelling enough to carry the story.

The action sequences are fun and will probably elicit laughs and enjoyment. But when you stop to think about them, there's not nearly enough blood on clothing, walls and the heroes in relation to the number of people who died gruesomely.

Cage knows what movie he's in, doing everything he can to keep the audience engaged. I really like him here, for everything he's given to do. He has one scene with Nicholas Hoult in the second half of the movie where he amplifies himself from a 3 to a 12 and then back down again without missing a beat. That's the best scene in the movie for me.

Aquafina is nowhere near as annoying as she can be, though she is a two-dimensional character at best. Hoult fares better and his may be the hardest part to play in the movie: fully understanding how crazy this situation is and having to walk two different worlds.

The beginning is fun, showing recreated scenes from the '31 movie.

When I got home and my fiancé asked how it was, my answer was "it's a movie." It's not something I would recommend to anyone or voluntarily watch again.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

What is Renfield supposed to be?

If it's a comedy, it forgets the jokes in the second half of the movie.

If it's action/gore/"horror," it's not very scary, though there is a lot of (CGI) blood everywhere.

If it's supposed to be a commentary on self-help and abusive relationships, it uses those tropes as gags, but that's about it.

If it's a direct sequel to 1931's Dracula, everything is wrong about it.

I mean, I get the idea they're going for here. Dracula in our modern world. There's just so much trying to happen in a scant 90-something minutes, there's never time to lean into any of it. A corrupt police force, estranged sisters, the mob, Dracula being resurrected, Renfield trying to break free, Renfield's guilt over his family... Seriously, so many ideas and so much happening without a single bit of it compelling enough to carry the story.

The action sequences are fun and will probably elicit laughs and enjoyment. But when you stop to think about them, there's not nearly enough blood on clothing, walls and the heroes in relation to the number of people who died gruesomely.

Cage knows what movie he's in, doing everything he can to keep the audience engaged. I really like him here, for everything he's given to do. He has one scene with Nicholas Hoult in the second half of the movie where he amplifies himself from a 3 to a 12 and then back down again without missing a beat. That's the best scene in the movie for me.

Aquafina is nowhere near as annoying as she can be, though she is a two-dimensional character at best. Hoult fares better and his may be the hardest part to play in the movie: fully understanding how crazy this situation is and having to walk two different worlds.

The beginning is fun, showing recreated scenes from the '31 movie.

When I got home and my fiancé asked how it was, my answer was "it's a movie." It's not something I would recommend to anyone or voluntarily watch again.

I'll watch it because I like Cage and giving him the role of Dracula was kind of a great idea. However, the trailer does not sell this one to me and I will just wait to see this later when it is streaming. I hate saying that, I feel I should go to the cinema to see the pictures that interest me because there are so few of them these days but this looks like a picture made for TV. The comedy between Hoult and the female cop looks very bland and not very funny. So, my impression from the trailer is I will be sitting there waiting for Cage to come back on screen.

 

[JohnRice]

I am constantly amused by comments about Nicolas Cage. Then I shake my head.

 

[billO']

I am not a big fan of horror comedies...for every one I liked there were a dozen I despised. Not wasting any time on this.

 

[Keith Cobby]

Nick Cage has made some great films but he is now on the Neeson/Willis flightpath to poorer and cheaper movies.

 

[Malcolm R]

Only $900K in Thursday previews.

Even with a relatively modest $65 million budget, there's a long road ahead.

 

[Tino]

I enjoyed it. Cafe was terrific as usual and the film was a gory good time. An easy 90 minutes of fun.

 

[TravisR]

I'll watch it because I like Cage and giving him the role of Dracula was kind of a great idea. However, the trailer does not sell this one to me and I will just wait to see this later when it is streaming. I hate saying that, I feel I should go to the cinema to see the pictures that interest me because there are so few of them these days but this looks like a picture made for TV. The comedy between Hoult and the female cop looks very bland and not very funny. So, my impression from the trailer is I will be sitting there waiting for Cage to come back on screen.

I saw it last night and it's periodically funny but it's worth noting that the movie is called Renfield for a reason. Nicolas Cage (excellent playing the straight man for the comedy) is a supporting actor in the movie.

One thing that I'm sure big time horror fan Cage must have loved was

Spoiler

recreating some of the iconic shots of Bela Lugosi in Dracula.

 

[Sam Posten]

We just got back from seeing it in a non premium AMC. We loved it. Fun and bloody. The role Cage was born to play