Just perfect...

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

The movie was OK. The problem I had was that it was to be a sequel to Drac 2000. Problem was...no carry over characters and most importantly totally ignored how the first one ended. The only thing that attached was a brief flash back to the first one and that is it. No continuity. I can overlook a lot but continuity between sequels and prequels drives me bonkers. I can forgive editing errors. I can even forgive when things like a mic drop in a scene but if you are going to do multiples you must must must have concept and script continuity. If you don't you might as well have them as entirely different movies. I can understand why butler wasn't in this $$$$. I would have liked to seen Johnny Lee Miller and Justine Waddell. To some it up what do I know I am just a movie junkie with all the training and no place to use it

While "Dracula 2000" didn't quite set the box office on fire, it did well enough to warrant a sequel – two, as a matter of fact. Released straight to video, "Dracula II: Ascension," finds everyone's favorite bloodsucker in the custody of a group of med students, following the events of the first movie. When experimenting with his charred corpse in hopes of helping their crippled professor turns out to be a bad idea, all Hell breaks loose and things get rather nasty, as you would expect.Director Patrick Lussier returns to the director's chair, and perhaps the biggest difference with this installment is its surprisingly restrained style. Less action packed and not as flashy in the visual department, the film is a more straight-up Dracula flick that gets its job done efficiently and in a timely manner. It also boasts a lot less star-power, in spite of a brief appearance by the late Roy Scheider. You'll spot a few C-list stars (Jason London, anyone?) but the big surprise is Jason Scott Lee, who plays a vampire hunter and virtually carries the film on his shoulders. It's a crime, then, that his character isn't given as much time as the over-dramatic students that drive the plot.Of course, the film was shot back-to-back with the third sequel, and it shows. The thing that keeps it from being as good and as complete as it should is that too much time is spent setting up the next installment and not enough time giving the film enough meat and potatoes to stand alone. Also, it doesn't help that this version of Dracula (re-casted from Gerard Butler to Stephen Billington) is slightly neutered and isn't given much to do. If you can forgive its shortcomings, though, you'll find it to be a fair sequel that is at least a lot better than a lot of direct-to-video fare and serves as a decent enough way to whittle away 80 spare minutes.

After the near death of Dracula (Originally played by Gerard Bulter and now played by Stephen Bilington) When an medical student (Diane Neal) and other med student (Jason London) accidentally discovered the body of Dracula. They find out that it needs fresh human blood to resurrect. When a mysterious dealer wants to pay them $30 million for the body of Dracula. They unwillingly agreed but a renegade priest/vampire slayer (Jason Scott Lee) looks for the body of Dracula. He finds himself in deeper trouble than he could imagine.Directed by Patrick Lussier (Dracula 2000, My Bloody Valentine "2009", White Noise 2) made an watchable Direct to DVD sequel to "Dracula 2000". Which the director certainly tries hard to match the quality of the original and it is just as good. The cast are decent enough although Lee looks lost half of the time with his role.DVD has an sharp strong anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an good Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD has cast auditions, deleted scenes and an audio commentary by the filmmakers. This was made as the same time for "Dracula 3". Although it is quite annoying with each film, they keep changing actors to play Dracula. But Craig Sheffer does have some fun with his supporting role as a college professor and the late Roy Scheider in a small part as a priest. At least... "Dracual 2:Ascension" has some interesting plot turns. Lussier's second film has good locations and fine production values. Horror fans will enjoy this one best. Super 35. (*** 1/2 out of *****).

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.