I would have never guessed this movie was made for TV if I didn't know that information because the film is that well made! Outstanding well written biography and performances by the cast.Dark Prince tends to have a little bit of everything: Drama, War, Crime, Romance, Fantasy, Action, Adventure and, yes, Horror... not a bad combination for a biographical film.Dark Prince: The True Story of Dracula should become a favorite (staple) for those who want a smarter, educated, Hallows' Eve movie festival since it is in fact a biography of Vlad Tepes, the real life Dracula.10/10

The true story of Vlad Dracula (The Impaler) is often confused by the propaganda that was circulated at the time by the Turks, and borrowed by his enemies on the Christian side of the frontier. Although this film portrays Vlad as more loved than feared by his people, which history disputes, the basic structure is very accurate. The acting, the sets, the scenes are all excellent; if all films made on this sort of budget were as good, Hollywood could close tomorrow. Even if the history doesn't interest you at all then watch it just for the quality of production. Please note that this is not a horror film - just a realistic representation of the Balkans in medieval times.

Some things...1) Dracula's first wife (whose name has never been historically documented other than known to be a Transylvanian noblewoman) committed suicide in 1462, not 1464, when Dracula was already imprisoned by the King of Hungary anyway. Not sure why the film changed this, really.2) The impalings... aren't accurate. The oiled stake is put in the buttocks and slowly moves out through the mouth. This takes days, the impalee dying a slow death. We don't see any actual impalings during the movie save one, and the guy slides down the stake like it's a flag pole.3) While not necessarily portrayed as a nice guy, I was expecting a bit more brutality. Much of Vlad Tepes' acts are brushed aside in the framing story of Dracula being interrogated by the priests in 1476 as "stories" by Dracula himself and this just seems like a kind of cop-out. I realize we don't need to see Dracula cutting the breasts off of women and such, but there was PLENTY of more hard-hitting material that could have been put in there. Example: instead of Dracula just closing the doors and executing the boyars like he does in the film, wouldn't it be far more effective cinematically to follow what *really* happened and show Dracula and his men dragging the boyars to go and build (by themselves) Castle Dracula, which took years and basically worked the lot of them to death? Also would have been effective to show the scene of Dracula rounding up all the homeless and beggars into the grand hall, then having his men burn it to the ground. The only real story of Dracula that was included was the one with the golden goblet that wasn't touched by anyone... that's about it.4) I realize it was done for dramatic purposes, but the film kept sticking Dracula's broth Radu in places/times he simply wasn't. Dracula was killed in 1476 by a man (a Turk) disguised as one of his own guards... in a MARSH somewhat near Snagov, not inside Snagov Chapel.5) The ending is neither here or there... I'd rather they didn't go that route, but then the end of Vlad's life is a bit anti-climactic.

I saw the movie! How could you make so many mistakes in it? In 1464 Dracula was already in prison, his first son name was Mihnea, in 1456 Iancu Huniade died and the sultan that imprisoned the boys was Murat II!!and this are only the biggest mistakes. They are so many! so please, help me make the novel that i write, a movie! The truth story of Dracula. Please, I AM BEGGING YOU ALL. this IS MY Address. [email protected]!!!!help Dracula to go to the light by helping me tell the truth! god bless you all of you that will help me! you will see that my novel is great! Please, don't break my heart by ignoring this message! Maybe one day i will see my movie on a big white screen. And that will be for Vlad