The Vampire's Seduction

This was the first of two Seduction Cinema movies about Van Helsing. Both versions are on the DVD.
Vampire's Seduction is lame, but the entire DVD package is one of the better releases to date, as this is on the same disk with Sexy Adventures of Van Helsing, the remake, which is a good spoof and excellent erotica.
There's also some behind the scenes documentary, deleted scenes, and commentary. The best part is the commentary from producer Michael Rasso, who is also the president of EI Independent Cinema, the parent company of Seduction Cinema. He gave a very candid view of the film, and a real insight into making and distributing independent films.

In this original version, Van Helsing is a lame guy. Dracoola tasks him with bringing her lesbians. He spends a lot of time looking through windows, then poisons Dracoola with garlic. Dracoola was played by Tina Krause, who was in line to be the main star at Seduction Cinema. When she decided to stop doing T & A, Misty Mundae had turned 18, and stepped up to fill the position. When this was filmed, Misty was only 17, and could not appear in it. Her older sister, Chelsea, does appear in the oddest of the three peeping scenes. Chelsea is the authority figure at a slumber party with two girls credited as Jenna and Janie, and manages to turn it into a lesbian three way. We also see Kiki Michaels undress, shower, and rub lotion all over herself, and Paige Turner as a shrink, and Dawn Monacco as her insecure patient doing a little nude touching therapy first with her shrink, then with a pizza delivery guy.

All of the women show breasts and buns. The production quality is not at all good, Lighting was often dismal.

The Critics Vote ...

No major reviews online

The People Vote ...

IMDB summary. Score: 3.3 out of 10.

The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, this film is a low C-, and is that high only if you award bad movie points and historical value.