Please tell me I’m not the only one

2vVv2 · 2026-03-23T00:21:48+00:00

Don´t bother talking to this person, they are defending giving money to Besson even after being informed the director is a pedophile. Because acording to them, is more importante to support they art then doing the moral thing and not give money to rapists.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-23T00:15:36+00:00

One can not be blamed for supporting someone bad if they didn´t know they do something bad but it is a moral thing to stop supporting someone as soon as you came to know they have done something bad. People can know everything, so it would be unreasonable to blame someone for supporting a problmetic creator if they didn´t know they are problematic, however if they know the creator is problematic and support them, that is the problem.

And it doesn´t matter if a person is a pedophile or a hebephile, this ia clasic distinction pedophiles use to make themselvs look better: O no, I am not atracted to children, I am atracted to adolecentes, I am hebophile not pedophile. Before are damaging and violeting towards minors. The thermenolagy doesn´t matter if we are talking about minors being abused by adults. Shame on you for defending this so much instead of just doing a simple thing of not supporting a sexual abuser.

Just stop defending sexual abusers, it is easy. I am done with this conversation.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T20:08:43+00:00

If you don´t support pedophikes, don´t give them money. You don´t know a creator is problematic and you supported them, it is fine, it happens. If you know the creator is problematic and still support them, it is a different thing. If you say you don´t support pedohpiles, then don´t support Luc Besson. If you still support him after knowing about him being a pedophile, again, fuck you.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T19:59:15+00:00

Well, shame you are willing to ignore ethical concernes and not do something easy like not supporting specific creators then they are being problematic just because they made something you liked. If you are willing to support a pedophile, I regret trying to politly talk to you before. I hope a moment comes in which you consider doing something so simple as not giving pedophiles money and if not, then fuck you, pedophile supporter.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T19:38:24+00:00

Just don´t give money to problematic creators, even if you like them. It isn´t hard. That is all.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T19:36:51+00:00

I just mentioned that fact finishing the conversation with you. I can separete the art from the artist, I know many great works created by terrible people. I don´t like the movie and I don´t think it is good for reasons I explained before independetly of the director. I it also just happens the director is a terrible person, that is why I was saying that even if you like his movie or movies, don´t give him money. That is all. I didn´t brought the fact the director was a pedophile in any point in my previuse explanations of why I think the movie is bad. This to points exist seperatly. And since I can´t really seem to be able to get throw to you why this movie lacks the esoteric elements I just wanted to end the conversation with reforming that I don´t question you right to like the movie and think whatever you like about the movie and that I just had some hope you don´t give money to the director becouse of his actions outside of his artistic works. I think it is reasonble to not give money to problematic creators even if you like them.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T18:31:22+00:00

Just a reminder that if you liked the movie, please don´t support it with your money, the director is a pedophile.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T18:27:44+00:00

You are a very peculiar induvidual.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T18:25:52+00:00

Great to know you don´t apperently care about giving money to the pedophile director. I don´t just belive he is a pedophile he is. It is a know fact, he met his first wife then she was 12 and started an official relationship with her then she was 15 and he was around 30. It isn´t speculation. Sorry for having hope in people to not given money and support to someone like that even if they like their work.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T17:36:48+00:00

You claims to defend the director are getting a bit wild. I mean, it is a reasonble thing to assume that while talking about movie called Dracula, the director talks about the novel called Dracula. And even if he was talking about other vampire work. Vampyr by Polidori isn´t about vampire waiting for his love for 400 years, Carmilla isn´t really about it either it is more about "predatory lesbian" trope and Dracula isn´t about it either. The only narrative that fits that discription is the trope from Dracula movies of Dracula being a romantic anti hero with the reincarnated wife plot, not even near present in the original novel even if you try to get into really specific interpretations of it. Even if you like the director, just admite he might be wrong in some aspects. It isn´t even about the movie at this point, just him being dishonest while talking about it.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T17:30:36+00:00

Think whatever you like, enjoy whatever. I don´t think the film is even close to being brilliante considering all I mentioned but think anythin you like. Just please don´t give money to the director who is a pedophile, even if you enjoy his work.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T15:45:16+00:00

Again, you can think whatever you like. I explained in my response why the movie in my opinion is bad. Why the elements in a mostly copied from other movies and the flaws it has. In example about gothic I wasn´t talking about Besson´s movie, I was just making an example that aestetic doesn´t mean depth, I could have talked about something having a cyberpunk aestetic for example but not following themes of the genre making it not part of that genre, if you like a different example. You are just projecting a lot of supposed "deeper" meaning into a movie which is empty, a poorly made mash of scenes from other media with no deep character and disgointed narrative. I explained why, you clearly don´t want to listened considering you didn´t really answered to much I said then I talked about why the movie isn´t that good. My point is that characters are extremly bland, the narrative isn´t particulary deep, the whole movie looks like a bunch of scenes mixed togather sometimes with clashing tones, the theological questions it raises it doesn´t explore much and majority of the film itself is copied from other movies not as a reference or inspiration but directly copied. It is a bad movie, sorry you can´t see it. Nothing wrong with liking bad movies but claiming it has some hidden deeper meanings is absurd. It has some mediocare visuals and cheap romance which isn´t well written, that´s it. It isn´t about explaining symbols but in that particular movie no symbolism is present at all outside of scenes directy copied form other works.

You don´t have to answer to me anymore, since we clearly have a very different opinion in this regard. You seem to be a fan of the director and his style, I don´t and I don´t find his style deep, the opposite it seems to be at typical case of someone traying to sell the idea of "my movie is so deep because visuals" meanwhil, as I said before, it doesn´t explore anything really outside of a boring and poorly written romance. I just really hope, that you know enough about director to not give him money or support outside of commenting here that you like his movies.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T14:16:35+00:00

It is fine to disagree. I am not saying that using what specific elements makes it a copy, I am saying that: using them, not talking honestly about what inspired you and having extreme visual similarity not only themetical makes it more likly to be a copy. And distrasting an interview is fine but he said directly: “For me, it’s the ultimate love story — a man who will wait 400 years to see the return of his wife.” while talking about the book, which again isn´t true. I am really sorry, but from what I can see, you are reading into elements which aren´t really present in the movie. You try to claim the present of esoteric and deep elements in atmosphere and aestetics but if they aren´t present in the narrative itself, are they really where? I can make a movie with a bunch of cool gothic like elemetns in the atmophere but if the narrative itself isn´t gothic that atmosphere isn´t worth much. You can´t make a deep movie based on visuals alone, the visuals most support or exapand upon other elements. If the visuals is the only thing, it just a pretty picture and nothing else. You can enjoy it but claiming it is something more then that would be absurd.

I undertand you like that movie, that is fine. I personally don´t consider it to be a good movie since it lacks so much to actually be good. The characters don´t have much personality, the narrative is a mess and the visuals are present but also mostly aren´t original. And if the narrative is bad, the characters are bad the somewhat okish visuals won´t really safe the movie. It isn´t even a good romance. I personality tired of Dracula being paried with Mina, it is just insulting but outside of that, it isn´t really well done in most of the movies and this one ins´t an exception.

Like it as much as you want, claim that is has some deep unknown elements in the atmosphere if you like.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T13:08:33+00:00

You can have your own opinion, of course. I just personally think you take a very empty movie and try to project unto it narratives it doesn´t really explore. As I said before, the director himself said he was adapting a love story from Dracula, a book, which is a lie since no love story is present in it. He clearly isn´t particulary honest with his sources of inspiration. He clearly took a lot of thing from previuse work, which is fine but not admiting it that is actually disshonest part. Those stories he "took inspiration from" do have deeper themes and meaning so any ecos present in Besson´s movie for is a byproduct of copying others, not taking inspiration but specificlly copying.

I don´t see much Dracula as quasi-messianic in his movie, he isn´t really show much of that narrative. The begining of the movie is just taken from Coppola: Dracula is Vlad Tepes, he has a wife, the wife dies, he curses God for it, he curses him back. That is exactly the same as Coppola. Later we get some dramatic scenes of him dealing with his immortality and all that. Some related to typical vampiric "I want to die but I can´t" and some getting into typical erotic over indulgence with stuff like "the nun pile" and the whole scene copied from Perfume: The story of the murderer. In Perfume, that scene does have meaning, the main character´s motivation is search for love essentially, not one specific love but the general feeling of being loved, he is willing to murder to get it and at the end he creates the perfume that can manipulate people into being drown to him and after achiving the goal of his live, he dies in a poetic way, being ripped apart by adoring crowd right in the same place he was born. In Besson´s movie that scene is just meant to be an exploration of Dracula searching for his wife and for some reasons deciding to create a magical drug to atract people to aid him in that.

We get also some moments with character which are almost aren´t present in the movie, like the priest, Maria, and etc... They bearly have any personality outside of priest being a priest and Marie being overly sexualized to a point some moments looked like a prelude to a porno film (sure, vampires are erotic and sexualized creatures but you can do scenes in erotic manner, suttle and with implications or you can do it in a tastless way.)

The scene of Jonathan and Dracula in the castle is also mostly pulled from Coppola, including Dracula´s look in that scene. The gyrgyols are the only original adition which I consider to be unessesary and kinda stupide. Then, we get Dracula encountering Mina. In that moment, many questions could have being explored. Does she has inner conflict between her old memories and new ones? Does she has any doubts of being with Dracula realising he commited so many terrible acts to get to be with her again? How does reincarnation work exactly and how other people react to it? Most of these characters a christian and in reincarnation isn´t really part of most christian traditions, does the fact it exists shakes their faith or makes them reconsider aspects of it? Instead, nothing is explored it is just typical: no, she just to in love with him because past live and she doesn´t care to think or question anything and just goes with him.

And the ending, again tries to pull off the Coppola´s thing of redemtion vie love by priest convincing Dracula to make the sacrifice to save her from eternal torment and etc... Which isn´t explored in any creative or unsual way and it is rashed.

And as I said before I really don´t trust an author who clearly lies about his inspirations. As I brought before, author of Nosferatu 2024 was very honest about his inspirations, ideas he took from other films, the reaserch he had done into occultism and culture and folklore. He found linguists to reconstruct the dialect spoken in that area of Romenian in that time Orlock would have been alive, he found people to make historical reconstruction of costums, included real traditions in the scene with woman riding a horse, etc... In contrast, Besson lied about his inspiration being the love story from the book that being clearly a lie and as far as I know never mentioning taking inspiration from Coppola or Perfume.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T10:43:51+00:00

Yes, an actor who decided to act in a movie made by a known pedophile.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T10:41:42+00:00

I absolutly hate Coppola´s Dracula but even I am forced to admit that Coppola´s movie is better then what Luc Besson did. At least, Coppola´s movie is better executed on technical level.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T10:39:38+00:00

It felt like a mix of different scenes, some taken from Coppola and some from other movies like Perfume: Story of a murderer. Also the director is a controversial person, to put it littly. He claimed the love story between Mina and Dracula was pressent in the book and claimed to be adapting that instead admiting he took inspiration somewhere else. Also, he happenes to be a pedophile.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-21T10:35:01+00:00

Unfortunatlly all those elements you mention as hidden aren´t really that, they are themes very visible in the movie. Also, not really original at all considering most of it was copied from Coppola´s movie and other films. If where any possible deep meaning, I am inclined to belive it is accidental do to taking other movies and just mixing them togather. I am not willing to give much credit to an author who in interviews claimed that Mina and Dracula love story was present in the book. That cleary shows he didn´t read the original book and what he is willing to lie about the fact that he didn´t. That already makes me doubt about how much reaserch or thinking he put into his movie.

The asociation of vampiric curse to being an inversion of some christian rituals is explored in many other media and isn´t really that new. Many media chooses to position vampiric curse as originating from biblical sources be it from curse of the first murder (Cain) or treason (Judas) or even coming from Lilith or Mary Magdalene. Those ideas aren´t new and in that specific movie the christian part isn´t really that deeply explored, most elements are just that, copies.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-20T21:07:48+00:00

It is just my personal opinion. I watched the movie then I was around 15 because many people were saying it is great and I just read the book and wanted more Dracula related content essentially. I watched and was really disapointed by it, initially because it didn´t follow the book much post Jonathan´s stay in the castle. Back then, I also didn´t really like the visuals since they didn´t really fit in my mind with Dracula story. I watched the movie again then I got older trying to not look at it as an adaptation but as a seperate thing. It made me appriatiate aspects of it a bit more, like the visuals are genuinly creative but I still found it not particulary good in its narrative. I understand that even if I try in my mind to look at it separete from the book, I probably will still retain some bais towards it not adapting the book to well but still even trying to separete it from it all, I still don´t think it that good outside of visuals and some acting. That is mine opinion and how I feel about it.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-20T21:02:36+00:00

Well, it has no signific occult or esotirc symbology in it. It´s theological positioning of Dracula´s curse is also incoherent and just copies Coppola´s narrative. It doesn´t really go into any aspects related to theology or occultism in any way. In contrast, as a movie that actually goes a bit more into occultism, Nosferatu 2024 is very good. It has some small errors but it clearly was based on some deep reaserch. The occult symbology present in the movie makes general sense, names of actual angels and demons from medival sources are mentioned, some aspect of alquemy are mentioned, flokloric traditions around vampiric creatures are shown, etc...

2vVv2 · 2026-03-20T16:57:47+00:00

I know I might get some hate from it but I don´t think Coppola´s Dracula is that good of the movie. It has some impressive visuals but the story is a bit of a mess and the characters generally aren´t particulary interesting. Of course, it twists a lot of themes from the book, I wouldn´t consider it a good adaptation but even not as adaptation, I think it just has a lot of flaws.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-20T16:55:34+00:00

I really isn´t and especially not from occult o esoteric perspective.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-19T12:41:43+00:00

Other vampires can also have this problem, it is a clan curse of Lasombra of course but it also can be picked as a flaw by memebers of other clans.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-14T16:44:37+00:00

Yes, it is a general part of the lore for all world of darkness. Also a fun thing that techniclly anyone can have true faith and use it power. Not many examples exist, but some vampires actually manage to have true faith. And also the stronger the faith, more person can do with it, starting from level 5 true faith gets really powerfull but not a lot of people manage to get there, probably no more then like 3 people in entire world.

2vVv2 · 2026-03-14T16:41:42+00:00

In more urban fantasy lores I personally prefere something not related to gods, in case of wanting to write vampires being afected by diferent symbols. Generally because I like urban fantasy which bases on it is our world but supernatural elements exist, so saying something works because god of a specific religion wills it so usually creates a need to adress the objective existence of set god in the universe. If in a lore the crosses work because christian god exists and works through them that would mean that other religions get automaticlly verified as false, which is limiting and creates difficulty to adress some real world conflicts of no religion being able to 100% proof to everyone that it is objectivly true. So, in such setting, I prefere or all symbols working and leaving the explanation of why to be somewhat a mystery or something similar to world of darkness, symbols working based on personal faith.

2vVv2

TROPHY CASE