Bram Stoker’s Dracula
Directed by Francis Ford Coppola
If there has ever been a more polarizing adaptation of Dracula, I’m not familiar with it. Pop culture has been telling me for years how much Bram Stoker’s Dracula sucks, and, though this is far from a good sample size, everyone I talked to about this movie has told me they’ve heard the same thing. I wasn’t even planning on watching this, but it was requested last week and I always try to give the people what they want. So, with a heart full of fear I turned the film on and was more surprised than I have been by a movie in a long time. Bram Stoker’s Dracula was, dare I say it, good!
Okay, You Probably Know The Story.
I don’t think I really need to explain what the story of Bram Stoker’s Dracula is, considering how many times this same story has been adapted, but just to make sure everyone is on the same page, I’ll quickly go over it. English real estate agent Jonathan Harker (Keanu Reeves) takes a trip to Transylvania to finalize a sale to the infamous Count Dracula (Gary Oldman). While there, Dracula comes across a picture of Jonathan’s fiancee, Mina (Winona Ryder), who reminds Dracula of his long lost love. Infatuated with Mina, Dracula arranges to arrive in London before Jonathan so that he has a chance to seduce her while at the same time spreading his vampiric influence through the city.
Now For The Interesting Part, The Visuals!
Now that the story is out of the way, let’s talk about what makes this movie special, the visual design. Gone are the days of a monochrome Transylvanian countryside and imitations of Bela Lugosi, Bram Stoker’s Dracula embraces a colorful, campy at times, distinct gothic visual style that completely sets it apart from anything that came before. From the striking and stylish sequences of the battle against the invading Ottomans to the elaborate and impeccable costume design, Bram Stoker’s Dracula is an absolute treat to look at and this movie is completely worth seeing for these visuals alone! Special shout out to Eiko Ishioka for designing the Academy Award-winning costumes that were crucial to making this movie work.
What An Amazing Cast!
It’s not just the visual style that makes the film so successful though, there’s a tremendously good cast here as well! Of course, Winona Ryder and Gary Oldman are great here, but we also have a great supporting cast with Anthony Hopkins as Dr. Van Helsing, Tom Waits as Renfield, and Cary Elwes as Lord Holmwood. What makes their performances so interesting though, is that everyone runs on big emotions. Incredible passion drives everyone and that passion makes it through to everyone’s performances. In a different movie, I might call this scenery-chewing or overacting, but it fits here and gives everything a bigger, almost operatic, feeling.
…Mostly.
If you know anything about this movie then you’re probably waiting for me to bring up the most mocked thing in the film, Keanu Reeves’ performance. Specifically, the English accent he attempts to put on. It’s bad. It’s really really bad. The kind of bad that when you hear it for the first time you think to yourself, “Oh god, this is what I have to listen to for 2 hours?” And because he’s concentrating so much on trying to do this accent he cannot act. At all. This is one of the biggest casting blunders to ever hit cinema, and even though Jonathan isn’t present for the entire movie, there’s a constant anxiety that he is bound to return and say more lines badly. I will point out that I don’t necessarily blame Reeves’ for this, it should have been noticeable at the audition that this was not the right role for him. Keanu Reeves tried his best. Yes, he failed horribly, but that just happens sometimes when actors get the wrong roles.
Sometimes It Feels A Bit Slow.
Other than Reeves’ performance, I would say my biggest problem with the movie is pacing issues. For the pacing, well, I’m familiar with the story of Dracula, I like the story of Dracula, but sometimes it felt slow when I knew what was going to happen next. This tended to happen more in the second half of the film when we’re back in London which is purposely more drab than Dracula’s castle. I get why that choice was made but there isn’t as much to engage me while a story that I’m familiar with is playing out. But there are some great performances in that sequence so it’s not a huge complaint, just something that comes up when you’re adapting a story that has been adapted many times before.
Bram Stoker’s Dracula Is Memorable, If Nothing Else.
Bram Stoker’s Dracula has been probably my most surprising viewing experience since I started these reviews. Sure, it has some flaws, and the larger than life stylings of it may not be to everyone’s taste, but I consider this a visual feast that everyone who likes horror should see at least once. I think it does say something about the film’s longevity when people are still talking about it years later, to complain about a silly performance, sure, but how many bad performances have gone unremarked upon in the public conscience? Bram Stoker’s Dracula is memorable if nothing else, and I would recommend it if you’re in the mood for some campy gothic horror and vigorous performances of varying quality coupled with some of the coolest costumes I’ve ever seen in a film.
Recent Comments