Bram Stoker’s Dracula
Nov. 19, 1992
Director Francis Ford Coppola gives a refreshing and interesting interpretation of the legend of Dracula. He does not offer the overdone Hollywood view of the Prince of Darkness as a bloodsucker, but instead, he chooses to remain faithful to Bram StokerÕs novel and to elevate the Victorian romance to the forefront. CoppalaÕs Dracula does not say, ÒI vant to suck your blood,Ó in a cheesy Rumanian accent nor does he have the hypnotic stare as popularized in many of the vampire films including the 1931 classic starring Bela Legosi. In fact, CoppolaÕs Dracula has an entirely different theme from its predecessors. It does not fall under the genre of horror film, but it encapsulates a variety of styles from horror to romance to even action-adventure. Coppola turns the Dracula legend upside-down, and redeems himself as one of AmericaÕs premiere directors.
Dracula is not like any vampire film that you have seen. Working from a script by James Hart, Coppola from the beginning wants you to feel the passion behind the motives of the man who was called Count Dracula. In the first scene which takes place a few hundred years before the Victorian age in London, the theme of undying love is established. Dracula is a man with a history behind his blood lust; he wants to become undead (never dying) in order to find his lost love, Elisabeta. Dracula having reason to his pursuit of blood is not what you would expect from a telling of the Dracula legend. If you enter thinking that you are going to see a lot of neck biting and other contrived devices of previous vampire films, then you are in for a surprise. Coppola wants to remain true to Bram StokerÕs novel and change the way audiences perceive the Dracula tale. He still shows a lot of blood, but focuses more on the attraction between Mina Murray (Winona Ryder) and Dracula (Gary Oldman).
Coppola returns to the screen in a highly stylized way. He starts out to take a look at passion and obsession and achieves that goal in his direction of the film. He takes you for a ride which does not slow down until the ending. Dracula constantly moves at an exciting pace; it never slows down. Even when there is not much action on screen, Coppola enlivens the film with dazzling cinematic techniques. From the opening moments of Count DraculaÕs battle against the Turks to the chase at the end, Coppola maintains a visual assault on your eyes with techniques that are flashy and uncustomarily unlike the director. The technique he uses in showing the countÕs point of view while stalking his prey is exhilarating. All this flashy camera work and special effects may sometimes get in the way of the story, but they are meant to highlight certain themes being played out. Also, his transitions between scenes are solid, even if at times they are confusing. But what makes his direction of the film stand out is the faith he had in the relatively young cast.
In the title role of Dracula, Gary Oldman does a convincing job. His Dracula is something other than a bloodsucking, undead creature of the night. Rather, he is charming and dramatic and able to exist beneath the midday sun, although his shadow has a life of its own. Oldman follows CoppolaÕs lead in changing Dracula from a man of evil nature to a man compelled by love. Bela Legosi would have a hard time recognizing the character he so much had created. Where LegosiÕs Dracula would have been more formal and staid, OldmanÕs rendition is irreverent to the notion that a vampires life is just lying around waiting for the sun to go down. Oldman shows the twisted side of lost mortality in Dracula. When Jonathan Harker (Keanu Reeves) cuts himself shaving, its amusing to see Dracula lick the razor clean; he needs the blood of a vibrant young person to maintain the illusion of living. Oldman makes Dracula seem more human which makes Dracula all the more creepy and spooky . Dracula doesnÕt do much to scare you but does enough to send shivers up your spine.
Other members of the young cast have impressive performances. They easily overcome the difficulties with an English accent. Winona Ryder turns in a remarkable performance as Mina Murray, DraculaÕs replacement for Elisabeta and HarkerÕs fiancŽe. Her fragile look fits that of a coy young, Victorian lady. At times, she is devoted to Harker, but when Dracula steps into her life she quickly falls for him. The sudden shift of her affection seems unbelievable at first, but it is within her character to give her undying devotion to someone. And it so happens that she fears Jonathan is dead. Keanu Reeves, as Jonathan Harker, overcomes his image of a burnt out surfer dude to give a spotty performance. When Harker is first introduced, Reeves seems to be unsuited for the role. His English accent sounds terrible, but by the close of the film, ReevesÕ performance increases in strength. Newcomer, Sadie Frost , does an amazing job with Lucy. As her name suggests, Lucy is a up front about her sexuality which is a contrast to RyderÕs upright Mina. She exemplifies the erotic nature to a vampireÕs blood lust.
The biggest surprise performance comes from Anthony Hopkins who plays DraculaÕs nemesis, Van Helsing. As with OldmanÕs portrayal of Dracula, Hopkins gives a refreshingly new interpretation to the Van Helsing role. In this film, Van Helsing is no longer a serious vampire slayer, but a swaggering old man who finds fun in hunting Dracula. It Ôs not just a job but an adventure. The two most serious characters, Dracula and Van Helsing, are played with a lighthearted feel. In fact, Hopkins illicits many of the laughs in the movie. He is just as comfortable at commenting on the action with witty one-liners as he is in driving a stake through a vampireÕs heart.
The opening of Dracula is surrounded by much hype. It is an eagerly awaited film. Lines are long to get into the theater, but you will get your moneyÕs worth in the first few minutes of an exhilarating film. Coppola changes the Dracula myth which will be a surprise to you. He renews the life of vampire films, and takes the genre to another level. Gary Oldman and Anthony Hopkins give the Van Helsing-Dracula rivalry a different perspective; they make it an age old rivalry for a manÕs humanity as well as entertaining to watch. With performances that are stellar and a visual style that is breathtaking, Dracula goes directly for the jugular and scores a hit.
2 Replies to “Bram Stoker’s Dracula”
Comments are closed.
did i tell you this review was really good? it made me think of the movie again (and realize i have not seen it in a long time)
I haven’t re-read this review. I think I am too embarrassed to do so. What with the fawning over it. I don’t think it is a good movie today.