BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA
A film review by Andrew Kuchling
Copyright 1992 Andrew Kuchling
Directed by Francis Ford Coppola
My foremost memory from this movie: The batlike form of the Count has vanished, and the vampire hunters tense, waiting for the next onslaught. Soon enough, it comes; suddenly a horrid mass appears, a shape of grey covered with pinkish--what, exactly? Tentacles? Worms? The form remains standing long enough for memories of all the myriad revolting creatures of Lovecraft's Cthulhu mythos to come rushing back, and then it collapses into a squirming mound of rats which run in all directions, seeking for escape and darkness in which to pool their various fragments of Dracula's evil.
Point: Movies, like all works of art and literature, are distant mirrors in which we see our own concerns reflected. Thus, an optimistic person tends to put the most positive highlight on things, preferring to see reminders of good in the most depressing tragedy; other people also impose their own interpretations upon the story. But in order for this to be possible, a movie must be complex enough, loosely structured enough, to allow us flexibility in twisting its events to our point of view. Simple movies one can forget five minutes after walking out of the theater; intricate movies can be brooded over for weeks and watched repeatedly, increasingly pleasurable with each viewing.
In my pretentiously ornate style, the previous paragraph is leading up to my opinion that DRACULA is one such wonderfully multi-leveled movie. Coppola has managed to evoke many memories throughout the movie; it resonates exactly with my subconscious, reminding me of H. P. Lovecraft and Conan Doyle, of paintings and myths and dreams. Don't take any of this to mean the storyline is hard to follow; scriptwriter James V. Hart has done his job very well and kept me fascinated throughout the film's course. I recommend it highly, and suggest you see it at once, for I'm not sure how well it will do at the box office. I don't think The Phantom would like it much, since while there are a few truly frightening moments, there is no sustained terror building toward a climax. Indeed, Prince Vlad (as perfectly played by Gary Oldman) doesn't seem very terrifying; you feel sorry for him, stuck in an undead state he no longer desires, pining for a dead love. This is not a classical horror film; it feels more like a Dickens Dracula, a story of character development.
This is also not the Bram Stoker novel, either in the fine details of the plot or in the approach. This is not a portrayal of real events; it is emphatically a film, designed to tell a story while adding subtext to it. As a train carrying Jonathan Harker passes through the Carpathians, an eye appears in the sky to watch him. Dracula's shadow doesn't match the actions of his body, instead seeming to act out his inner thoughts. Scenes meld into one another; dissolves leave just enough overlap between transitions to blur the boundaries. Humourous juxtapositions are made, but you hate yourself for laughing when, just after Lucy has been decapitated, we cut to a roast being carved in a London public house. Anthony Hopkin's Van Helsing has a knack for inappropriate jokes, and there are numerous suspicious details in his portrayal, actions and lines that lead me to suspect an old connection between him and his undead foe. It is not a completely naturalistic relation of events, and I fear this will alienate some audiences, although I fervently hope I'm underestimating their tolerance of cinematic games. Expect long discussions of DRACULA in rec.arts.movies, rivalling the "Deckard is a replicant" topics in length of argument and counterargument.
Overall, this is not a movie to be missed. It has immediately leapt into my list of favorite movies, and I expect to be seeing it many times. Everything about BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA demonstrates Coppola's mastery.
Andrew Kuchling fnord@binkley.cs.mcgill.ca
.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews