BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA
A film review by Lewis C. E. Butler
Copyright 1992 Lewis C. E. Butler
In short:
DRACULA, the newest offering from Francis Ford Coppola, is not
all that it sets out to be. While reaching for greatness it
fails to attain anything better than mediocrity. There are some
wonderful performances on the part of Oldman and Hopkins, but
overall, though enjoyable, it fails. (+1 of -4 to +4)
Francis Ford Coppola has once again taken on the task of making a movie from a classic book. Where before he created a remarkable film (APOCALYPSE NOW from HEART OF DARKNESS) this time he has not done quite so well. Bram Stoker's novel is a chilling Gothic horror, recommended reading for everyone. What Coppola has done is remove the element of horror from the story and transform it into a love story.
Strangely enough, in terms of plot, this version follows the book far closer than any Dracula movie I've seen. There are some remarkable inconsistencies, and the film feels as if it was not quite ready for release. The editing is choppy, there are incongruous scenes and scene changes, and the occasional voice over. These details add up to a fairly steady diet of distractions.
Oldman is a wonderfully powerful vampire. His performance manages to bring a certain sympathy, much as Karloff's Frankenstein's monster did. Dracula is not evil in this film, just misunderstood. Perhaps this film reflects our times in the belief that no one is evil, and no one beyond redemption. Interstingly enough, Oldman's undead Dracula seems to be most alive of all the main characters, with the possible exception of Hopkins' Van Helsing.
Winona Ryder is disappointing. Her performance is not poor, but it is uninspired. Though her character seems to be broiling in inner turmoil, we know of it only through her diary. The character of Lucy was far better drawn by Sadie Frost.
Keanu Reeves is just dreadful. He is completely dull, and seems to be walking through the role from start to finish. By far the worst performance in the movie. I am quite disappointed, as I like Reeves, but it is quite obvious that this role was far beyond his meager abilities.
Hopkins turns in an inspired performance as the good doctor, Van Helsing. He and Oldman make the film worth seeing. He manages to be humorous without quite crossing into something incongruous. If you are as impressed with Hopkins as I am, though, THE EFFICIENCY EXPERT allows him a little more time on screen.
Tom Waits (the singer?) plays Renfield, and does an amazing job with him. It's a shame he wasn't cast as Jonathan Harker instead of Reeves; I'm quite sure he would have done a much better job.
The problem with Dracula isn't so much the actors though, it is that it does not quite work as a love story. Perhaps it is a failing on the part of Ms. Ryder, but I believe it was more a problem with the script. The effects are very good (especially the shadows, which never seem to be in sync with the Count) but still there is something missing. If Coppola wanted to make a love story, he should have taken a hint from the makers of GHOST and made us *believe*.
Still, with all its problems, Dracula does have something going for it. Coppola's hand is evident throughout, and Oldman's performance is compelling enough that I have no doubts the movie will be successful. Come Oscar time, though, and Oldman is the only one deserving of any recognition, though I wouldn't be surprised to see a nomination for Hopkins anyway. Of course I am not including the effects work, which certainly deserves some accolades. Oldman's makeup artists does some amazing things, but in terms of major recognition, Gary Oldman is the only actor who might deserve a nomination.
See it at a matinee for cheap.
-- kreme@nyx.cs.du.edu kreme@#22 (FV3 Net) [303/722-2009] Vox
.
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