Bram Stoker\u2019s Dracula (1992) \u2013 A Science Fiction-Fantasy Movie Review<\/p>\n
First of all, I assume everyone knows the plot of Dracula, so there will be no spoiler alert.\u00a0 I\u2019ve been wanting to review this movie for a while because I read that it was pretty good.\u00a0 Well, pretty good is in the eye of the beholder, I guess.<\/p>\n
This movie is all over the place.\u00a0 First off look at some of the cast members:<\/p>\n
Gary Oldman as Count Dracula<\/strong><\/p>\n Winona Ryder as Mina Harker<\/strong><\/p>\n Anthony Hopkins as Professor Van Helsing<\/strong><\/p>\n Keanu Reeves as Jonathan Harker<\/strong><\/p>\n So, you can imagine the range of acting ability here.\u00a0 Oldman and Hopkins do the best they can with the script and dialog but Reaves and Ryder \u2026 are Reaves and Ryder, so you can imagine.\u00a0 Keanu is especially notable for his amazing 19th<\/sup> century British accent.\u00a0 I keep expecting him to exclaim, \u201cWhoa!\u201d<\/p>\n Alright, so let\u2019s talk about the approach to the Dracula story.\u00a0 Apparently, by the movie\u2019s name, director Francis Ford Coppola intended for this film to be seen as adhering, to some extent, more closely to Stoker\u2019s novel than most other versions.\u00a0 I read the novel many, many years ago but from what I remember there were no nekkid vampire women sexing up Jonathan Harker at Castle Dracula.\u00a0 And, granted, unlike many other versions of the story, the end of this movie does take place where and how it occurred in the book, but Coppola added Mina Harker into the climax to close out her romance with Dracula.\u00a0 That\u2019s not Stoker.\u00a0 Also, the movie starts off in the 15th<\/sup> century with Vlad the Impaler renouncing God because his wife (who is also played by Ryder) committed suicide and therefore she cannot go to heaven.\u00a0 And because of all this, we are supposed to see Dracula as a sympathetic character and at the end he gets this redemption scene where instead of looking like this decrepit bat-like thing he turns back into young and relatively handsome Vlad and dies the beautiful death (well, he still gets his head chopped off but he does get a nice moment).\u00a0 So, Bram Stoker\u2019s Dracula?\u00a0 Some yes and a lot no.<\/p>\n The special effects are pretty good for 1992.\u00a0 And the sets and costumes look like they cost a bundle.\u00a0 I didn\u2019t hate the whole movie.\u00a0 I rather enjoyed most of Hopkins\u2019 Van Helsing and a lot of Oldman\u2019s spoken part was well done.\u00a0 I think what I objected to was Ryder\u2019s absurdly emotional scenes with Dracula.\u00a0 I guess we\u2019re supposed to imagine that the Mina Harker character must have some kind of psychic link to Vlad\u2019s dead wife and this compels her to fall hopelessly in love with the undead and mostly repulsive looking creature that has very recently murdered her best friend, Lucy.<\/p>\n So, let\u2019s say there is some kind of twisted logic to this take.\u00a0 But since this is framed as a Christian legend, complete with crucifixes and holy water are we supposed to add in an un-Christian example of reincarnation?\u00a0 And somehow God is going to forgive Vlad for four centuries of murdering people because Winona Ryder loves him?\u00a0 I could be wrong but I don\u2019t think that\u2019s how it works.\u00a0 Someone named Vlad the Impaler is going to need a much stronger advocate than that when he gets to the Pearly Gates.<\/p>\n Alright, I\u2019ll put all my quibbles aside.\u00a0 What\u2019s the verdict?\u00a0 Well, since this is a Dracula movie then as a Dracula movie it provides blood and gore, a castle with frightened Transylvanian peasants nearby, a vampire that can turn into bats, wolves and mist and is attractive to female victims and a final scene with a stake and even a decapitation.\u00a0 So, successful, I guess.\u00a0 But Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder?\u00a0 That\u2019s not helping.<\/p>\n