Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)

 OLDMAN'S EXQUISITE PERFORMANCE RESCUES THIS SILLY MOVIE FROM ABSOLUTE FOOLISHNESS.
Francis Coppola's DRACULA saga is an extravagantly nutso affair shot though with several terrible performances. (You know who they are.) But if you're going to have one really good performance in a vampire movie, it helps if it's from the actor playing Dracula. Gary Oldman is so much the life of Bram Stoker's Dracula that you the audience, unlike the characters in the movie, are safe only when Dracula is around.

Oldman's Dracula is by no means scary -- going for scary probably would have been futile and fatal -- but he is creepy, unpredictable, funny, sexy and compulsively watchable. Oldman succeeded in invoking the familiar, ghoulish Dracula with ease and wit, while at the same time evoking a new, modern, "F"-ed-up Dracula that has the kick of the unexpected. How difficult was Oldman's job? For starters, he was actually playing several different characters -- the medieval warrior; the crazed, debauched old man; the hairy giant bat; the seductive prince. That alone was potential chaos. But he also has a movie sliding off into silliness all around him. And he had gobs of makeup to contend with. You could see how the guy who became famous playing rock psycho Sid Vicious would have no problem handling this last challenge -- Oldman could act right through a brick wall, not to mention heavy prosthetics. How Oldman succeeded in keeping Coppola's sputtering blarney half-afloat is another matter.

Oldman seems to have thought a lot about how someone who has been pursuing a very bad habit for 400 years might feel and behave. On the one hand, the relic in the castle who unnerves Keanu Reeves is a combination of cheesy Bela Lugosi tribute and purely original strangeness -- as the terrifying razor-licking scene shows. The lethal geezer has the manners of someone who hasn't been out in public in a few centuries. On the other hand, the blue-spectacled fashion plate who fascinates Mina (Winona Ryder) is all seductive single-mindedness, with a subtle -- here's the key and the surprise -- vulnerability. The elegant prince has been consumed by a love since the fall of Constantinople -- and he has the gaze to prove it.

Besides giving Dracula a low voice and slooowww way of talking (why hurry when you've seen everything and you're never going to die?), Oldman paid special attention to his character's eyes. Dracula almost never blinks, telegraphing that, physically speaking, he doesn't have normal human needs, and metaphorically speaking, he can't be surprised or intimidated. The moment when Oldman does have Dracula blink -- when he sees the picture of Mina on Harker's desk, and later when he is with Mina and she is "remembering" his love Elisabeta -- are precisely when his ancient humanity has been aroused. Oldman also uses his hands to feed energy into his portrait of the "undead." The old Dracula, whose palms are hairy (a good joke), does some fancy finger-waving that is complemented by a sort of bat-flapping of the arms when he gets ticked off. A great effect. The prince's hands are flawless, manicured instruments of seduction. Very sexy.

But these are just the specifics of a performance that is thoroughly thought out and fearlessly executed. And all within the confines of a basically terrible movie! With the whole enterprise of Bram Stoker's Dracula pitched so dangerously, and at points disastrously, toward extremism, it was something of a miracle that Oldman managed to resurrect a woefully picked-over legend with the strength of his own dramatic nerve.
May 10, 2008

 For the dead travel fast
Not too many movies try to stick close to the story or at least the essence of what the story is about. You get a lot of blood suckers without the true story as seen from the time. This presentation kept all the main characters and kept them as they were meant to be. Many of the actual lines from the original story are presented her.

The basic story is of Dracula losing his love only to find her again four centuries later. Well not quit the original thrust of the story it fits well as a main thread. Drac goes to London to start a new life and finds food for though. Munching on Sadie Frost can defrost anyone's soul. And Winona Ryder makes a tasty Mina. Keanu Reeves picks up a British accent.

Two major drawbacks, keeping this from being a five star movie is that many of the visual effects are hokey and threaten to undo the pathos of the story. And what is with the dumb looking Renfield outfits? Secondly the background music turns out to be foreground music and the actor lines get lost in the noise.

Of course the ending does not actually match the book but it works for the story being told.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Just a not that if you are buying this for Blu-ray you are missing the point of the movie. Yes the blood is bloodier and you can see the good bumps on naked flesh, but it doe not change the story one iota. I only bought Blu-ray beau that is the technology of the time.

Dracula (Signet Classics)

Nosferatu April 27, 2008

 Stunning on blu-ray!
Always loved this movie, always thought it was great (visually, acting of the stars (minus Keenu), costuming, sound, so forth...)
I had recently gotten an LCD HDTV and a Blu-Ray player, and this was the first blu-ray I put to the test.
Oh my God, I was thrilled by the total experience of this disc! The picutre was outstanding, vibrant colors, sharpness, detail, it all was there in spades. This is now the blu-ray I compare others to.
I highly recommend this, not only for the fantastic movie it is, but also for the blu-ray experience. April 18, 2008

 Love Never Dies
What can I say? I absolutely love this film. I try and watch it at least a couple of times per month. I have read the other reviews stating how the acting was horrible, or the cheesy shadows...pish posh. The focus of this adaptation was how Prince Vlad's love for Elizabeta never died. The film shows you how the picture of Mina brings back all of the joy inside the Count and his desperation to reach Mina to see her for himself. How can you not love the part where the Prince tells Mina that he is her servant? Hello all men out there!! There is no courtship these days, like what is portrayed in this movie. I wish that aspect existed in these times!! And no, dinner at Big Boy is NOT courtship!

I own the Superbit edition of this movie and there is a scene on the back cover where the Prince and Mina (in the red dress, boy what I wouldn't give to have that dress...)are at Rule's and he is just about to lock lips with her. I do not see that part in the actual movie. I wish there were more parts of them kissing. Is there some director's cut sitting out there waiting for us with more scenes?? Please say it does exist! April 14, 2008

 It's OK, but it's been done better.
Francis Ford Coppola can make good movies. This, unfortunately isn't one of them. It's got some things about it that are amazing, some things I love, but it's also got lot's of unintended comedy and jarring, goofy moments that make you cringe- not with fear, but with disbelief.

First I'll fire off some things I like about it. It's got great music, for starters, that definetly fits the tone of a more serious Dracula movie. Most of the sets are outstanding, and some of the actors do really great jobs. As far as the narrative goes, they stick closer to the novel as any Dracula movie has yet.

The film starts off very promising, with eerie narration and a little background on Dracula, which for me was one of the most striking scenes. Unfortunately, we soon move to a terribly miscast Keanu Reeves narrating in an unconvincing British accent. And then we see the aged Dracula...with a red Halloween-costume satin robe on and white beehive hairdo. At this point I was giggling and going umm...What;s going on with that?

Some problems occur when you update this story and try to add elements from Anne Rice and 80's slasher movies. Dracula and all things vampiric become overtly sexual- something that was more hinted at for sharper readers of the novel- and Dracula turns from monster to Romantic Anti-hero. Mina Harker basically becomes the 'final girl' in this story- the lone heroine who survives and kills the stalker. It might have worked if the acting had been less cheesy, the nudity less gratuitous, and less bloody ( you may say "it's a vampire movie, it's supposed to have blood"...you can have too much.).

Of particular mention is Sadie Frost, who, as Lucy, spends roughly 80% of her screen time moaning, topless, or some combination of the two. It's one of those things that you'll be watching, trying to stay serious and you're like...Huh...huhuh...Hey Beavis, check it out.

Also, Tom Waits as Renfield. No thank you. I'll gladly listen to your music. Just stop eating flies.

And some of Dracula's transformations are ridiculous to look at...Think Sci-Fi Channel original movie quality.

Finally, my biggest problem with the movie is that Gary Oldman just doesn't make a very iconic Dracula. I mean with Christopher Lee and Bela Lugosi, both actors had long reaching influence in defining our perceptions of what Dracula is. Gary Oldman, though a great actor ( and getting great roles, lately), doesn't really dominate like his predecessors did. He's just there. He's doesn't steal scenes, which, as Dracula, is his right. Also, I hate his sunglasses and Top Hat. Dracula is supposed to be menacing, not a member of Guns & Roses. March 22, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...