Bram Stoker's
Dracula
Directed
by Francis Ford Coppola
Screenplay
by James V. Hart. Based upon the novel Dracula by Bram Stoker
Starring
Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Anthony Hopkins, Keanu Reeves, Richard E. Grant,
Cary Elwes, Bill Campbell, Sadie Frost, and Tom Waits
130
minutes. Rated R. Original aspect ratio: 1.85:1. 1992
Y'know, Bram Stoker's Dracula
is one of those movies that you look at and think they could have done
so much more. You realize that what they did do was pretty damn good, but
you're severely disappointed, because you know -- you know -- that
if they'd just taken it a step further, then they would have a truly great
film on their hands, but instead they stopped short of greatness, as if
skidding to a halt at the edge of a deep crevice. Both the nature of the
novel Dracula and the operatic fashion in which Francis Ford Coppola
directs this opulent piece of work just scream "three hour epic!"
But Bram Stoker's Dracula extends just a tad past two hours, and
it hurts because of that. You almost get the feeling that there was a lot
of material that was either written in the screenplay but never filmed,
or even filmed but not included in the final cut. And why this is, I'm
just not sure. Dracula is a long and complex (if badly-written)
novel, and Coppola is no stranger to epic-length tales (The 
Godfather
trilogy, anyone -- basically a nine hour long move). I suppose if the film
had been written differently it might be another story, but the screenplay
in places seems truncated, almost as if the screenwriter was impatient
to get to the end.
But let
me back up. We all know the story, so I won't bore you with the details.
Y'know what bugs me? When reviewers start a sentence with "we all know
the story," and then proceed to give us a synopsis. Anyhow, acting out
the familiar parts in this film is a colorful and diverse cast that --
for the most part -- does an excellent job. Gary Oldman is nothing short
of brilliant as the Count, and Winona Ryder gives us a sweetly convincing
Mina. Hopkins is great, as usual, as Van Helsing. Newcomer Sadie Frost,
who plays the doomed Lucy, is easy on the eyes (and seems eager to bare
her left breast, as she does in every other scene, but never her
right
breast) but slightly annoying. Though, I suppose the same could be said
of Lucy. Lucy reminds me a bit of Scarlet O'Hara. More's the pity that
Scarlet O'Hara didn't wind up decapitated in a crypt, but that's beside
the point. The real weak link in the cast is Keanu Reeves as Jonathan Harker.
Now, hold on. Keanu Reeves has improved greatly as an actor in his past
few films. True, he's very stiff here, and in other early films (Speed
leaps to mind), but he was pretty good in The Matrix, he was actually
really
good in 
The
Devil's Advocate, and -- believe it or not -- he was pretty damn good
in Much Ado About Nothing. Granted, he plays a completely one-dimentional
character, but he does it well. I'm not kidding here. At any rate,
he stinks here, but that's okay, because Jonathan Harker actually kind
of takes a back seat to the rest of the characters in this film.
As I
said, the screenplay seems really truncated, and the dialogue isn't always
so hot. One thing that bugs (get it? ha, ha) me about the screenplay is
the fact that we're constantly hearing the characters voice-overs. The
voice-overs are ripped straight from the novel, and and really badly written
and offer no insight into the characters or the situation that a few extra
seconds of actual filmmaking could have gotten across much more
effectively. Coppola is a talented filmmaker; why he didn't decide to omit
the voice overs is beyond me.
But Coppola
is
a talented filmmaker, and it's his sweeping, operatic style that really
makes this film worthy of a viewing or three. The lush sets and costumes
are truly amazing, and the way that Coppola moves his camera and directs
his actors is really astonishing. This Dracula is a slick and hotly
erotic piece of work -- vampires in general and Dracula in particular have
always had a bit of eroticism attached to them (the "three sisters," anyone?),
but that really comes through, here. It's not all bared breasts (breast,
rather) and lusty gazes though. There are some violent, horrible images,
but they're executed in such a way as to make them seem almost beautiful.
There's one sequence in particular -- the scene keeps cutting back and
forth between Mina and Jonathan's wedding and Lucy's final transformation
into a vampire -- it's actually very similar to Coppola's "baptism" sequence
at the 
end
of The Godfather. As the marriage ceremony reaches it's climax and
the two lovers kiss, literally buckets of blood are tossed about
the set of Lucy's bedroom from off-screen, covering everything with blood
in a magnificent flourish. It's gross, but at the same time absolutely
spectacular, and one of the most creative ways of showing the transformation
from human to vampire that I've ever seen.
The climax
is somewhat of a disappointment, though. Harker and his allies have caught
up with Dracula just at the base of the mountain on which his castle is
atop, and it's a race to stop him from reaching his home before the sun
sets. But the sequence is not only abruptly thrust upon us with absolutely
no set-up, build-up, or any other sort of tension-building device, but
it's surprisingly sloppily done, and not very tense at all. This could
have been an absolutely spectacular action sequence, but it falls
short, for some reason, and it's my main problem with the film.
I have
plans to do my own version of Dracula. It's going to be modernized,
with elements from other novels and stories tossed in for good measure,
but it's going to remain true to the story, more or less. And when I say
true to the story, I mean the whole story. Characters will be developed
more clearly, giving the film much more power and emotion. The action sequences
will be much more tense. The screenplay won't feel like it's been hacked
to pieces, or simply put together by a hack. The only thing I won't try
to improve on is Coppola's sweeping, magnificent, operatic direction. I'd
never succeed, so why even try?
Bottom line: Another "good, could have been great" quandary.
My grade:
B
My advice:
See it, but just keep in mind what I've said.
Get the movie
poster!
