BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA
Reviewed by Jerry Saravia
The 1922 silent masterpiece "Nosferatu," and its 1979 remake by Herzog are
clearly the most lucid, atmospheric interpretations of the famous novel by
Bram Stoker. There have been several remakes and sequels in their wake, so
why keep remaking the oft-told story? We all know it by heart. Francis
Ford Coppola's "Bram Stoker's Dracula" is a visual
symphony of horrors and an overblown,
campy knock off of the legend. That's not to say that it isn't fun, it surely is, but scary? Not at all but it still compelling.
Coppola's "Dracula" starts off very promisingly and maintains an eerie, fairy-tale tone with nightmarish overtures from start to finish, complete with silhouettes, shadows, old transitional wipes such as irises, beautiful if ostentatious
imagery and really fancy camera tricks, especially when we first visit
Dracula's castle. Some of this represents Coppola's best directorial
work ever and every image is stunning and truly remarkable with dissolves that are truly hypnotic.
The acting is uneven throughout. Gary Oldman ("J.F.K") plays Dracula
fairly straight with an astonishing array of body movements and language
(he's a bloodsucking, white-haired, venemous creature in the beginning) - I initially thought back in 1992 that his
performance lacked passion and verve. It doesn't - he truly loves his Mina, the reincarnated love of his days as Vlad the Impaler. Keanu Reeves as Jonathan Harker is
merely incompetent and unbelievable in a period setting - he reminded me
too much of his Bill and Ted antics. Sir Anthony Hopkins overacts to the
hilt as Professor Van Helsing, and has a moment where he smells Mina's
fragrance reminding one of Hannibal Lecter. Winona Ryder, however, steals
the movie as Mina (Harker's sweetie) and she is appropriately passionate
and sexy, especially in the love scenes. She has that chemistry with Oldman that makes for some very erotic love scenes, in and out of the bedroom.
This "Dracula" is something of a technological marvel and a touching love story, more so than I had thought. It somehow works in the big
egostistical way that some of Coppola's lesser efforts have. At times
resembling more of a horror spoof, it is extraordinarily well-made and the
snowy climax at Drac's castle is terrific, suspenseful stuff. Dear old Francis still leaves so little to the imagination and
the gore is piled on scene after scene with none of the cold, chilling
atmosphere of "Nosferatu" or Lugosi's "Dracula." The scene with the vampiric Lucy (Sadie Frost) approaching her tormentors as she carries a human child is not nearly as horrific as a similar scene in John Badham's 1979 "Dracula" version with Frank Langella.
Over-the-top, overstuffed, overdone and undernourished in certain character
details (especially characters played by Cary Elwes, Bill Campbell and Richard E. Grant), Coppola's "Dracula" is never boring and somehow fun in a crude way. This
Count does not suck and is given a measure of peace and humanity that has escaped many previous versions (and it practically tears away at Stoker's Victorian conventions with sexual acts galore). This is also one of those films that stays with you with its visual grandeur, gorgeous costumes and practical special-effects and a truly sympathetic Dracula.
No comments:
Post a Comment