Bram Stoker's Dracula

[stray]

Well treaded ground, to be sure, but you know... This movie is quite brilliant. Why the hell does Coppola not direct many movies? He is possibly the most mainstream director (i.e. with cash) who's got a flare for things of a surreal nature (note: what's funny is while I'm typing this, the less mainstream guy that comes to mind that is like Coppola to me is Aronofsky.. and so I Google their names together, and find the exact comparison made by Mickey Rourke in a recent interview. So I'm in good company on that opinion, I guess!). Here, the surreal is in flying colors.. But I think it applies to even the Godfather, Apocalypse Now, Rumble Fish, the Outsiders.. I've renewed my appreciation for him because of it. He's also utterly meticulous and detailed.. but this I already knew.

When it came out, I didn't really like it much (it wasn't "scary" enough.. nor could I appreciate all that he was paying homage to at the time). In fact, I probably enjoyed the Mel Brooks' spoof "Dracula Dead and Loving It" even more...

[stu]

Gary Oldman is the MAN. This movie came out just as I hit my teens, so the lusty ladies in Victorian garb played me like a fiddle.

This movie perfected practical effects on a grand scale and is probably one of the last to use them to such an extent without any CGI crutches.

[IainC]

Keanu Reeves managed to wrest the award for worst English Accent Ever from Dick Van Dyke in that movie. That's really all I remember it for, that and Gary Oldman's cool shades I guess.

Oh and 'Dead and Loving it'... srsly....

[Ironwood]

One of the five movies I've walked out the theatre on.

Serious shite.

"You killed Lucy, I love you !"

That's an actual line.

Winona Ryder sucked balls and Reeves, as mentioned, was the worst fucking carboard cutout since Mr Ben.

No.

[stray]

They're supposed to be lame and melodramatic. It's a silent film homage, and full of horror archetypes. Everyone but Dracula and Van Helsing are idiots.

[stray]

Rather, let me put it this way -- a realistic Jonathan (Keanu) would have gone utterly insane the second Dracula's carriage rider picked him up. But he was totally oblivious until far too late about all the fucked up shit happening to him. I can only think it was deliberately written this way -- for him to be some sort blown-out-of-proportion horror boyfriend idiot type. Heh.

Also, Cary Elwes. There is no way Coppola was going for nothing but humor by casting him.

Everything's exaggerated here really. I said Van Helsing wasn't an idiot -- but he does suffer from some sort of mania -- and it isn't played down here.

[DraconianOne]

Stray - your taste in films is something I can normally associate with - we mostly share a lot of similar likes.  This isn't one of them although I'm willing to watch it again to see if there's something I missed when I saw it 15 years ago or whenever it came out.

A better homage to the silent horror films is definitely "Shadow of the Vampire" with Willem Dafoe and John "Malkovich" Malkovich.

Also, I'm not sure Coppola's made a good film since, dunno - Rumble Fish? I liked Godfather III but it wasn't a patch on the first two.

[stray]

I like Shadow of the Vampire, but that isn't a homage to silent film at all. It's simply a movie about a silent film. I'm referring to the cinematographic transitions used here.. as well as the lighting, the melodrama, the closeup shots, the kind of fake looking backdrops.. even the angles on the chase scenes have a certain silent film feel to them (they have that "directly forward and back look".. like how a lot of old movies looked how they were filmed right out of the window of a train).

[edit] I would say it's a throwback to some other older stuff too, not just silent. It's use of diary talk in the narration reminds me of a lot of 30's and 40's films. Also, how it uses a "map" to segue between scenes.. Kind of an old fashioned device, I guess.

He does use one effect though that is so obviously a throwback to silent films.. When Drac enters London, Coppola starts filming the city streets in a fast motion, grainy 8mm look (but it doesn't quite look like typical home movie 8mm.. it looks like an old silent reel -- except in blown out colors).

That said! This is as much a homage to Lugosi as well. Oldman rocks in this. At the very least, it should be liked for that.

[DraconianOne]

Well, I'm convinced enough to watch it again.  Don't think I've seen it since I got more interested in filmmaking as a whole so yeah, why not.

[Riggswolfe]

Stray, have you ever read Dracula?

This movie is one of the more faithful adaptions. (though the novel does not give Dracula a backstory to my memory, or really, any motivations, he's just an evil dick) The diary talk comes from the novel. In fact, the whole novel is basically, a collection of letters and diaries rather than prose.

[schild]

Stray, have you ever read Dracula?

This movie is one of the more faithful adaptions. (though the novel does not give Dracula a backstory to my memory, or really, any motivations, he's just an evil dick) The diary talk comes from the novel. In fact, the whole novel is basically, a collection of letters and diaries rather than prose.

^^This.

I love Dracula, it's a beautiful film, hampered by the book (imo, even though I loved the book), and as such the screenplay adaptation is slightly spotty. But I still love it.

[HaemishM]

I think Coppola is mostly overrated, but then I was never a fan of the Godfather movies either. 3 was horrible and 1 was decent, but not good enough to make me watch 2. He's a competent director with occasional flashes of brilliance. Dracula was not one of those flashes, however.

[WayAbvPar]

I really didn't like it when I saw it in the theatre. It has won me over with repeated viewings, however. Put enough hot naked chicks in a flick and I will give it a 2nd viewing- a lesson to all future filmmakers 

As noted above, it is far more faithful to the original book than most adaptations. The book is genuinely creepy, and this brings some of that through, which is amazing given the presence of Keanu Reeves. The nighttime ride along the snowy road in the carriage brings out the feel of the book very nicely, for one example.

[Merusk]

I enjoy the movie becuase it's one of the more faithful adaptations and Coppola made an effort to recreate physical effects from the old B&W days.  When the movie came out I remember reading articles about how hard it was to do some of them because nobody in Hollywood knew how to do them anymore.  IIRC they sought-out some old retired special effects artists to get pointers.

I surprised myself how much I liked it because I've tried to read Dracula 3 or 4 different times and just couldn't stomach it.  Things were just wacky, disjointed and couldn't pull me in flipping from letter to letter, but it worked in the film much better.

The acting, however, is pretty damn awful.

[Ingmar]

Disliked this movie immensely, entirely because of the acting. Anthony Hopkins completely mailed this one in, you can actually see the not even trying lines emanating from his head.

[stray]

Stray, have you ever read Dracula?

This movie is one of the more faithful adaptions. (though the novel does not give Dracula a backstory to my memory, or really, any motivations, he's just an evil dick)

No, I haven't. I thought the backstory part was cool... It turned this into a good supernatural "romance" story as much as a horror. And it's got some cool lines to fit in with it. "I have crossed oceans of time to find you." But did the book end with the same sort of redemptive take on it, with Mina there when he died?

I have no idea how the original book ends.. Even the silent Nosferatu film had a changed ending, I believe (where he gets exposed to the light).

[edit]

Put enough hot naked chicks in a flick and I will give it a 2nd viewing- a lesson to all future filmmakers

so the lusty ladies in Victorian garb played me like a fiddle.

These aren't just normal hot chicks, by the way. It's butt naked Vampire Bellucci. One of her first movies, I think. As for Keanu, I think he redeems himself just for the baby scene with her (his reaction is spot on).

[stray]

I think Coppola is mostly overrated, but then I was never a fan of the Godfather movies either. 3 was horrible and 1 was decent, but not good enough to make me watch 2. He's a competent director with occasional flashes of brilliance. Dracula was not one of those flashes, however.

What the fuck are you talking about? As great as 1 is for Brando and all that, 2 is almost universally considered the superior. Watch it.



I would praise the guy just for the above. That whole rooftop scene is the shit. He isn't overrated because there is no one else who can or has done anything like it. In fact, I might just buy that new Godfather II game just to see how this segment plays out. 

And it's another example of how he can be sort of surreal in his depictions of unlikely things. Godfather is not a realistic mafia movie, in the sense that Goodfellas or Donnie Brasco is.. It's some otherworldly fairytale world of mobsters. And it's brilliant in that sense. Like Apoc is some dark fairytale of war. It's not Platoon. Or Tucker is a fairytale inventor story. Or the Outsiders is a fairytale greaser story. This guy can seem to turn any subject into some grand epic bordering on fantasy. Yet, he doesn't need an outright fantasy story as a crutch to do it, like Lord of the Rings. And he doesn't need to outright fairytales to do it either, like Tim Burton. Dracula is the one where he did have that crutch, and got to play it all up to full effect. Now I wish he'd do it more. He'd probably make a good Dune movie or something. Or hell, even a Christmas movie.

[lamaros]

Heh a thread where I (generally) agree with Stray.

[Riggswolfe]

No, I haven't. I thought the backstory part was cool... It turned this into a good supernatural "romance" story as much as a horror. And it's got some cool lines to fit in with it. "I have crossed oceans of time to find you." But did the book end with the same sort of redemptive take on it, with Mina there when he died?

Let me preface this with a disclaimer: It's been about 2 decades since I read Dracula. I appreciated it but found it hard to read and never wanted to read it ever again, unlike say, Frankenstein. So, with that said, my memory is fairly hazy. So here goes:

The original book ends with a chase as Dracula races back to his castle. Jonathan, Van Helsing, Texan Dude (can't remember his name) and the Doctor are I believe the people involved. They catch him and a fight ensues. Dracula kills the Texan and the others get injured and also injures him. The others stab him with the Texan's Bowie Knife and he dies. The end. There is no love between Mina and Dracula, Dracula's sole interest in her was as a way to hurt Harker and Van Helsing.

[stray]

Well basically how this one ended too, down to the Texan dying. Except Mina is there, convinces them to stand aside, and she drags him in the castle, where he repeats Christ's line on the cross "It is finished!" before dying. Heh. Oh, and Mina cuts off his head.

[HaemishM]

I think Coppola is mostly overrated, but then I was never a fan of the Godfather movies either. 3 was horrible and 1 was decent, but not good enough to make me watch 2. He's a competent director with occasional flashes of brilliance. Dracula was not one of those flashes, however.

What the fuck are you talking about? As great as 1 is for Brando and all that, 2 is almost universally considered the superior. Watch it.

I'm talking about the fact that Godfather 1 didn't make me give two shits about the characters, the story or anything else related to it. Why would I want to subject myself to 2? I really tried to like it, but other than being well-shot, it was boring to me. I think he's overrated, period, probably because of the exact things you love him for.

[stray]

Very strange then. Godfather is like Apple Pie or some shit. Take all the hype away and any preconceptions -- and still.. Apple pie.

[Merusk]

Well basically how this one ended too, down to the Texan dying. Except Mina is there, convinces them to stand aside, and she drags him in the castle, where he repeats Christ's line on the cross "It is finished!" before dying. Heh. Oh, and Mina cuts off his head.

None of the Vlad Teppis back story is in the Novel Dracula, either.  That whole line was added-in just because folks now know who Stoker based Drac on, and to give him a more humanizing angle.  Coppola obviously follows Lugosi's take on the character, Dracula isn't a monster piece, it's a romance.

[WayAbvPar]

Heh a thread where I (generally) agree with Stray.

I was as surprised as you. Had to happen eventually 

[stray]

It's a jolly New Year already.

[Evildrider]

Goodfellas > Godfather movies.

Godfather was boring as hell for me.

[stray]

They're too different for me to measure against each other. It's like the difference between a space opera and a hard science fiction story (just to be geeky about it). The underlying plots are polar opposites too, even if they are both mob movies. Godfather is about a legitimate guy getting involved in something he doesn't want, making difficult choices out of necessity - and dies, never able to get out of it. Goodfellas is about a guy who romanticizes bullshit from the get go, takes the easy way out in life, and takes the easy way by fucking the very people he romanticized... Equal movies, in their own way... But Michael Corleone was less of a douchebag, I think.

[Broughden]

Silent films were overly acted melodramatic shiite. Paying homage to overly acted melodramatic shiite doesnt make it brilliant. It makes it fucking stupid.
Winona Ryder sucks. Quite literally if you are in a band, but figuratively if you mean her acting attempts.

PS- Shiite needs to be added to the dictionary. that is all.

[Rasix]

PS- Shiite needs to be added to the dictionary. that is all.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[stray]

I hear the book was overly dramatic too. Which would be consistent with Victorian novels in general, would it not?


Anyhow, I can understand not liking Winona and Keanu in this film -- but they were not the overly dramatic ones. They were quite wooden. Winona not as bad Keanu.

It was the chick who played Lucy who overacted -- like a slut. And that is good.

And Anthony Hopkins. And he was brilliant. The minute he realizes the vampire is Dracula himself, he goes apeshit.. runs outside, and starts humping the Texan's leg. Fucking hilarious. Leg humping is valid overacting, if you ask me.

Then Tom Waits. Who is pretty much the best Renfield ever.

[Broughden]

PS- Shiite needs to be added to the dictionary. that is all.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Sorry. I cant spell apparently. Only has one "i".

[HaemishM]

Then Tom Waits. Who is pretty much the best Renfield ever.

Now THIS I will agree with.

[Johny Cee]

They're too different for me to measure against each other. It's like the difference between a space opera and a hard science fiction story (just to be geeky about it). The underlying plots are polar opposites too, even if they are both mob movies. Godfather is about a legitimate guy getting involved in something he doesn't want, making difficult choices out of necessity - and dies, never able to get out of it. Goodfellas is about a guy who romanticizes bullshit from the get go, takes the easy way out in life, and takes the easy way by fucking the very people he romanticized... Equal movies, in their own way... But Michael Corleone was less of a douchebag, I think.

Godfather glorified and romanticized the Mob.  The undercurrent and theme was the moral decay that life caused on those who engaged in it,  and on Michael's hypocracy.


In Goodfellas,  Henry Hill bought into the romantic imagery and let himself be used by the organization.  The viewer, though, sees that the romanticized image is all gilding and bullshit from near the start.  It's the organizations final betrayals, where:

1.  Paulie gives him a couple of thousand dollars and tells him not to come back,  despite decades of earning for them.
2.  Jimmy Conway is obviously plotting the murder of he and his wife to tie up loose ends

That breaks the romantic image and leads him to testify against his friends.


The scene in the bar,  right before Jimmy starts his killing spree, with the close up of Deniro's face while Sunshine of Your Love starts playing?  I think that's not only one of Deniro's greatest performances,  but probably my favorite scene in cinema.

[Velorath]

I think Coppola is mostly overrated, but then I was never a fan of the Godfather movies either. 3 was horrible and 1 was decent, but not good enough to make me watch 2. He's a competent director with occasional flashes of brilliance. Dracula was not one of those flashes, however.

What the fuck are you talking about? As great as 1 is for Brando and all that, 2 is almost universally considered the superior. Watch it.

I'm talking about the fact that Godfather 1 didn't make me give two shits about the characters, the story or anything else related to it. Why would I want to subject myself to 2? I really tried to like it, but other than being well-shot, it was boring to me. I think he's overrated, period, probably because of the exact things you love him for.

It insists upon itself.

[HaemishM]

Well-played, nerd.