Rating: 
Summary: For what it is worth-
Review: You have to love this movie. The only reason to not like it is the rediculous and pathetic Keanu. What a waste of time this guy is. My dirty socks could act better than he can. Go to school and learn your craft you wastoid.If you can get past Mr. thespian there, you will see a strange but unique version of the original book. If you can even call it a "version". Many of the actors are excellent. The story is paced well, and I don't ever recall a more artistic approach to film making. There are sceans that just stay with you. The film is oddly romantic, I can see why under a spell Mina would go for this guy. Yet he is still a foul creature from hell, and Gary Oldmann portrays both sides of Dracula with perfection. Excellent musical score. I just wish there were some extra features on this DVD. Because of that I have to knock it down a peg.
Rating: 
Summary: The Essence of Dracul
Review: Once in a while there comes a movie that tells the story with the same epic sweep as the original author intended it. Also there are some people who write for the mere fact of making money while others write to make a memory. The story of Dracula is captured perfectly in this movie. With its broad sweeping gestures of citimatic inginuities Coppola captures the essence of Mr. Stoker's picture of the count. It is not about horror, mind you that it does play a fantastic role, but it is a story of a man who is in love and wishes to achive redemption through the love of one that is dedicated as Mina's is to the Count. Essentialy it is a story about the triumph of Love ove the condemnation of undeath. That is why you have such a moving episode at the end of the movie, and of the book also, of this love that Coppola stamps in our conscience. So re-see the movie through the eyes of a lover instead with a lustful desire for blood to be spilled.
Rating:
Summary: Best Movie Ever Made
Review: This movie was beautifully made. Great cast with wonderful music. Especially for the scenes when 2 things happen at the same time (Dracula kills Lucy/Mina gets married) or when 2 things appear on the screen at the same time (Mina talks about the princess while Elizabeta's pictures appear on the wall). A MUST SEE!!!
Rating:
Summary: Not actually a vampire horror story.
Review: Through the tale of an intriging vampire story, it vividly illustrated a kind of love, that is powerful enough to despite everything standing in its path.
Rating: 
Summary: No mommy, not that one!
Review: This is truly HORRIBLE AND EMBARRASING TO BRAM STOKER! It absolutely stunk! Dracula is a blood sucking vampire not a romantic gentleman! If you want a truly errie, and a classical movie get the Bela Lugosi version from 1931. They knew true horror then!
Rating:
Summary: um, no
Review: ok, I normaly LOVE movies about vampires, but this ones just didn't do it for me. I found Mel Brooks's Dracula Dead and Loving funny when I first saw it, but after I saw this movie, I found it VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY FUNNY!! Look, if you want a good vampire movie go see Interview with the Vampire! That is a GREAT movie.
Rating:
Summary: FANTASTIC!
Review: Another Coppola Classic
Rating:
Summary: Title Misplaced
Review: I wonder, how many of the reviewers have actually read the novel by Bram Stoker. The concept of Dracula, in his original manifistation, was the embodiment of all sexual taboo's of the 19th century. Self-love (can't put the actual word), incest, homosexuality. There is no love in Dracula. So why, I ask, did Copolla, turn it into a love story? Dracula is not even close to a love story. The movie was excellent. I gave it one star because he titled it "Bram Stoker's" Dracula. It is nothing like the novel. Dracula is evil, disgusting, and heartless. In the movie, he is an avenger. He is turned into a man (not a beast) obsessed with reuniting with his lost love (ridiculously portrayed in Mina). I love Copolla, but....I couldn't get past the fact he tacked Bram Stoker's name to a story that has nothing to do with the original Dracula. I will put this forward. How many people want to kiss a dead, rotting, self-loving, incestuous, adulterous, corpse? That's exactly what Dracula is, not a handsome, gentleman. And couldn't they find someone better to play Dracula? I like Gary Oldman, but...god....he was too pretentious and too *nice* to be Dracula. In my opinion, Mr Hopkins would have made a *wonderful* Dracula. Read the book, you'll know why.
Rating:
Summary: Best Dracula Movie ever
Review: I think that this was the perfect Love story. I think that every one should see this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Oldman, actore extraordinare, was the only saving grace..
Review: Although the acting in this movie was superb on Oldman and Ryder's parts(and even w/ Keanu Reeves at some points), the movie did absolutely too little justice to the novel itself. The cinematography, in an attempt to be spooky and ominous, ended up being cheezy and overdramatic. Dracula was done MUCH better by Lugosi in...'54, was it?..All in all the movie flat out STUNK.
| 
