Rating: 
Summary: Not the "definitive" version but still a very good movie!
Review: Based very loosely on the Broadway play instead of the Bram Stoker novel, this most interesting version of "Dracula" is not the most evenly spaced movie of the famous story, but it is still one of the best films of the genre, and is far superior to the dismal Coppola remake of 1992. Langella repeats his Broadway success as the infamous Count and has able support from an excellent cast. The almost black and white coloring is really very impressive and lends itself wonderfully to the gothic proceedings. The story in this version is set in the early 1900's (about 1910 or so I'd say) and is filmed in the Cornwall coastal area of England, a beautiful misty area of great subtlety. The scene of Langella crawling up the side of the house, bat-like, his eyes gleaming, is truly a scary sight, and there is genuine suspense throughout. Because the original Bram Stoker novel depends on the reader's imagination, it is doubtful that the story will ever be told cinematically or on the stage as well as it reads. For those of you who haven't read the Stoker book, his novel is told as a series of letters between the characters and, as it progresses, the reader begins to "read between the lines" of the letters, piecing together the details of what is actually happening before the characters are aware of them. This gives a sort of documentary feel to the novel, and I can tell you the book is definitely one of the scariest reads you will ever have! In many ways, Stoker's novel makes Blatty's novel of "The Exorcist" look like Winnie the Pooh. Stoker's novel of "Dracula" is truly VERY scary, laced with Victorian sexual suppression and gothic horrors thus far unimagined by ANY film version. However, for those who enjoy a good gothic treatment with good acting, the Langella version from 1979 remains a very good treatment of the material. The DVD has a good widescreen print and equally good sound. But for any of you who want "the real thing" I'd suggest the original novel by Bram Stoker: you won't get any better than that!
Rating:
Summary: Wasted performances in very uneven version of Dracula
Review: This is a very uneven version of the Dracula story, ostensibly based on the Broadway production with Frank Langella but with some major deviations from both the play and the novel. You get a sense for Langella's characterization but not much. Laurence Olivier hams things up a bit too much as Van Helsing, although Donald Pleasance comes a close second with his Dr. Seward. Wasted in the effort is Kate Nelligan, one of the more intelligent actresses of her day. My main complaint is that the ending comes rather abruptly as if the producers were watching the clock on the wall. Ultimately very disappointing for both fans of the Count and the actors alike.
Rating: 
Summary: Sly...subtly perverse...telling of the Dracula legend
Review: John Badham's version of DRACULA is one of the more interesting and...in my estimate... underrated versions of the tale. Frank Langella is excellent in his portrayal of the Count as a sexual predator reeking of arrogance and menace "I NEED!" aptly summarizes his supernatural solipsism and blood lust. Ironically, Kate Nelligan's, Miss Lucy is portrayed as a willing accomplice and co-partner in vampirism. Lucy is a "sophisticate"...a prospective lawyer, no less...who is wantonly bedazzled by the Count's glamour of evil. Her betrayals of fiance, family and...it is implied...feminine nature itself are a subtly perverse twist on the characteristic focus of Dracula as VILLAIN. In Badham's tale, DRACULA has clearly won a willing partner and disciple in the feral furtherance of his murderous, soul-damning cult. If there is "seduction" involved in this film it is Lucy who is its source by her eager embrace of evil incarnate. Laurence Olivier is superb as Van Helsing. The emotional range...overwhelming sorrow at the vile murder of his daughter Mina; to fierce hatred at its source is convincing. It well serves to contrast his role as Avenger with Lucy's conscienceless complicity. There is more to this version of DRACULA than "meets the eye". John Williams' romantic, yet rife-with-danger...like Franz Liszt's "Mephisto Waltz"...musical score magnificently accents this DRACULA with an above average (for a "horror" film ) cinematic exploration on what is the nature of the "monstrous" and when is a victim not a victim but someone who has willingly become what he has beheld and should have defied... This is a well-directed, beautifully photographed movie that...like Frank Lagella's Dracula..."has a light step" and can sneak-up on you with its subtle horror...
Rating: 
Summary: Laurence Olivier(spelling?) is not to be missed!
Review: Coppola's "Dracula" is sexy with excellent cinematography. But THIS version has SIR LAURENCE playing the role of Van Helsing and he is fantastic! Also, it had scenes that truly scared me and believe it or not, one that made me cry.I think it's a must for fans of the vampire mythology.
Rating:
Summary: Good Film, No Features Though. Dracula Collectors Rejoice.
Review: Frank Langella stars as the doomed Count and does a good job. Dracula leaves his homeland and begins to terrorize a new community. He falls for his real estate agent's love Mina. It is up to Mr. Harker and his comrades including Dr. Van Helsing to stop him, both from stealing away Mina, and from spreading his vampiric plague to the world. This version of Dracula (much like Coppola's), is more of a dark romance than a horror film. With no features whatsoever it's hard to justify purchasing this DVD. It is however, the only release of Langella's Dracula on the market on DVD and I don't see a newer release coming soon. The film's picture and sound are fine, so for just the film it is a good purchase.
Rating:
Summary: Rip-roaring Gothic melodrama
Review: The first thing you'll notice about the DVD version of John Badham's "Dracula" is the almost total absence of color. In fact, to all intents and purposes, this Technicolor film is now a black and white production! Apparently, the director felt his movie would play better this way on TV. Go figure. Anyway, the film itself is a rip-roaring Gothic melodrama, designed and photographed with a visual flourish that may seem old-fashioned and melodramatic, but it compels attention in a way that almost completely eluded Francis Ford Coppola's take on the legend thirteen years later. The script retains the basic structure of Stoker's novel whilst adding enough fresh ideas of its own to keep boredom (bred of familiarity) firmly at bay. For instance, Dracula's comeuppance during the climax is a million miles from his fate in the book, but it works here on purely cinematic terms. Frank Langella's rather unfortunate pompadour hairdo detracts from the power of his performance as the Count, but his deceptively romantic interpretation is fully in keeping with the film's approach. Lovely score by John Williams, too. Though the DVD packaging promises the film has been "Formatted for 16x9 TVs", don't be fooled - the disc is simply letterboxed at 2.15:1. It looks OK (except for that irritating lack of color, of course) and Gilbert Taylor's rich Gothic compositions are preserved with crystal clarity. Sound is Dolby Digital Surround. Be advised that Universal/Image STILL haven't sorted out legal wrangles over some of the incidental music in the original film. As a consequence, this is the same "home video version" as all the others, with some music rescored.
Rating:
Summary: It's not Bram Stoker, but it's an interesting revision...
Review: ...of Stoker's classic horror story. This version takes liberties galore with Stoker's plot, but the cast is excellent, and Frank Langella is absolutely devastating as Dracula -- diabolical, mesmerizing, incredibly erotic (I wanted to leave my window open so he could fly in) -- and the plot twists are an interesting reworking of the original. I wasn't too satisfied with the ending, but the rest of the movie more than makes up for it. This Dracula is definitely worth seeing.
Rating:
Summary: Mesmerizing
Review: Frank Langella was mesmerizing as the blood thirsty count Dracula. He played the role to perfection. Kate Nelligan as Lucy was just icing on the cake. She and Langella lit up the screen! The gothic, chilling landscapes, brilliant perforances, and wonderful music score make this move a MUST for all true Dracula fans! Try it, you won't be disappointed!
Rating:
Summary: Frank is the BEST Dracula. . .The end is brilliant
Review: I was so excited to see AMAZON had this inventory. I thought I was the only one impressed with this version of DRACULA. I will treasure this one and watch often. THE END IS REALLY GREAT!!!
Rating:
Summary: A Dracula for romantics: gore-hounds go elsewhere.
Review: Is this the most under-rated film in its genre? Yes, probably. Usually dismissed by those for whom the horror cinema should be all about cheap scares, this stands as an exemplar to that minority of us to whom the genre is more interesting as a branch of romantic poetry than as some tatty ghost-train ride. With the focus securely on the magnificent Kate Nelligan's Lucy, a bolder, stronger heroine than you'll find in any other Drac-flick, this - like the Coppolla version - makes gothic romance of Stoker's gothic horror story. But whereas Coppolla & co. crudely stapled a love story on Stoker's structure(which had no comfortable place for it), this movie is a square one reimagining of the tale and therefore more satisfyingly unified in its own terms: not Bram Stoker's 'Dracula', but close to what 'Dracula' might have been if Charlotte Bronte had written it. With a terrific cast and magnificent Cornish locations (Langella and Nelligan make such grand presences in that landscape that they're more Tristan & Isolde than bloodsucker & fainting ingenue), as well as the most luscious photography any gothic movie ever had (on VHS at least) and John Williams's most vibrant score, this is a movie that deserves championing by gothicists who have grownpast the point of being satisfied by cruddy shock effects (although Jan Francis's reapparance as the vampire Mina would have made Aeschylus's hair stand on end!).
|
