Rating: 
Summary: Good horror movie
Review: This is one of my favorite Dracula tales. It has a nice gothic feeling. I liked Oldman, he has a charming yet creepy manner that worked really well. I also liked Winona Ryder as Mena, she was very effective. Good acting and atmosphere make for an enjoyable spooky tale well told.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Stoker's Dracula
Review: Terming this film version of Dracula as "Bram Stoker's" is patently ridiculous. The love story that is one of the main plots of this film is not in the novel and simply does not work. Instead of a dreaded monster of great power we are given a lover who will not die. One of the elements of the novel that make it work so well is that the forces of good - Jonathan and Mina Harker, Van Helsing, Dr. Seward etc. - must summon all their bravery in a cause that has little chance of success. There is a spirit of sacrifice, partly motivated by the death of Lucy and to save humanity that the characters of the book band together. This is missing from this film, instead we have a lot of gore. One is not supposed to feel sorry for Dracula; he is supposed to be evil and terrifying, not the world's greatest lover.This Dracula is visually stunning but as far as adhering to Bram Stoker's novel, as I recall Francis Ford Coppola prided himself on, it makes a shambles of it. Why didn't Mr. Coppola have enough courage to say this was his Dracula?
Rating:
Summary: Stylish Vision of Bram Stoker's Horror Classic
Review: Before 1992, Bram Stoker's chilling and masterfully written horror novel, "Dracula", had not been given the screen treatment it deserved. The Bela Lugosi version, while a fine film in its own right, was a far cry from what Stoker had in mind. The superb 1922 German made silent film, "Nosferatu", captured the mood of the book, but fell slightly short of being the definitive screen adaptation. Francis Ford Coppola succeeded with "Bram Stoker's Dracula". Stylishly directed, "Bram Stoker's Dracula" packs quite a punch with delicious, eye-popping art direction that perfectly evokes the eerie atmosphere of Stoker's vision, Dracula's castle being the prime example. The cinematography, with its clever use of scenes dissolving into poetic montages, is just as impressive. The cast effectively brings the story's colorful characters to vibrant and vivid life: Gary Oldman is alternately frightening, seductive, and pitiable as the bloodthirsty Count; Winona Ryder is delicately charming as the ingenue, Mina Murray, the reincarnation of Dracula's tragically deceased love; Anthony Hopkins is witty and amusing as the eccentric vampire hunter, Professor Van Helsing; Richard E. Grant, Cary Elwes and Bill Campbell also contribute crackerjack performances as a triumvirate of dashing vampire busters. Only Keanu Reeves is disappointing (although, it is excusable in a film this good) with his awkward portrayal of the protagonist, Jonathan Harker. He never does get that British accent right! The connection to the factual Romanian King, Vlad Dracula, while not in Stoker's book, made the film more interesting. The only real drawback to "Bram Stoker's Dracula" is its explicit sensuality. With a more subtle use, it would have been an even better film. "Bram Stoker's Dracula" is an atmospherically gothic visual feast that is not so much a horror story, but an allegory of man's darkest fears and desires, as well as a story of undying love. But, if you are not as intrepid as I am, I suggest you watch it in a brightly lit room with someone sitting close beside you!
Rating:
Summary: A Very Good Interpretation
Review: Although this movie takes quite a few liberties with Bram Stoker's novel, the changes are inventive and flesh out Dracula's character. The addition of a love story between Dracula and Mina Harker (who looks like his lost love) transforms Stoker's theme into a context where evil is even more sympathetic than in his Victorian novel, and the tragic dimensions are clearer. The visual style may be bit off-putting at times, but Coppola's inventiveness more than makes up for it.
Finally, I'd like to address the "faithfulness" of this movie to the book, since many people see it as heresy. If you want to see a strict visual version of the book, then read the book and use your imagination. It's free and you can use all the special effects you want. If you want to see how someone else interprets the story (someone with actors and money to use), then watch this and enjoy the ride, but leave your pseudo-biblical concordance of Bram Stoker at the door.
Rating: 
Summary: Pleasing DVD of an overdirected movie
Review: BS's Dracula is the most ambitious project of Francis Coppola since Apocalypse now. Ambitious project doesn't mean succesful, so this film wasn't a succes nor for the critics nor for the audiences, but it split them both. I think it's worth seeing because it's a great creative effort and if sometimes it can seem overdirected, the cinematography, the costums and the locations are wonderful. Winona Ryder is good, while Tom Waits makes an impressive performance playing a minor role.
The Superbit DVD looks good but not so good as other titles in this series, maybe it all depends that the movie is of 1992, so isn't quite recent, however the video track is good and pleasing: an important result when you consider the extreme differences of lights the movie presents. Between the 2 audio tracks I prefer the DTS track, surround effects are rare, but musical surround is highly involving, while dialogues are beautifully rendered.
Rating: 
Summary: How does this compare to the book?
Review: I did not like this movie. I read the book and loved it. When I saw the movie I saw that it followed non of the books story line. The movie was titled Bram Stoker's Dracula yet the movie portrays the characters and their personalities all wrong. They even add things that are not in the book, such as the love affair between Mina Harker and her "Prince," in the book she depised the Count, in the movie she couldn't get enough of him. So in short it is safe to say that I was extremely disappointed in the movie.
Rating:
Summary: THIS WILL PLEASE HORROR FANS!
Review: This is one of the most stunning,seductive,and scary horror films of all time.This DVD(or video)will keep you on the edge of your seat until the credits at the end! But I think that the Superbit and the ordinary Dvd release are the same.But it is up to you if you want to pay more. Bram Stoker's Dracula is director Francis Ford Coppola's epic retelling of a story that has inspired many films-but never one so true to Stoker's 1897 novel and its historical background. This is a great horror.This is Dracula as you never seen him before.Once you have seen Bram Stoker's Dracula you will never forget it. *RATED R FOR VAMPIRE VIOLENCE,GORE,STRONG SEXUAL CONTENT,and NUDITY.
Rating:
Summary: Great visuals, great Waites, mediocre eveything else...
Review: I always feel like I'm watching a documentary on life in the Hollywood Hills when I see this film. Everything about it is either way overdone (the effects, the histrionics, the makeup) or way way way underdone (Reeves & Ryder performances). Ultimately this movie doesn't hold a candle to Werner Herzog's matchlessly brilliant & much creepier Nosferatu (with Klaus Kinski's sublime definitive performance).
Rating:
Summary: Overblown Movie SORELY Needing A Plot!
Review: The movie's effects are great, of course they are, but you need substance and not just style in a movie. It seems that Coppola, a washout since Apocalypse Now, forgot that he needs a plot as well to give the drama of the visuals weight. Otherwise the choral music and the rivers of blood just come off as silly. Rarely does the film mix the psychological and the visual, and in it's selfconciousness to cover this MAJOR fault up, this being the fault of not having a solid story, the visuals come off as gags more than anything else. I don't mind gore, but it needs a reason other than just gore, and this is especial to a horror movie to elevate it above the usual silly crap that's supposed to really scare you. Anybody with half a brain recoginzes that psychological suspense and horror is infinetly more frightening than the sight of blood, and rarely does this film combine the two. It has all the flair in the world, but a movie needs a story to match it's plot. Rent/Buy Rosemary's Baby instead.
Rating:
Summary: Great film...but....
Review: It it just me, or does it seem like the guy below me work for Columbia Pictures???? Way to blow some sunshine, pal.
|
