Rating: 
Summary: Unique....
Review: This is a very, very, strange film, that gets a very questionable five from this wide-eyed viewer. It isn't really scary, and is not near as good as "Interview of the Vampire," but it's unconventional storyline, excellent acting, and weird and gothic sets of which the like have not been seen since "Batman Returns" are all high points in the film. I say for sure though, "DRACULA" IS NOT A FILM FOR EVERYONE (especially not for the kiddies), and still, I'm not sure it was a film for me.
Rating:
Summary: A Super-Biter on Superbit DVD
Review: Francis Ford Coppola's unique and exquisite retelling of Stoker's classic vampire tale. Coppola chooses to balance out the horrific and supernatural aspects of the story with equal emphasis on history, romance, and overt eroticism. He masterfully embellishes the film with lavish sets, bold art direction, and stylish camera effects, all choreographed to some haunting musical themes and sounds. What emerges on-screen is a visually sumptuous, lushly photographed, richly scored cinematic tour-de-force which deservedly won the 1992 Oscars for Best Costumes, Make-Up, and Sound Effects Editing.The cast is first-rate throughout. Gary Oldman completely inhabits the title character and makes it his own; although Bela Lugosi's singular interpretation of the Count is a definitive classic, Lugosi would be as inappropriately cast in Coppola's film as Oldman would be in Tod Browning's 1931 version. In reciting several of Lugosi's most celebrated lines ("I never drink ... wine", "I bid you welcome", and "Children of the night! What sweet music they make."), Oldman manages to subtly pay tribute to Lugosi's original readings without ever lapsing into parody or imitation. Anthony Hopkins is wonderfully over-the-top as the brilliant but obsessive Professor Van Helsing, and Winona Ryder is a clever balance of Victorian ladyhood and sensual romantic as Mina. Notable performances are also turned in by Sadie Frost as the unfortunate Lucy, Cary Elwes as Lucy's betrothed, and the always interesting Bill(y) Campbell as the Texan who carries a big Bowie knife. Even the sometimes under-dynamic Keanu Reeves is utilized here to good effect; his dull earnestness is perfect for the role of Ryder's blandly noble intended, Jonathan Harker. The Superbit edition DVD is definitely the one to own, offering impeccable visuals and flawless sound. It especially looks good on a large-screen TV viewed in wide-zoom mode. Like the previous DVD edition, the Superbit package comes with no extras, but if you're looking for high-quality picture and sound, you'll not be disappointed. This is definitely one DVD you'll want to add to your home video library and enjoy again and again.
Rating: 
Summary: Overblown production looks good but misses the mark.
Review: What could have been the epic, closest to Stoker interpretation of DRACULA turns out to be an experiment in turning Dracula into a romantic hero-villain. Stoker's Dracula was the opposite, a sinister, evil, truly King of the vampires who even had bad breath. What we get is Gary Oldman as an odd-looking (at the beginning of the film), tortured, romantic bloodsucker. I don't mind people making variations on the Dracula theme, but calling your film BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA and then straying from the basic plot of the novel (really about Harker and Mina VS Dracula...not Mina being his reincarnated bride...which is a rip-off of Karloff's Mummy film of 1932) is not how to do it. The best version I've seen yet is the PBS Louis Jourdan version COUNT DRACULA, though I think either Christopher Lee or Max Von Sydow would have made a more memorable Count in that version. Anthony Hopkins and Keenu Reeves are miscast and Sadie Frost as Lucy is the best part of the film. I also didn't like the ending. Hopefully someone will film DRACULA and really do it justice someday, including parts of the Stoker novel that have never been filmed, like the wolves attacking the mother of the baby Dracula gives to his "brides" to feast on!. You would need a
6-8 hour mini-series to do the story properly.
Rating: 
Summary: A true gothic love story
Review: While many vampire movies contain your basic good guys and bad guys, in this movie it isn't really that simple to tell them apart. In my opinion, Draula is the hero and he appears to be all to human, with human desires, fears, wants and needs. Don't put off buying this movie as it is a true love story in every sense of the word. But be warned, it is rather gory in certain scenes so children ought not to watch this. Try it, I think that you will be pleasently surprised. Enjoy!!!
Rating:
Summary: OLDMAN,HOPKINS,COPPOLA,NEED I SAY MORE
Review: THIS IS THE GREATEST TELLING OF THIS STORY EVER. I THINK THAT IT IS THE MOST EVIL AND HAUNTING MOVIE. ALL IN THE BEST WAY OF COURSE, IF YOU LIKED THE FIRST VERSION ON DISC THE SUBERBIT VERSION IS HEAD&SHOULDERS ABOVE THE FIRST DISC.PICTURE/SUPER/AUDIO/SUPER. GO OUT AND BUY THIS DISC WHEN IT COMES OUT YOU WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.
Rating:
Summary: A bit long in the tooth
Review: God knows why this movie wasn't titled simply 'Dracula' - maybe to sound more high-minded? Francis Ford Coppola's 'Bram Stoker's Dracula'? Hardly. It's fit to break your tongue to pronounce this. Maybe to emphasize the literary origin? With all the sex and animal-attraction references involving blood-shot eyes, Dracula's long-lost love Mina (Winona Ryder) looking over her shoulder apprehensively, and an escaped woolf wandering the streets of Victorian London as casually and imperceptibly as any ol' stray dog? Not (...) likely! Gary Oldman does not exactly sprng to mind as the best choice to play the Divine Count. His bloodsucker is more brooding than outright villainous, but what with all the buxom ladies constantly getting out of their corsets and the young hunks on hand to chew and spit out, he fits in nicely into the proceedings. This version of the story is closer to the Hammer Film tradition of vampire erotica than to the austere original. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing - the costumes, sets and visuals are more than satisfying, but it's the acting that squeeks like rusty hinges on a coffin-lid. Oldman is just the beginning of a string of weird casting - Winona Ryder is more petulant than haunted, wearing a perpetual confused pout, and when she tries to play the passionate lady she comes off as a (...) schoolgirl. Anthony Hopkins is OK, if a bit too jocular as the determined Dr. Van Helsing, the guy who used to kill vampires long before Buffy was even conceived, Richard E. Grant is appropriately hysterical as a well-meaning junky twit, and Sadie Frost does little more than flash her pretty red curls around... Actually, I was wrong, she does do something quite out of the ordinary - she gets to have sex with Yeti's nephew, Gary Gorilla. Don't ask for an explanation, the purpose of this particular scene escaped me - maybe the producers were aiming at a universal audience, zoophiles and all. Tom Waits is unrecognizable (and chillingly touching) as Dracula's plaything, Renfield. And Keanu Reeves attains new heights of looking as though he had just swallowed a flagpole playing Mina's husband-to-be. No wonder sucking blood looked like a more inviting alternative to the poor maiden. I love vampire lore - stories, movies, legends, you name it. Which is why I have gone so easy on Francis Ford Coppola's 'Bram Stoker's Dracula'. Otherwise, no fancy dressings or false fangs in the world would save this uneasy blend of Victorian mores and Anne Rice-style morals from a swift and final demise.
Rating:
Summary: It's a great film - Count on it!
Review: The tradition of the Dracula film, which has lasted almost since the movies began, is undoubtedly the main influence on the making of the film. There are influences which date back to the Hammer films of the 1950s to 1970s, and of course the very fact that the film was made must have its roots in the Universal films or even in Nosferatu. Another influence was the "Dark Knight franchise makeover", deriving its name from the way Batman was reinvented initially in comic books, and then for the big screen in the 1980s. In both cases, a reinvention was necessary because both characters and genres had become associated with cliché and spoof. We needed to be able to take our heroes and villains seriously again and films like Batman and Dracula gave us that opportunity. Francis Ford Coppola's 1992 film (not directed by Bram Stoker, as the title implies) has its heritage in the 1980s gothic revival. It was not uncommon in the late 1980s to attend a pop concert and find people dressed as vampires, even to the extent of having their teeth filed into fangs, and the glamorisation of vampirism is nowhere more evident in the casting of Sadie Frost as a vampire neophyte. Perhaps the Vlad The Impaler sub-story could have been omitted as this detracts from the idea of this being Bram Stoker's Dracula To reinvent the genre, a different approach has been taken to several of the standard elements of Dracula films. The Count is not the debonair creature portrayed by Lugosi or Lee, although he is no less charming. The prefacing of the title with 'Bram Stoker's' suggests authenticity, as if this is the definitive version. It is understandable that the film-makers wanted to do this, because how else would they tell the public this wasn't just another Dracula movie, and break away from the camp that the name would otherwise imply? It is interesting to note that since this was made, vampire films have all tried a different angle, such as The Vampire Of Brooklyn, Interview With A Vampire, and Buffy The Vampire Slayer. The sets are beautifully made, at once magnificent and decaying, reflecting the nature of the film's central character. Apart from Gary Oldman, the most outstanding member of the cast has to be Anthony Hopkins. He makes Van Helsing less sympathetic than the traditional Peter Cushing character, but that might just be my soft spot for Cushing. Hopkins gives the character some menace that makes you believe that he is a worthy adversary to the count.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best versions of Stoker's classic tale
Review: This version of Bram Stoker's classic novel is one of the best movies that deal with the tragic story of Vlad Dracul (Dracula). Gary Oldman is the perfect count, his accent and his acting is chilling and yet tragic. Winona Rider portrays Mina the woman who is loving two men, Dracula and Johnathan Harker, portrayed by Keanu Reeves. Sir Anthony Hopkins is Abraham Van Helsing, the "mad hero" who knows the power and the deadliness of Dracula. The special effects are outstanding, especially when it comes to the many versions of Dracula presented. Oldman really put himself through the make-up chair and stunts for this movie. The scenery is creepy, especially Castle Dracula and the scenes of old London. The costumes are effective, except when it comes to some of the fashion excesses of the costume designer of the movie. But, I'm being picky so it dosent distract from the movie. I'm quite impressed of Francis Ford Coppola's allowing Dracula to be portrayed as a tragic historical figure. This is one of the few movies that shows why Dracula turned away from God and pursued a path of blood and destruction...All in the name of Love...I also liked how the story began in the year 1462, when Vlad Dracul had to defend the eastern Holy Roman Empire from the Turks. It is a nice touch and is somewhat accurate historically... Throughout the movie, the actors in this are excellent...Sometimes the story lags a bit but it picks up in the nick of time....Scary, tragic and chilling is what I would describe it to be. A great line in the movie is when Dracula tells Johnathan Harker.."The luckiest man in the world is the one that finds true love"....Wow! Quite a line! I highly recommend this movie to those who like a good scary yet tragic movie...
Rating:
Summary: Greatest interpretation of Dracula ever...
Review: Although inaccurate, Francis Ford Coppola's rendition of Dracula is the most accurate compared to any other ever made. The story sways quite a bit from the novel, giving it a gothic romance overtone instead of that of horror. It centers on the Count's and Mina's relationship, adding in plenty of tidbits from the novel as it goes along. Jonathan Harker, who is poorly played by Keanu Reeves, still goes to Transylvania to meet the Count. There is still Lucy, who is the count's first victim, getting killed more vividly by the wolf. The investigation of the count is abridged, coming into a climatic ending in the Count's native land.
The charismatic Anthony Hopkins' portrayal of Dr. Van Helsing is very exceptional. But Gary Oldman as Dracula blows him away. He puts feeling into every line from the old, evil count to the young, charming, and animalic one. His performance is unrivaled by any other Dracula performer and never will be equalled. It's a shame he didn't get that Academy Award for best actor back then. Winona Ryder as Mina is very lady-like and shows longing for the count. But Keanu Reaves as Jonathan Harker is a very bland interpretation. He puts little feeling into his words. Even his screams as he's being attacked by Dracula's devil women sound very fake. Reinfield's character provides some humor.
But as soon as you see the old Drac on the screen, you'll be amazed. The makeup put on Gary Oldman to make him look pale, creepy and literally older can't help but make your mouth drop. The special effects of this film contrast beautifully with the live effects. In the count's keep, you have to admire the architectual excellence of the arches, rooms, right down to the furniture. It gives you a sense that everything really was from an ancient period of time. Gary Oldman's transformation from old to young startles you. It goes from the pale complexion to the younger, livelier one with the facial hair and more fashionable clothing. Every bit of clothing in the film seems right to date with the times.
If you like Stoker's novels, Coppola's films, or Dracula: get this movie. It's worth it!
Rating:
Summary: Bram Stoker's Dracula
Review: As an ardent collector of horror movies/ my collection would not have been complete without this movie.Gary Oldman really goes out there for his role as Dracula.It has a very good plot and acting . Sometimes not to believable from Keanu Reeves . But still anyone who enjoyes a good vampire movie will like this one.Some of the costumes for this movie were great.Especially Oldmans sunglasses for his arrival to London. most will enjoy the scenic and castle shots as well as the special effects.Worth a watch. Enjoy Lisa C..
|
