Rating: 
Summary: JUST ABOUT THE BEST MOVIE EVER
Review: well, i thought i was the only one who likes this movie THAT much, but after reading all the reviews i see i was wrong. a perfect movie, my all-time favorite. there was nothing i didnt like about it. i liked it so much, i plan on having various scenes tattoo'd on my back.
Rating: 
Summary: WOW! But they shouldn't call this Bram Stocker's Dracula !
Review: Wow, I have to admit this is one of the best movies I have ever seen, but this movie is nothing like Bram Stocker's Dracula. First of all Dracula was not a loving person in the book at all. He was a mean person who did not love anyone. I'm sure that the reason Coppela made Dracula look like a romantic was because he wanted to attract the female side of the crowd. I completely understand that but I think if he was going to do that he should not have put Bram Stoker in front of the title. But other than that I think the costumes, special effects, and most of the acting was great. By the way I do think that Keana Reeves did a horrible job playing the part of Jonathon. He had the foniest accent I have ever heard.
Rating:
Summary: Pretty good movie, but this is NOT Bram Stoker's Dracula!
Review: Hi! I had seen this movie when it first came out and liked it. Just recently I read the book, and decided to watch the movie again because I loved the book so very much......but this movie hardly follows the book at all! I recommend that everyone read the book as well as see the movie because they are both good (the book being better of course) and they are both VERY different stories!
Rating:
Summary: A stunning visual accomplishment
Review: This film merits a 5 star rating for the set decoration and photography alone. Sure, the acting is not that great and it is not that scary, but the look of it - wow! The colors are breathtaking and the sets are sumptuous. I can't wait to see this one on DVD.
Rating:
Summary: horrorfest
Review: A feast of first-rate visuals and amazing acting is bettered by the unique sexiness this gem posesses. A must-see!
Rating: 
Summary: Too much Coppola, not enough blood
Review: Give any of a dozen directors this story and this much money to realize it and you would get a stunner. Give it to Coppola and you get this - a visual feast with no true heart and some of the worst acting since...well, Keanu Reeve's LAST movie. What Apocalypse is to war movies, this is to the Dracula film legacy - and I do not mean that as a compliment. Worst of all, it simply has no scares. It rates it's 3 stars based on clever, dreamy visuals, a fair amount of kinky vampire sex and Winona Ryder's see-through nightie. When will someone finally do this story justice? I cannot forgive Coppola for blowing the chance.
Rating:
Summary: A black and sensual dream...
Review: Assessing whether or not Coppola should have been faithful to B.Stoker's novel matters little when you see the result-And what a result! This "Dracula" is so enthralling and aesthetiquely enchanting that I couldn't help to fall under its spell. Apart from K.Reeves's insipid performance, all the actors play their part perfectly: G.Oldman is a cruel and yet moving Dracula, A.Hopkins as Van Helsing is imperial even if he retains something of Hannibal Lecter... and W.Ryder appears as a a definitely exquisite incarnation of Mina Murray. Some scenes are just unforgettable: for instance when Dracula and Mina meets for the fist time on the streets of London, how the image hesitates and progressively focuses on the Count, a man among others in the crowd but with such an elegant and old-fashioned appearance that you're almost compelled to notice him... Another memorable scene: when the Count and Mina are at the restaurant and you hear music and a vague rumor in the background with shadows of people dancing behind a tinted glass. You just wish you could see a movie so aesthetiquely perfect more often... Coppola's "Dracula" unfolds like a black and sensual dream, and you don't want to wake up.
Rating:
Summary: the old fasion dracula
Review: this movie is great for people who like the old fasion dracula. this movie is filled with art of the past.I have read the other comments and for those other people who say this movie sucks, well, i guess some people just dont see the art in this movie. As I said before, if you appriciate art of the past, you will love this movie. I encourage you to at lest rent it.
Rating:
Summary: An orgy of visual splendour and romance.
Review: We all know the name, the story, the book. And this film? I think it's fluent and graceful, filled with actors delivering some fine performances. Especially Gary Oldman. His performance as Count Dracula is nothing but brilliant, and Winona Ryder does her part as the lost love. One let down is a stiff and poor performance by Keanu Reeves, but that minor stab isn't enough to hurt this film. Watching it on the big screen, the film dragged me in and didn't let go. The costumes, the setting, it's all wonderful. Watching it on a small screen just wasn't the same. But being a sucker for first impressions...I love it none the less. Definitly one of the great vampire movies of all time.
Rating:
Summary: Badly titled live-action anime film
Review: What this movie suffers the most from (even more than Keanu Reeves' "acting") is a bad title. This is definitely *not* Bram Stoker's story, except in a few instances, such as character names and *some* incidents. It may partially fulfill the letter of Stoker's story, but it comes nowhere near the spirit. If you read on, you'll find this is the major problem most people complain about: The title just *dares* you to compare the film with the novel.But, that said, if you can pretend you don't know anything about the original story, or that the title is anything other than what it is, you may enjoy this. This is especially true if you are partial to anime, because that is where the spirit of this film lies. It may be live action, but the way the story is delivered is pure anime. Reeves' performance, as usual, left a lot to be desired. The character he plays is somewhat stiff, so his blankness is not too misplaced, but when he screamed in terror, I never thought I was watching anything but an overly self-conscious actor trying to do a part. I may be wrong, but it seems that screaming in terror shouldn't be too difficult to do convincingly, which left me more puzzled than ever about how Reeves manages to get top roles. Fortunately in this movie he is more than compensated for by the wonderful performance of Gary Oldman as Dracula.
|
