Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)

 

Well, here it is: by far my favourite adaptation of the classic vampire novel by Bram Stoker. Naturally, many, many versions exist and a lot of them are quite good.

Some also rather horrible, but you can't always win, unfortunately. 

Francis Ford Coppola did his very best to stick as close to the source material as possible and it is actually rather impressive how an entire novel worth is condensed into one film without feeling rushed, overdone or skimping on certain details. 

A young Jonathan Harker is sent to Transylvania to arrange certain transactions concerning properties in London at the behest of an eccentric count named Dracula. Once there, Harker soon finds out that Dracula isn't what he imagined him to be and is in fact, quite evil. While Harker is kept in a state of near death by Dracula's three brides (among whom the ravishing Monica Bellucci), the count sets sail for London, completely wiping out the crew of the ship Demeter, yet arriving safely, after which he is transported to Carfax Abbey. 

The count believes Harker's fiancée Mina to be the reincarnation of his own lost love Elisabeta, but when Mina first refuses the advances of a youthful and reinvigorated Dracul, he sets his sights on Mina's friend Lucy, effectively turning her to vampirism. It is in this stage that the men of the story turn to doctor Van Helsing for help and in this way they also discover that the culprit isn't some disease but a true monster. 

To make matters worse, Mina falls for the count and wants to be turned and now the race is on as Jonathan has escaped and the men actively hunt down the vampire to end his reign of terror... 

If you have read the book, it is surprising to see how close Coppola sticks to it, although he does emphasize the sexual nature of the vampire quite a bit more than Stoker could have ever done due to the constraints of the period. It makes sense though: who are you going to let their tongue and mouth out on your neck? Only one you want to do some hanky-panky with, right? 

The sets and costumes have that opulent and magnanimous feel that Hammer films could create with their best work, only on an even grander scale. The colours are vibrant and feel alive and the visuals are quite stunning. It becomes even more impressive once you realize everything is done using old school tricks, so in camera and every set is effectively an indoor set. 

Nice.

Props to the actors as well, and especially Gary Oldman who plays Vlad as a love torn young version and as a creepy old monster, and it feels natural to switch between the two. Dracula is still a monster, but one that became this way because he lost his love so long ago and the Church couldn't give them redemption. 

Makes sense that you'd turn your back on any god in his stead. Consoling someone by telling them their love won't enter heaven because they committed suicide, even after all the sacrifices you made for that same deity? Harsh and uncalled for. There's a reason the line: "I have crossed oceans of time to find you." is so heartstoppingly beautiful. 

Is everything then excellent? Not quite. If you are wholly unfamiliar with the novel, certain characters and plot developments can feel a bit rushed.

Yes, I'm looking at you, underusage of a brilliant Tom Waits as Renfield. 

And the biggest elephants in the room are the unconvincing accents of Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder, even if she does a slightly better job at masking the fact that she isn't British by a long shot. Reeves however, no matter how decent of an actor he is (and yes, that is said unironically) can never quite get it right and if you start to notice, it just gets worse throughout. 

But disregard that, as this is a beautiful film with that classic sheen on it and a story that is excellently told. 

It's bloody great.