As someone who's read the novel Dracula, I was curious about how this movie compared to the book, even after hearing about the romance that was never in the book. So I went and bought the DVD (which was only about six dollars, I should add), though my high expectations of consistency to the book ruined it for me. The movie was certainly appealing to the eye, which some nice costumes and settings (for the most part), and a soundtrack that got the job done. The performance by the actors were well-done, even if I didn't find the performances of Gary Oldman and Anthony Hopkins as hammy as people claimed it to be. However, what greatly ruined the film for me, besides the character derailment (which I'll get to later) and a few scenes that went out of order, was the tacked on romance plot between Dracula and Mina. Tacked on is a perfect analogy: the romance was never in the book, and it causes derailment to both characters involved. Though between the two, Mina got hit harder with the derailment stick: in the book, she's wholly devoted to Jonathan, her own husband, while in the movie, she's basically like someone who's in a resentful arranged marriage, longing for Dracula. Another point that irritated me was changing Lucy's personality from a sweet girl to a sex maniac, where she basically alludes to sex in most of her sentences and her actions. Did the one in the movie have Permanent Sexual Arousal Syndrome or something? Why did Coppola need to change her character like this? A more minor point that bothered me was Dracula in the first act. Not so much his character, but to how he looked. Honestly, with his hairstyle looking like a pair of butt cheeks, I just couldn't take him seriously. Also, those who are a bit weak to the sight of blood probably won't like this, since there are buckets of blood in the beginning and at Lucy's death. All in all, it's a decent movie, but it's probably best seen with no expectations about the name Dracula.
In order to post comments, you need to