From: v076r95v@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Bernard Eric Cana)
Subject: REVIEW: BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA
Reply-To: v076r95v@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Bernard Eric Cana)
Organization: University at Buffalo
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 15:37:43 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01607
Keywords: author=Cana

			      BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA
		       A film review by Bernard Eric Cana
			Copyright 1992 Bernard Eric Cana

     Well, I went and saw Dracula last night at a sneak preview here at
my school.  Needless to say, it was ... umm ... "different."  I will say
that I thought it is worth paying $6 to go see.  But, then again, I'm
*very* biased to all Vampire movies.  -:)  Anyway, if you do not want to
know any more, DON'T READ ON!  For those who are interested, keep going.


     Okay, let me talk a bit about the actors first.  Gary Oldman does a
wonderful job on playing the good ol' count.  He was romantic, charming,
and downright nasty when he had to be.  The make up on him was *really*
good.  Trust me, I can see an Oscar for the make up or costume design.
Anthony Hopkins was *incredible* as Von Helsing!  Absolutely perfect!
As far as I am concerned, he was the star of the movie.  Very funny and
also very convincing.  Keanu Reeves was very wishy washy.  Just ignore
him.  -:)  Winona Ryder was cool.  She played a good role, but her lines
were kind of silly.  Though the "kiss in the maze" was interesting.
Just see the movie, you'll see what I mean.  -:)

     Okay, the directing and filming.  It was incredible!  Absolutely
amazing.  The special effects were definitely worth seeing!  This goes
along with the make up and such.  It must have taken forever to film it,
but it was worth it.  Oh, watch for a few things early in the movie:
Winona's eye twitch and watch the count's shadow when he's walking
around.  It's just *weird*!  The directing was interesting, but very
jumpy.  You *really* have to follow the movie to understand certain
things.  I did not like the background monologues and diary entries.  It
got annoying after a time.  Also, the number of overlapping scenes were
overdone.  Too many times when you would see two different scenes (i.e.,
Winona's character thinking about Dracula's homeland) at one time.
Though the one interesting thing was the "Tolkien-like filming" with a
battle scene.  In other words, puppets were used.  Reminded me of LORD
OF THE RINGS.  You'll understand what I mean.

     Finally, the actual story.  Not bad, but a lot of inconsistencies.
They used the original legend of Vlad Tepes, but never called him that.
They said that his *name* was Dracula, when it fact it was not.  Dracula
was derived from the Rumanian word for dragon, which was the family
symbol of Vlad and his armies.  Otherwise, it stuck pretty much to the
story.  It seems to be taken from *many* people's viewpoint and it was
easy to tell when someone was supposed to be important.  Look for
Winona's green dress to understand this.  The only thing I did not like
was how they changed this from a horror story to a romance story.  The
action was very limited and the ending was absolutely *horrible*!  Just
cheesy in my eyes.  

     I think that covers most of it.  In my overall view, it's worth
seeing it for the filming, not the storyline.  Hope you enjoyed this!

Bernard Eric Cana
in%"V076R95V@UBVMS.BITNET"

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews