From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Subject: REVIEW: BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA
Reply-To: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 15:46:54 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Summary: r.a.m.r. #01609
Keywords: author=Miller

			     BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA
			           [SPOILERS]
		       A film review by Jimmy A. Miller
			Copyright 1992 Jimmy A. Miller

    This is a review for Francis Ford Coppola's DRACULA.  There are a
few spoilers, so bail out now.



     Hrmm.  This film has some *MAJOR* problems during the first act.  I
honestly felt like getting up and walking out for a while.  Keanu Reeves
was painful to watch as the proper Englishman Jonathan Harker, and the
usually engaging Winona Ryder seemed quite stilted as Mina.  There were
bizarre effects involving shadows, movements, and visuals which seemed
not only out of place but frankly quite stupid.  Many of the visual
effects also seemed so utterly cheesy as to elicit laughter.  The use of
diary-style narration was jarring in the early going, and the movie was
quite slow to develop (let's leave out the bizarre armor they hung on
Vlad Dracul going out to battle the Turks).  The only characters worth
watching at all were Vlad himself and Mina's friend Lucy (played by
Sadie Frost), who were both interesting, engaging, and even sympathetic
(especially as the movie wore on).  

     Then Vlad comes to England, leaving Reeves to the tender mercies of
his vampiric harem (no joke, and I wish I had a bed like that).
Slowly, an entirely different movie begins to appear.  Ryder's Mina
becomes much more real, and the young version of Vlad manages to be both
menacing and seductive.  The other characters, though still lacking much
depth, at least begin to seem real in their words and deeds, and quit
acting like they just memorized their lines ten minutes beforehand.
Lucy, in fact, almost steals the show from Ryder (who in all truth
doesn't have much to do) in her portrayal of the girl being transformed
into a vampire.  Her seductiveness, sudden fears and fits made her real
and sympathetic, and made her eventual death(s) that much more
emotionally engaging.  

     Before Lucy finally fades, however, Antony Hopkins enters as
Abraham Van Helsing, and quite thoroughly takes command of the screen.
His very enjoyable, sometimes campy, sometimes foreboding performance
lifts the entire movie.  Reeve's reappearance after his escape from
Vlad's castle (why he is left alive is not really explained) seems to
take heart from Hopkins, and he actually turns in a credible performance
after this point.  

     The focus now on her character, Ryder does fine, though I honestly
felt something lacking.  This I found disappointing, as I'm a fan of
Ryder, and felt she could have done a better job.  Still, it suffices,
but only barely.

     Things finally start to move at the end, which a chase scene and
fight, plus a wry twist on things when Vlad chooses to be slain rather
than condemn Mina to life of the damned.  Despite all odds, this scene
somehow worked for me.

     The sets and costuming (with some jarring exceptions) were very
nice, and added to the feel of the film.  This movie has its problems,
most of which I'm tempted to plop into Coppola's lap.  Ridley Scott or
Tim Burton could have done much better.  That this movie succeeds at all
would seem to me to be in spite of Coppola, not due to any great vision
of his.  As I noted earlier many of the effects were not only
cheap-looking (and thus failed in that measure to create the mood they
were after) but unnecessary -- the blue fire rings, for example.
Puppet-like movements of figures in the battle scene.  Moving shadows,
etc.  The exceptions to this were the supernatural creatures -- the
vampires, the werewolf (it sure looked like one), and the accompanying
blood.  Those at least were well done.  Much of the acting was wooden
for far too long.  Some of the dissolves (like from Lucy's fang-marks to
the wolf eyes) are just plain stupid.  This movie is over-wrought and
top-heavy.  It only succeeds well in the scenes that contain some
eroticism.  

     I was quite disappointed.  This movie had some real potential but
something was lost somewhere along the way.  You had the feel of
*something* good straining to get through, but no dice.  Unlike BATMAN
RETURNS, which succeeded for me despite obvious flaws in the narrative,
DRACULA could not quite make the same visceral impression.

     I would not pay full price for this movie.  Try a matinee or some
other cut-rate time (and try not to squirm too much for the first thirty
minutes or so), or wait for video and fast-forward to the point where
Reeves is seduced by the female vampires.  You'll be happy you did.

     This flick is rated R for nudity and some gore.

semper fi,

Jammer Jim Miller 
Texas A&M University '89 and '91

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews