Hey, If You're Gonna Go Goth...

Rating: 7/10 (12 May 2004)

...you might as well go all the way. In terms of production, camera work, score, and everything-but-the-kitchen-sink scene work, Donald Trump only wishes he were as rich as this film. Taken on that production level, it is almost reminiscent of a weekend with Jim Morrison in terms of excess. But somehow, this overly-sumptuousness works for such a tale as this. And yes, I do agree that in the terms of the original story, this telling is more faithful that the host of other movies made over the decades. If you have not read the original, I highly recommend it, but save it for Samhain :)
Individual notes: Some of the casting in this is positively inspiring, especially Tom Waits as Renfield who was superb. Of course, the ubiquitous Gary Oldman as the Count was a casting inevitability, and he did not disappoint--pulling out so much that he gave new height to The Hilt that most actors aspire to! Boy, if ever there were a candidate for a remake of The 7 Faces Of Dr. Lao...And Sir Anthony Hopkins (slight pause for a reverent bow) captures the exact mood of the entire production in this film--bold, bawdy, lush, wicked and witty. There must have been some secret delight for him to go from the vampiric doctor in "Lambs" to the vampire-eradicator in this film. What other actor could find so much with so little?
Now, the bad notes...I know that Winona Ryder was very keen on doing this film and tried her best, but she tried TOO hard, and it showed. Her accent was almost a caricature of the true British tongue, and she almost sounded like Carol Burnett imitating the Queen on her variety show. One reader commented on and questioned her gasping through the film; it could have been an attempt to look shy and easily frightened, but I'm going to chalk it up to an overly-tight corset. And where Ms. Ryder over-did her part, Mr. Reeves UNDER-did his. I, too, kept waiting for a "dude" to slip into his speeches. And his pronunciation of certain words had my friends and I giggling hysterically. Which is a shame, because in the book, the part of Jonathon Harker is a major and pivotal role...though not in this film, and I can't help but suspect that the fact that Harker was played by Reeves might be the reason that the Harker character was pared down dramatically from the book for this movie. But, because of the lavishness of the rest of the material, we don't miss it much.
And rightly so, for this is not supposed to be a true remake of the book, but rather an experience. The true Victorian feel of the book gives way to the lustiness that would never have been expressed by Stoker (maybe not even realized...??). Why do we feel such sexual magnetism about the legend of the Count? There is something very sensuous about someone entering your mind and exerting intellectual will over yours. This was never more evident than in "Lambs", and in this modern version of Dracula. Also, I think what makes Dracula more appealing, particularly to females, is the way he exacts what he needs. Other fabled "monsters" merely slash, chop, dice, shoot, etc. There is no contact with the victim. But with Dracula, he supersedes the will of the victim by engulfing their will with his, he moves in close over them, draws from them in a "kiss of life/death"...but does not kill the women. Instead he makes them his wives. And immortals. So not only does such a character appeal to some secret side of a woman's sexuality, but also feeds the human desire to live forever. That, to me, is why the Count survives as still the most feared, yet feared not, of all the movie "monsters". And these facts are what this movie captures - the written fable, the primal desire AND the imagined legend.
So to sum up...Goth doesn't get better than this. Be prepared to laugh and lust. Give your will over to the bawdiness, and enjoy--it really is a carnival ride of a film.