Why Did Francis Cast Keanu?

Rating: 6/10 (25 May 2002)

Okay, I'll get to it. This potentially great film will unfortunately be most memorable to me for containing the worst performance by an actor I have ever seen in a quality major motion picture. That performance is by Keanu Reeves.
Now. I am not backing away from my judgement by saying that Keanu Reeves is, in fact, not that bad of an actor. I actually thought he did a good job in "Parenthood", and, if I'm going to be honest, he helped make "The Matrix" work.
However, Reeves performance as Harker is staggering in its ineptitude. It's not just the accent. His reactions (key to a film actor's work) to events around him were either inappropriate or non-existent. His chemistry with Winona Ryder (who I think did an adequate job here, particularly in her attraction to Gary Oldman) was also non-existent. Was he supposed to be bland so we would actually root for Lucy to be with Dracula? Well, folks, there's such a thing as stacking the deck so blatantly that you cheat the audience, and this is an overwhelming example of it.
I have to say Francis Ford Coppola has to take at least half the blame here. Why did he cast Keanu in that role? If he had to cast an American to balance Winona, why didn't he cast someone who could play the role, or at least was right for the role? Did the studio force him to cast Keanu? Remember, this is the man who fought a titanic battle with Paramount over casting Al Pacino in "The Godfather". Of course, this is also the man who cast Sophia Coppola in "Godfather III".
Sorry, Gary Oldman. I thought your semi-sympathetic portrayal of Dracula was more than worthy. And although Anthony Hopkins overworked Van Helsing, his portrayal was also noteworthy. But you both were working against the tide.
And sorry, Keanu. I don't think you're a bad actor. But your performance here is unwatchable.