Probably the worst Dracula ever

Rating: 1/10 (29 July 2005)

Dracula (Gary Oldman) attacks London.
OK-there are so many things wrong with this film it's hard to know where to start. First off--the title. "Bram Stoker's Dracula". Oh really? I've read the book multiple times--this is NOT the book at all. Just the opening with how Dracula became wasn't from the book at all. It gets worse when they switch to 1897 London...and you see Jonathan Harker is played by Keanu Reeves! We all know Reeves can't act but seeing him trying to imitate an English accent was just jaw-dropping. He was TERRIBLE! He goes to Dracula's castle to help him move to London. There we met Oldman in terrible makeup giving one of his worst performances. He also seems to be wearing Japanese robes (for some reason). And he looks ugly--Dracula is supposed to be handsome. Also the shadows in the castle don't move with the people (???). It all leads to a stupid scene full of pointless female nudity where three female vampires attack Reeves. Reeves pretty much disappears after that (this is a good thing).
We cut to London--Dracula comes aboard. Mina (Winona Ryder) is watching for Jonathan, her boyfriend. With her is her good friend Lucy (Sadie Frost). She behaves like a nymphomaniac--not in the book. Also there's a huge rainstorm when Mina and Lucy run around giggling and end up kissing. WHY? It leads to nothing and isn't in the book either. Then Dracula shows up, turns into a wolf man (???), lures Lucy out of her bed and rapes her (????) on top of a tombstone. Bites her too. Then Mina shows up and she is (sigh) the reincarnation of Dracula's dead wife. OK--that is the oldest, stupidest cliché in horror films and, again, not in the book.
Lucy starts to slowly die--poor Frost has to wither around in bed with her breasts constantly being exposed. Her boyfriend (Cary Elwes) and suitors stand around and watch--they're given nothing to do. Also Dr. Seward (Richard E. Grant) pops up too and--for no reason--he's shown as a drug addict. Why? Again--not in the book. Then Van Helsing (Anthony Hopkins) is called in. He realizes what's happening. Lucy dies (after being raped by a wolf) and returns as a vampire (one of the few effective sequences). Of course she vomits blood on Van Helsing--for no reason other than to gross out the audience. She's killed (again) and Dracula starts romancing Mina in some truly boring sequences that drag on forever.
It all leads up with the guys trying to get Dracula away from Mina and kill him. And the very end is (again) changed completely.
OK--let's deal with the acting. Oldman--just dreadful. He's a good actor but not here. Let's put it this way--when somebody mentions cinematic Dracula do you think of Oldman? Ryder was actually very good but, purportedly, her and Oldman hated each other--it comes through loud and clear. Poor Frost is forced to be topless a lot and act sex-starved--she DOES pull it off however. Reeves--just the worst here--and that's saying a lot. Hopkins--what the HELL was he playing? He's acting like he's in a comedy--not a horror movie. Elwes and Campbell are given nothing to do. Grant is just OVER OVER the top (and annoying). Tom Waits is forgettable as Reinfield.
The movie is chockful of visual tricks and stunning color--but it did nothing for me. It was nonstop and I got the impression that director Francis Ford Coppola was just showing off. Also it got tremendously annoying--I almost turned it off a few times. The special effects ARE good however (except for the stupid green mist that seduces Mina--don't ask). Also the music score is loud and overbearing. And what was with the costumes? An Asian man did them and Dracula seems dressed as he just popped in from China! Perhaps the gentleman should have been told Dracula is from Transylvania NOT China. I don't blame him though--Coppola probably told him to do that to add more color to the film.
The script was hopeless--constantly straying from the novel. The title should be "Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula" or "James Harts' Dracula" (he was the screenwriter). Also--it wasn't scary at all. Not even a little (but Frost ALMOST makes it work in her vampire getup). My main problem is this tripe about Mina being Dracula's long-lost love (or something). Crap like that was clichéd back in the 1940s--it's almost insulting that this was stuck into a 1990s movie.
This was a huge hit in 1992 (most likely cause it was advertised nonstop and Coppola did it) but now it's, rightfully, almost forgotten. A textbook example of how NOT to do a vampire film. I can't stress enough how horrible this truly is. A 1.