Incoherent, disappointing effort

Rating: 6/10 (10 January 2014)

Dracula clearly had potential to be a great film. Excellent source material, an excellent director and a excellent cast. Which more is needed, right? Unfortunately, nothing works. The adaptation of the classic book to the film is mediocre at best.
The story came in pieces, and is absolutely incoherent further first viewing, that is the most important. It improves upon a second viewing, mostly because you can pay attention to other aspects of the film which is impossible to do with the consistent cuts and scenes rising out of nowhere in first viewing.
Still, there are totally nonsense scenes (the cemetery scene is a prime example) in the film that are there for whatever reason. The film captures one of the most important aspects in the book, that is the ambient, the erotic and romantic atmosphere contrasting with the horrific monsters and the dark, Gothic tone given by the excellent art direction. The visual effects tough, are outdated and horrible, it is even awful at times.
The acting, apart for the good performance by Gary Oldman, is average and even mediocre at times. Winona Ryder is pretty disappointing in it. Keanu Reeves it's in one of his best performances here, and still that's not saying too much. Anthony Hopkins is meh, neither good nor bad, just mildly convincing. The first sequence, explaining how 'Draculia' turns in 'Dracula' has one of the worst acting efforts I've seen in a long while. But despite that, it's not as big as a problem as the editing is. Frankly, it's a disappointing film mostly because it had everything to be a great and big one. It seems that everything was done badly and in the laziest and campy way possible. A shame. One of Coppola's weakest efforts. 5.7/10