what a way to ruin a great story..

Rating: Null/10 (24 November 2001)

i am sorry but this movie defines suckiness. i thought it would be impressive at least..francis ford coppola is a pretty cool guy, right? and the cast is superb..though i am never quite sure why keanu reeves was ever cast as anything. but i was wrong. much of the acting is wooden and pretty damn unfeeling. keanu reeves' and winona ryder's pathetic attempts at an english accent are laughable..wot no voice coach? the count, though suitably scary-looking, also looks like something out of star trek. gary oldman sadly overdid his acting, as per usual. keanu reeves simply makes a fool of himself with his dull acting and non existent presence, dreadful haircut, and aforementioned terrible english/american valley guy mixed accent. winona ryder is pretty but bland in comparison to the bright and lovely sadie frost, and her accent sucks too. the texan drawl of the american dude is sadly overstated, just when you thought things couldn't get any worse. the story has been ruined..anyone who has actually read bram stoker's novel can see that. for example what's with lucy westenra's character?? she has been morphed into some kind of nymphomaniac, whereas in the book she is written as a kind and sweet young girl, which is why everyone cares so damn much about her anyway. the beautiful use of descriptive language used in the book's collective diary entries has been abridged in such a way that we hardly believe such supposedly literate individuals could write that kind of 8 year old's account of important events. credit is due to superb performances from the brits amongst the cast..richard e grant is a convincing and brilliant dr.seward, sadie frost is perfect as lucy westenra, and anthony hopkins plays the role of van helsing beautifully. it is, sadly, half what it could have been. despite cast members salvaging some credit, this is a thumbs down. :(