Lavish, scary and engaging despite its problems.

Rating: 8/10 (29 October 2013)

The Dracula novel has seen a ridiculously high amount of film adaptations. But if anyone could bring something new then it probably was acclaimed Godfather director Francis Ford Coppola. Coppola made some very smart decisions when making the film, mainly deciding to stick closer to the book than most and paying many tributes to the iconic images seen in vampire films of old.
The plot does stick quite close to the story. Young solicitor Jonathan Harker travels to Transylvania to sign over land to Count Dracula, who plans on coming to London to wreak havoc. However, upon seeing a picture of Harker's fiancé he believes her to be his old lover and attempts to win her heart. Although many dislike the added romance it does offer a lot and shows that Dracula does have some kind of soul, making the character more three dimensional. It also adds to the plot as it makes the film more than a struggle against a beast, but a struggle to win the heart of a person. While most argue that Dracula should be a cold monster, I think that it was a wise decision to offer a more sympathetic version as one hadn't been seen before at that point. I'm especially impressed with how the story juggled all of its elements so well, as the romance never felt forced and the scary stuff worked superbly.
You can forget about Bela Lugosi and Christopher Lee, as Gary Oldman steals the show with ease in an incredible performance as Dracula. He encompasses every single thing he needs to in order to make the role work, he can be both savage and creepy as well as humane and somewhat loving. Oldman made Dracula someone I feared but still felt sorry for , which is no simple task. He is still identifiable in a lot of make-up and the chilling accent is spot-on. Even the way he moves and expresses seem to have been worked to perfection. Should have won an Oscar in my book.
The movies biggest stumbling block is with the acting however, seen with a trend of the support outshining the leads, bar Oldman, strangely. Sadie Frost puts a lot of energy in as the seductive Lucy and her feisty nature comes off well. Richard E. Grant is perfect for the part of Dr. Seward and plays the smart doctor well, even if he is underused. Both Cary Elwes and Billy Campbell do solid as can be jobs and make the most of their underdeveloped suitors. Tom Waits was also extremely enjoyable as the insane Renfield.
The other three leads are the source of the films main problems for me. Keanu Reeves is horrifyingly bad here, there may actually be planks of wood that have more charisma than him. He is just so wooden in everything he does, his expressions don't convey any of the fear they should and his accent always sounds too fake to be convincing. Winona Ryder never truly convinces either. She just doesn't seem to know how to convey emotion properly and doesn't kind Mina the right depth, but she is just about acceptable. Anthony Hopkins just hams it up as Van Helsing and it comes across as ridiculous (He even humps Billy Campbell's leg at one point).
Almost everything else in the film is spot-on. Coppola shot the film in extremely striking and attractive way, as almost every frame oozes richness. The effects are all in camera which is so impressive given the scale of some of them and they still look fantastic to this day, showing CGI isn't always needed. The costume design rightly won an Oscar. Everything fits the Victorian time frame perfectly and it looks beautiful as well as authentic. Dracula's many different costume are also outstanding. The locations look realistic as well, it really captures the gloominess of Victorian London and the makes Transylvania look like a creepy place.
The scary scenes were just that and I'd say the film can boast some of the most wildly scary images of any horror centred film since the 80's. The film carries a very Gothic and eerie atmosphere that allows the scary moments to develop more, this is very apparent in the sequences in the castle which are really creepy. Dracula's frequent monstrous forms are demonic and frightening, they are also really well designed and add to terrifying aspects of the character physically. Other times when the film captures a classic horror feel are seen with Harker's encounter of the Brides and the confrontation with Dracula, which both rely on mood to produce terror and it works wonderfully.
A lot of praise has to be given to Wojciech Kilar who composes one of the greatest scores I've ever heard. Kilar manages to create a score that has the absolute perfect balance of bone chilling and sweeping beauty. The music feels like it is coming alive at times and enhances certain scenes ten-fold. It is too great to really put into words, but it's one of the few soundtracks that can make you paranoid with fear as well as make you shed a tear of sadness.
So does Coppola succeed in making the ideal Dracula movie? I'm going to have to say yes. Whilst I can see that there are aspects people won't enjoy, mainly the romantic sub-plot and some of the poor acting, the film has an extremely high amount of excellent features. The production design, effects and score are some of the very best you will see in film, and visually the film is still a magnificent achievement. It also achieves many of its aims, Gary Oldman is a superb Dracula, the scary moments are very scary and it sticks very close to the book. It may not be the perfect film, but it is extremely well made and very memorable.