Really?

Rating: 1/10 (23 May 2004)

Bram Stoker's Dracula??? Is the book really this terrible? I will get the book at the next convenient time and READ it. Because I just can't believe it can be this bad!
Obviously there must have been some artistic freedom involved when the book was adapted for the screen and my feeling tells me that all that turned out so very bad has to do with only that: the adaptation. Other things obviously not being in the book were also really bad: Reeves performance and terrible wannabe English accent, Watts looks (because he looked like himself, not like a mad servant of Dracula's), lots of inconsistent and pointless details in the rest of the movie. To be honest - I had seen it shortly after it came out and it left a mixed feeling. Now I wanted to see it again to get a second chance of building an opinion... but... I didn't make it. I couldn't stand watching this movie all the way through. Normally I don't comment movies I haven't seen all the way through, but this time I felt I had to say what I think anyway.
I couldn't connect to the movie at all. The performances in general sucked big time, there was no real feeling - it felt more like a circus with a several hour long and chaotic number with 399 overly colourful, completely (raving mad) shrieking, crying and shouting clowns! This film left me dizzy and my brain was spinning out of control.
TERRIBLE! YUK!!!! 1/10