|
|
Bram
Stoker's Dracula (1992)
|
Directed
by:
Francis Ford Coppola |
COUNTRY
USA |
GENRE
Thriller/Horror |
NORWEGIAN TITLE
Bram Stoker’s Dracula |
RUNNING
TIME
128 minutes |
|
Produced
by:
Francis Ford Coppola
Fred Fuchs
Charles Mulvehill |
Written by
(based on the novel by Bram Stoker):
James V. Hart |
Review
Francis Ford Coppola's treatment of
Bram Stoker's classic novel is one of the most stylistically
fulfilled and visually ambitious films of all-time in the horror
genre. A testament to Coppola's vision and position at the time,
fresh off from The Godfather Part III, Bram Stoker's
Dracula was arguably the director's last fully successful film
to date. With a title that suggests an increased faithfulness to the
book, the picture opens with a handsome red and black colour palette
which may not exactly transport you back to 15th century
Transylvania, but certainly immerses you in its romanticized spirit.
You cannot help but become impressed by Coppola's craft and vision,
even if the film's meticulousness, aesthetics and stylized (albeit
enjoyable) performances do unavoidably become distractions from the
suspense and thrills you'd expect in a rendition of one of history's
most renowned pieces of horror literature. Gary Oldman gives an
immaculate performance in the title role. Like the bloodthirsty
count himself, Oldman alternates between repelling and enthralling you.
And there is technically adept supporting work from Winona Ryder as
Dracula's love interest and Anthony Hopkins as Professor
Van Helsing. What the film and the cast ultimately have in common is that neither
of them really succeed in reaching your gut and making its large
portions of eroticism and gore truly felt. For that, Bram Stoker's
Dracula remains somewhat too mannered and distant.
Re-reviewed:
Copyright © 19.12.2023 Fredrik Gunerius Fevang
Original review:
Copyright © 05.02.1997 Fredrik Gunerius Fevang
|
[HAVE
YOUR SAY] |
|
|