What are your thoughts on Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)?
 

I finally watched this film in its entirety tonight. I was very underwhelmed. First of all with the casting. Keanu wasn't as bad as I expected but Winona Ryder? She's supposed to be his Romanian bride; couldn't they have gotten someone a bit less American looking? Anthony Hopkins and Gary Oldman were perfect though.

I kept comparing this film to Murnau's silent epic Nosferatu for pretty much I found his film to be better in just about every facet of the story. I liked the idea of Dracula's shadow being its own entity while it was kinda creepy at first it quickly became a parody of itself. I thought Murnau was able to make it much more creepier even now after seeing it 85 years since it came out.

I want to bring up the special effects only because they were so horrid. The make up and costumes while Oldman was old Drac was great as was the giant bat and werewolf. However, everything else made this film look like it was made in the '70s.

There was a lot of homage to Nosferatu in this film. The blu-ray is the only version I've seen and I'm quite aware of the controversy regarding the colors. I can certainly understand why the colors should be there. Murnau's film is either a very strong blue or a very bright gold and I could see why Coppola would try to mimic that look. However, the film only shows bold tints in the very beginning.

Perhaps I would have been more impressed if I saw the film back in 1992 but seeing it now for the first time I was very unimpressed.

It's my favorite telling of the Dracula story on film, other than the Lugosi version. Dracula (1992) has some mild flaws, to be sure, but it has definitely grown on me over the years since it's release (I saw it in theaters originally).

Mina is not Harker's Romanian bride just because she goes to Romania to marry him. She's English. And it was a perfectly fine film until the latest transfer which is so dark it makes the film incomprehensible.

I think its a fantastic film! Probably one of the most excitingly visual movies ive ever seen. Theres so many images from that movie that stick out and stay with you. Sure like zombiezilla said, its has some minor flaws, but its great nonetheless. Gary Oldman was incredible in the role!

What do I think? I think A+.

Superb movie. Masterpiece.

Soundtrack...cinematography...storyline...costumes...set designs..pace..editing...everything. Keanu's performance is less than optimal but what the heck...doesn't change much.

One of my favorite movies.

"We've all become God's madmen. All of us."



Gary Oldman is great. Anthony Hopkins is perfect for the part.

One of my favorite movies. The acting of Keanu and Winona have always been the drawback for me but not enough to bring the entire movie down.

I love it. The cinematography is lusciously dark. The acting is great across the board, especially Oldman and Hopkins. Everything about the film shows exquisite detail, from the set design to the costumes. I still need to pick up the new SE becasue this is one of my favorite adaptations of the Dracula story, and one of the best vamp films out there. I remember when this came out in theaters, I was in 6th grade and the "big thing" was to sneak in to see it. I was never able to but everyone that did told me how awesome it was. When I finally did see it, I agreed.

I agree Keanu's acting isn't great - watching the Criterion laserdisc with the ability to edit a sequence together with alternate delivery lines is precious, cause you can see him straining with each line.

as for the film - I really dug it - the overflourishing of the costume/art design and early 5.1 Dolby Digital soundmix are exemplory. Too bad the bluray is flawed, but that a different's topic ;)

Haven't seen it since it first came out. Thought it was visually stunning in the theater, but the story and the acting were dreadful.

Very disappointed.

That was kind of the point...Coppola didn't want to use any modern effects - he wanted to use effects/methods that were "old school" for lack of a better term.

Great movie. Winona was the hawt in the movie. Sure, she barely acted but hey, Oldman did enough overacting for four or five actors.

The discovery on how they were handled (On Disc 2) grabbed much respect for me. Anyone could be fooled that a majority of the effects are optical when they are not.

Interesting replies I'll have to check out the extras on the effects.