Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992) October 14th, 2023

I heard somewhere that Dracula is the most adapted screenplay of all time, a claim I’ll leave unchallenged because fact checking it intimidates me (Who has the time to watch every movie, much less catalog them?). Many great directors, including Murnau and Browning, contributed to that long list of adaptations but I haven’t seen anyone do it quite like Francis Ford Coppola.

Bram Stoker’s Dracula brings a depth to the titular character uncommon in the source material and previous adaptations. The script establishes Vlad the Impaler’s transformation into Dracula began with the church’s betrayal. Having just slaughtered the enemies of Christ, Vlad returns to his castle to find his very-mortal beloved has died by suicide. The attendant priests make clear that no one who takes their own life in this way will be permitted into the kingdom of heaven. Struck dumb by the cruelty of a God who would ask so much from him and give so little in return, Vlad denounces his creator and stabs his longsword into a large stone cross. Blood erupts from the wound like a weeping madonna and Vlad drinks of it and in so doing becomes a vampire. He spends the following four centuries in a miserable state of self loathing and self indulgence until the day he learns of his wife’s resurrection. Aside from that rich backstory the rest of the film follows the predictable Dracula story. He travels to London, feeds, and turns some women into vampires before dying by Van Helsing’s hand.

Of the cast and special effects much has already been written. Yes, Keanu Reeves is miscast and completely wrong for the role with Winona Rider being better but still slightly off. Yes, Gary Oldman is as good as ever and for my money should be compared more often to Daniel Day-Lewis as the zenith of contemporary screen actors. More people should discuss Richard E. Grant and Cary Elwes’ performances as monumentally adequate with Billy Campbell saddled with the aptly named everyman Texan in that he could’ve been played by any man.

The real star is Sadie Frost who’s performance as Lucy brings vampirism’s symbolic eroticism to the surface with unprecedented explicitness. Dracula’s busty brides are all too common in Hammer films but nothing in my memory comes close to the violent rutting scenes in Bram Stoker’s Dracula. This choice to be explicitly sexual adds a believability to Dracula’s seduction severely lacking in the slow shaking wrists of previous renditions. The allure of vampirism becomes believably enticing when Lucy, driven to madness with pleasure, writhes on her death bed. This parallel to addiction bridges the gap between the vampiric fantasy and tragic reality. It’s easy to see a hopeless junkie or alcoholic in the reflection of Lucy’s ecstasy. Perhaps their own demons are equally seductive? The choice to draw this parallel elevates the material beyond a perverted guilty pleasure and into a new standard for the genre.

Much has also been said for the choice to use almost exclusively in-camera effects. Dracula’s eyes appear in the clouds suggesting his awareness of the actions happening in a scene taking place far away from his physical form. POV shots speeding through London streets suggest Dracula is flying or traveling quickly even though we never see his body zooming around. Dracula’s shadow cast on walls moves independently from his physical form. These style choices evoke a sense of antiquated charm as well as a strengthen Bram Stoker’s Dracula‘s unique art direction.

Bram Stoker’s Dracula peaks with Dracula’s tragic death, cementing him as a sympathetic monster not unlike Frankenstein’s creature. Bram Stoker’s Dracula‘s additions to the Dracula myth are so strong that I didn’t realize they weren’t present in the source material. That speaks volumes to Bram Stoker’s Dracula‘s influence and staying power. For my money Dracula just isn’t as interesting without turning on God for betraying his faith, and any story missing a similar backstory is not invited into my library.