"We've All Become God's Madmen"

Dracula and movies were born out of the same world. The novel came out in 1897, just as moving pictures were attracting crowds at fairs and exhibitions all over Europe and America. Given their common background it's no surprise that the legendary vampire has been the subject of countless films since Nosferatu first appeared in 1922. Bram Stoker’s Dracula is the first and only movie to openly acknowledge this relationship with lots of creative visual effects and nods to the film industry of yesteryear. Though this movie was probably a big part in the “emo-ization” of vampires, I love it all the same. Sometimes the crazy story of love and Dracula’s on-again off-again relationship with God really hits home for me, other times I have to laugh the whole thing off. But however I’m feeling about the story (or lack thereof) at any particular moment, I will always love this movie as a great achievement in visual filmmaking.

I seem to recall a lot of marketing hoopla around this movie when it first came out in November of 1992, but at the time I was more interested in Aladdin and Home Alone 2: Lost in New York. But Dracula provided excellent adult counter programming for that holiday season and did pretty good business at the box office. In my adolescent years boys were always watching it at sleepovers thanks to some generous nude scenes, but I missed it during those years, too. I only finally saw it when I was a junior in high school, after finding it in a VHS bargain bin a few days after Halloween. I was going through a period of life at the moment when a big Gothic love story was right up my alley, plus I’ve always been a huge history buff, so when I finally popped the movie into the VCR and saw the cross tumble from the roof of Hagia Sofia as the Turks conquered Constantinople, it was love at first sight.

This movie is over the top in every way possible, and that only makes it better. In the first four minutes alone you get a Turkish invasion of Romania, a puppet-show battle scene, shots of brutal impalement, a gorgeous shot of Dracula’s bride plunging what appears to be a million feet to her death in the river, statues crying bloody tears, and finally a giant explosion of blood. This movie uses every cinematic trick in the book to create an experience unlike any other.

When movies first started they owed as much to magicians as to actors and directors; some of the earliest film makers were also professional magicians. They saw the medium as a way to expand on the visual illusions they employed in their magic acts, and thus special effects were born. Bram Stoker’s Dracula indulges in these old school effects with fiendish relish, giving the film an antiquated feeling that perfectly fits with the Dracula storyline. It’s almost as if you’re watching an elaborate Victorian era carnival attraction whirl to life with music, bells, and an organ grinder’s monkey. Almost every effect is done live on set, from the aforementioned death of Princess Elisabeta to Jonathan Harker’s carriage ride to Dracula’s castle; even the multitudinous explosions of blood are all happening for real. There’s not a single “location” used in this movie—every leaf, every waterway, every castle and manor house is constructed on a soundstage, allowing the creators to preserve that old-school cinema look.

The story of Dracula is well known enough that I won’t go into it here. What the movie adds to an otherwise faithful adaptation of the book is a love story between Dracula and Mina. I still don’t quite understand whether Mina is meant to be the reincarnation of Dracula’s dead wife, or just look like her enough that the resemblance shocks his soul towards salvation, but like I’ve said the story is really a moot point. Like the book, the best part of the story is Jonathan Harker’s journey to Dracula’s castle in Romania. After that, the book descends sharply into Victorian heroic clichés as Dracula sneaks around London, but the movie keeps on wowing us with new locations, special effects, and montages. The sequence in the final third of the film, clearly modeled after the successful montage that concluded The Godfather, is equally entertaining and a whole lot more fun. On one hand, you have the marriage of Jonathan and Mina Harker in a beautiful Eastern Orthodox ceremony, and, at the same time, poor Lucy Westenra’s neck being torn open by wolf-Dracula. It’s so over the top that in any other movie it might make you laugh, but in this film it’s perfect.

But this movie isn’t about the story, it’s about visuals and raw emotions. Gary Oldman’s performance is so tortured and sinister without creeping into parody that he carries the whole film on his shoulders. We feel for Dracula not because the story gives us a lot of reason to, but because Oldman infuses the character with such a sadness and sense of loss. His expressions and mannerisms are perfect for a man who has been at war with God for 400 years, conveying all the anger, hurt, and betrayal that would fill such a life. Is Gary Oldman the best Dracula ever? I guess that's debatable (though if you argued he wasn't, I think you'd lose the debate.) He is unarguably the best actor ever to play Dracula, so it only stands to reason that he brings far more to the part than any actor before him. If he hasn't replaced Bela Lugosi yet as the definitive image of Dracula, he sure should.

The other actors are all fine. Winona Ryder makes a suitably naïve Mina, and Sadie Frost is fun as the vampire-in-waiting Lucy. Anthony Hopkins really seems to find the fun in Van Helsing, and plays him as a man far crazier than Dracula. In the old Dracula movies Van Helsing was always rather stern and humorless—Hopkin’s makes him into a wild eccentric with a twisted sense of humor. Sorry Hugh Jackman, but this Van Helsing has you far outclassed.

And then there’s Keanu Reeves. Sweet, lovable Keanu. His performance in this film might be one of the worst ever recorded. From the moment he utters his first line you’ll be in stitches. It’s as if he was a foreign actor trained to read English for the first time just for this film. He suffers through the only slightly archaic dialogue like it was completely unknown to him, and seeing his bizarre reactions and truly terrible accent is a sheer delight. He’s so out of place, just looking at him is funny. In one scene near the beginning of the film, Mina types in her diary while looking at a framed photo of her Jonathan. It’s not supposed to be funny, but I dare you to look at a 19th century photograph of Ted Theodore Logan wearing period clothes and a blank, emotionless expression and not crack a smile. Keanu Reeves’ performance in this film ranks right up there with Coppola’s other casting disaster, Sophia Coppola in Godfather III, but this one is a million times funnier. Coppola couldn’t have gotten it more wrong if he’d cast an anteater.

But despite that rather gigantic fault the movie is amazing. It’s easily in my top ten of all time, for sheer audacity if nothing else. I know I’ve bad mouthed the story from time to time, but there are definitely days when it does work for me. It’s a story told in images and emotions rather than words, but if you let it wash over you it can raise a lot of questions about God and man and forgiveness and sin and evil. God definitely exists in Dracula’s world, and we’re left with the question of why a divine being would allow Dracula to live so far outside of God’s mercy and allow all the evil Dracula causes. Is it just to teach him a lesson? Or is the movie essentially a retelling of the prodigal son story, but with more blood and vampires? Or is it all about the redemptive power of love, divine or otherwise? It was honestly the hopeless love story element that made this movie so appealing to me in high school. There are moments in everyone’s life when a love so powerful it can survive the grave seems like a mighty entertaining notion, and the romantic sucker in me still enjoys watching Gary Oldman’s Dracula pine away for his Mina.

I’ve watched this movie at least once during the fall for over ten years now—it’s become an essential part of the Halloween season. This is the movie that turned Dracula into a sympathetic monster and unfortunately started vampires on their journey to harmless if sensual romantic leading men. But Bram Stoker’s Dracula still has it all—creepy tombs, haunted castles, obsessive love, a vengeful God, and oodles of impressive special effects and gorgeous cinematography. This is Gothic horror done to absolute perfection.

See it. See it now.