Dr. K's Waiting Room

Released: 13 December 1992
Director: Francis Ford Coppola
Distributor: Columbia Pictures
Budget: $40 million
Stars: Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Keanu Reeves, Richard E. Grant, Billy Campbell, and Anthony Hopkins

The Plot:
Having renounced God after the suicide of his love, ruthless vampire Count Vlad Dracula (Oldman) travels to London to seduce her lookalike, Mina Harker (Ryder), indulging his bloodlust and inspiring a rag-tag band of would-be vampire killers to stand against him.

The Background:
Inspired by Irish folklore and age-old vampire myths, Bram Stoker’s Lord of Vampires undeniably popularised the vampire as we know it today and inspired many critical and academic discussions. About thirty years after the book was published, World War I infantryman Bela Lugosi first embodied the role of Dracula for a stage production, eventually transitioning to the silver screen for Tod Browning’s horror classic before the legendary Christopher Lee made the role his own in 1958. After decades of reinterpretations and filmic appearances, Dracula lived again in 1992 thanks to the efforts of star Winona Ryder, who brought James V. Hart’s screenplay to director Francis Ford Coppola as a project for them both. Attracted to the haunting, disturbing sensual nature of the material, Coppola agreed and Gary Oldman jumped at the chance to work with the prolific director, who spared no expensive crafting the film’s ornate costumes. Veteran production artist Mentor Huebner and even comic book writer and artist Mike Mignola worked on the film’s extensive storyboards while hair and makeup designer Michèle Burke crafted Oldman’s signature look. After Christian Slater turned down the Jonathan Harker role, Keanu Reeves stepped in, though his hard work to convey a British accent drew much criticism. Oldman apparently lost himself in the sexuality and intensity of the role so completely that fell out with Ryder for a while and Coppola’s eccentric demands drew some criticism at the time. Finally, Coppola also insisted on utilising practical, in-camera, and old-school special effects technique utilising forced perspectives, miniature effects, and matte paintings. Opening at number one at the US box office and with a final gross of over $215 million, the award winning Bram Stoker’s Dracula was largely praised as a visual masterpiece. While many criticised some of the performances and its overly dramatic elements, just as many praised it as a tragic, alluring mixture of romance and horror, lauding Oldman’s performance and the tangible nature of its presentation.

The Review:
Bram Stoker’s Dracula mixes folklore, fiction, and history to present the titular Lord of Vampires as having started life as a Vlad III Drăculea, a warrior for the Romanian Orthodox Church, a commander and soldier so ruthless and bloodthirsty that he single-handedly slaughtered many in the Ottoman Empire and impaled their bodies and heads on pikes as a way to destroy their moral. Back in 1492, Dracula’s campaign against the Turks was seen as a righteous one, fought to defend his church in the name of almighty God, who Dracula praised and devoted himself to above all else save his beloved wife, Elisabeta (Ryder). However, while Dracula was successful in slaughtering his enemies, Elisabeta took her life after receiving false reports of his death, unable to face living life without her husband. Upon discovering this, and learning that Elisabeta’s suicide had damned her soul, Dracula cursed and renounced God, desecrating the chapel and drinking a strange blood spewing from its altar. In the process, Dracula became the first vampire, an undead thing with powers over the elements (he conjures great storms and winds), dominion over the “children of the night” (wolves, rats, and such), and the ability to transform into a monstrous bat-like form, mist, and rats. Contrary to most popular depictions, Dracula is merely weakened by sunlight, though he does draw strength from the cursed soil of his homeland, Transylvania, and renew himself by drinking the blood of his victims. Yet, Dracula spends four centuries isolated in his decrepit, ominous castle on the outskirts of a nearby village with only his lustful, ravenous concubines (Florina Kendrick, Michaela Bercu, and Monica Bellucci) for company, presumably terrorising and feeding upon the locals whenever the thirst or fancy takes over. When the film jumps ahead to 1897, however, visits to Transylvanian to liaise with the mysterious Count have driven solicitor R. M. Renfield (Tom Waits) insane, leaving him in the care of Doctor Jack Seward (Grant), who’s both disgusted and amazed by Renfield’s hunger for flies and mad rantings about his “master”.

Since Dracula wishes to purchase properties around London and represents a substantial investment, Renfield’s duties are passed to fresh-faced, well-spoken, and somewhat frigid solicitor Jonathan Harker (Reeves). Though his fiancée, Wilhelmina “Mina” Murray, is saddened to hear he will be gone for some time, eager to consummate their marriage, she recognises that this is a big opportunity for Harker and takes solace in his frequent correspondence. Though well-mannered and good-natured, Harker is unnerved by Transylvania, where wolves freely wander, darkness looms ominously, and his client is prone to bizarre outbursts. Dracula treats Harker as a guest, welcoming and feeding him and expressing his desire to be amongst civilisation once more, but is erratic and eccentric, lamenting his cursed family bloodline, driven to a frenzy by the sight and smell of blood, and generally testing Harker’s civil nature. While I love Keanu Reeves, he is dreadful in this role, delivering perhaps the worst British accent I’ve ever heard and appearing lost and confused. This is a case where it might’ve been better to let him use his natural accent, if only to make his line readings less awkward, but that wouldn’t have helped with his awful haircut/wig and robotic tone. Harker’s effectively held prisoner in Dracula’s castle, feasted upon by his brides for at least a month before he finds the willpower and courage to escape and being left severely traumatised. While pining for her love, Mina takes solace in the courtship of her dear friend, the promiscuous Lucy Westenra (Sadie Frost), giggling over sex acts while Lucy flits between her suitors, Dr. Seward, wealthy Lord Arthur Holmwood (Cary Elwes), and gunslinger Quincey P. Morris (Campbell). Though she settles on Holmwood (presumably for the financial security, accustomed as she is to such a lifestyle), the other two continue to hang around and curry her favour, forming first a dysfunctional friendship and then a rag-tag group of vampire hunters when the peculiar Professor Abraham Van Helsing (Hopkins) alerts them to the vampire’s threat.

Betrayed by his faith, Dracula is presented as a far more tragic and sympathetic figure. Upon seeing Mina’s photograph, Dracula alters his plans for London to include seeing his reincarnated love, mercilessly slaughtering the crew of the Demeter to restore his youth. Unlike other adaptations of Dracula, where he integrates into London society and socialises with Dr. Seward and the others, Dracula is a largely enigmatic figure once he reaches Ol’ Blighty. Appearing as a peculiar foreign prince, Dracula stalks Mina through the streets, using his hypnotic and persuasive powers to entrance her and slowly unearth her forgotten memories of their past life and love. Though initially rude towards him, Mina comes to be captivated by Dracula and begins a love affair in Jonathan’s absence, naturally unaware that her handsome prince has been feeding upon Lucy in the night as a wolf-beast. However, when she receives word of Jonathan’s condition, Mina goes to him, encouraged by her sick friend, to rekindle their love and get married, though it’s obvious that her feelings have changed and that her thoughts constantly drift to her passionate and mysterious prince. When Lucy’s condition worsens and defies Dr. Seward’s expertise, he calls Van Helsing for aid, only for the outlandishly blunt priest to conclude that she’s been targeted by Nosferatu, a subject he’s well versed on. Although Van Helsing tries to stave off the infection with a questionable blood transfusion, Mina’s beset by a fever, constantly wandering off in a daze, and undergoes radical personality changes, resembling Dracula’s ever-horny, ever-hungry brides and quickly making believers out of Lucy’s bemused suitors.

Jonathan’s return to London confirms Van Helsing’s worst fears, that Dracula himself is amongst them, and he leads the fledgling vampire to hunters to “where the basturd sleeps” so they can destroy Dracula’s cursed soil. However, Dracula is agonised when Mina breaks off their tryst, conjuring violent winds and fully transforming Mina into a vampire out of spite. This process sees her rise as an undead seductress with the same unnerving taste for children as Dracula’s concubines. While Dr. Seward, Quincey, and Holmwood falter against Lucy’s monstrously sexual transformation, Van Helsing leads the charge, wielding a holy cross and easily placing Lucy into a vulnerable slumber so she can be staked and decapitated. While Jonathan is startled about how blasé Van Helsing is about this, he eagerly joins their cause to deal a measure of revenge against Dracula, who murders Renfield for running his mouth to Mina before appearing before her, all pretence dropped. Although Mina is horrified and angered to learn that her lover murdered her best friend, she cannot deny her feelings for him or the strength of her vague memories and begs to be with him, forever. While elated to hear this and desperate to inflict his curse upon her to be reunited with his lost love, Dracula hesitates at the last second, unable to bring himself to watch her suffer from eternal torment as he has. However, horny little minx that she is, Mina refuses to listen and gladly, hungrily drinks his blood in an explicitly sexual act that sees her undergo a similar transformation to Mina. This means that she constantly interferes with the hunters’ attempts to intercept and destroy Dracula when he flees to Transylvania, attempting to seduce Van Helsing and even holding her husband at bay with a rifle to defend her dying love, having willingly sacrificed her humanity for some real passion in her life.

The Nitty-Gritty:
Since I haven’t read the original book, I’m not really qualified to comment on how accurate an adaptation Bram Stoker’s Dracula is. However, from what I’ve heard, it’s one of the most faithful retellings and I did like that the film incorporated voice overs and diary entries to mimic the book’s epistolary nature. Dracula is undeniably a vastly different character to other, more popular depictions, appearing as a once proud and seemingly noble (if ruthless) soldier who slaughtered armies in the name of his God. He cherished Elisabeta more than anything in the world and felt betrayed when the church turned on him after his many years of faithful service, renouncing God since he’d forever be denied his love even in death due to her damning her soul through suicide. His quest to London thus becomes a desperate desire to reunite with Elisabeta, who’s seemingly been reincarnated in Mina, and he wastes no time in captivating and wooing her. Whereas Jonathan is reluctant to give in to carnal desires, Dracula is an extremely passionate man whose romantic way with words entrance Mina as much as his hypnotic gaze and the shadows of her former life. While he’s overjoyed to reunite with his love, Dracula hesitates to subject her to his curse, knowing it cannot be undone and will lead to eternal earthly damnation for them both. Interestingly, he doesn’t spare this same concern for his other concubines or show mercy to the children he regularly feasts on, but these are apparently secondary concerns for the lovelorn Mina, who’s so desperate to get laid that she gleefully renounces her humanity. And make no mistake about it, Bram Stoker’s Dracula is the horniest, sexiest adaptation of the text you’ll ever see! Lucy is super horny for all her suitors, Dracula’s many attacks are framed as blatantly sexual acts, the vampire brides all exude succubus energy, and then there’s the scene where Mina drinks Dracula’s blood and he reacts with orgasmic pleasure!

Bram Stoker’s Dracula may also be the most visually impressive version of the book. It’s clear that the filmmakers spared no expensive on the elaborate costumes and sets, with the woman, especially, being strapped into extravagant gowns and the men all dressed in their finest regalia. While I dig Dracula’s beehive hairdo and opulent robes, I do question the design of his blood red armour, which seems awfully devilish for a man of God and also looks far too much like heavy leather for my tastes. The film uses practical effects and traditional optical trickery to fantastic effect to overlay miniatures with backgrounds and diary entries and project Dracula’s gaze into the storm clouds. The film is surprisingly sparing with the gore, but it makes quite an impression when it does appear, with arterial spray drenching drapes, Lucy spewing up blood when Van Helsing shoves a cross in her face, and heads flying after being severed by the vampire hunters. Dracula has quite a few forms here, though some are better than others. His aged, withered appearance is one of my favourites, though his youthful guise makes the girls wet and his unnerving mist proves suitably deadly to the rabid Renfield. Sadly, Dracula’s monstrous forms leave a lot to be desired, his man-bat form is the superior of the two, but even this looks awkward and uncomfortable, especially as his arms are literally bent-back wings. His wolf-man form is even worse, however, appearing very fake and shaggy looking, with only the facial prosthetics and his unsettling sexual attack saving it from being ludicrous. Dracula’s decaying appearing in the finale is far more striking, as is his mysterious horseman and the techniques used to show him and his concubines moving with unnatural grace. Unfortunately, little of this keeps the film from being an absolute slog to sit through. At just over two hours long, Bram Stoker’s Dracula sure does drag things out, inflating its runtime with bizarre editing choices and unnecessary cutaways and perhaps sticking a little too close to the text for its own good.

Thanks to Jonathan, Van Helsing and the others destroy all but one of Dracula’s boxes of earth. When his seduction of Mina is interrupted, Dracula’s forced to flee to Transylvania in his last box, his powers fading and his appearance quickly degenerating, to regain his strength. Van Helsing leads his group in intercepting Dracula, bizarrely taking Mina with them despite her being less of a liability in London. While Harker and the others try to cut off the gypsy slaves transporting Dracula’s carriage, Van Helsing and Mina head directly for his castle, with the eccentric vampire expert desperately fending off the brides with his flaming torch and subduing Mina with a communion wafer when they try to seduce and bite him. When the brides kill their horses, Van Helsing takes a swift revenge and claims their heads before joining up with the others at Dracula’s castle. Although Quincey is fatally stabbed in the hectic fracas, he does stab the decaying Dracula through the heart and Harker gets a measure of revenge by slitting the Count’s throat. However, Mina stops them from finishing off the monstrous abomination and Harker and Van Helsing reluctantly allow her to get Dracula into the chapel where he once turned his back on God. There, the demonic Dracula shares a kiss with his beloved and is amazed when the chapel undergoes a supernatural restoration; the candles ignite and the cross he disgraced repairs itself, restoring Dracula to his youth. However, he’s still mortally wounded and, with his dying breath, Dracula begs Mina to bring him peace. Although she’s heartbroken, Mina agrees to end his suffering and stake shim through the heart before decapitating him, undoing the curse inflicted upon her and seemingly allowing Dracula to reunite with Elisabeta in the afterlife.

The Summary:
I’m going to be honest and say I’ve never liked Bram Stoker’s Dracula. I never watch it because I remember it being a long, boring, overly stylised affair with some atrocious performances. And that isn’t just a knock against Keanu Reeves, either, as Winona Ryder and Sadie Frost are just as bad with their accents and delivery. Hell, even Gary Oldman and Anthony Hopkins are hamming it up, though I at least give them credit for bringing a Shakespearean gravitas to this tediously dull movie. While I’m sure Bram Stoker’s Dracula is exceedingly faithful to the book, there’s something to be said for condensing the text when making an adaptation. For example, did we really need Dr. Seward, Holmwood, and Quincey all in the film? I feel it would’ve been far simpler to combine them into Dr. Seward for the sake of brevity. Additionally, we spend way too long in Dracula’s castle with him, Harker, and the brides. Like, I get it; Dracula’s manipulated Harker and imprisoned him there, but this sequence goes on for what feels like an age and yet the Demeter scenes are a glorified montage? I did like how tragic and human Dracula is, with him depicted as a disgraced former believer who’s spent centuries yearning for his lost love and yet hesitates to afflict her with his curse as it’s been such a tortured unlife for him. Paradoxically, Dracula is still a monstrous fiend who feasts upon innocent souls (and children) to prolong his life and make others suffer for his own amusement. While the film is undeniably beautiful and the old-school filmmaking techniques are appreciated, giving the film a tangible quality that makes it seem like a big-budget stage play, Dracula’s monstrous forms leave a lot to be desired. His man-bat form is a major disappointment and the man-wolf effects are laughable, though it is intriguing how sexually aggressive the film is, explicitly depicted Dracula’s attacks as sexual misdeeds. It may be the most faithful adaptation of Stoker’s text, but Bram Stoker’s Dracula is just too tedious for me to rate much higher. I dreaded revisiting it for this review and hoped my opinion would’ve changed, but it’s just as dull and painful to sit through as ever, despite its strong visuals and atmosphere.

My Rating:

Could Be Better

Are you a fan of Bram Stoker’s Dracula? If you’ve read the book, how faithful is this adaptation and would you say it stuck too close to the text in some areas? Do you agree that the film is too long or were you captivated by the gothic atmosphere? What did you think to Gary Oldman’s performance and Keanu Reeves’s atrocious accent? Which adaptation of Dracula is your favourite and how are you celebrating Halloween this year? Tell me I’m wrong about Bram Stoker’s Dracula in the comments, read my other horror reviews, and donate to my Ko-Fi if you want to see more Dracula content.