Why is it that I cannot stay awake to the end of this movie?

Seriously, that’s a question I’ve asked myself all seven times I’ve seen this film.  That’s right, I even dozed off during the theatrical run in 1992.  It happened right about the point that Hopkins and company board the train to Transylvania.  My brother shook me awake to tell me the credits were rolling.

I don’t have this problem in my day-to-day life.  I can be sitting in the most boring of meetings and remain blissfully awake, my mind floating off to places while I smile, nod and occasionally answer a question.  However, if you put Francis Ford Coppola’s 1992 film, Bram Stoker’s Dracula in the DVD player, I can almost guarantee you I will be asleep by the third act.

I have no idea why that is.

I have had a love for the character since I was barely old enough to read.  Some of my first Halloween costumes were of The Count.  My love for the Tod Browning film has been well documented here at DIMP in the review I did with fellow writer Shawn McLoughlin on the Dracula Legacy Set last October.  Additionally, I think Coppola’s vision of the titular character may be my favorite of all time.

Still, you put this thing on and I start dozing off.  Shit, I’m getting sleepy just writing this review.

Coppola brought this film to the screen as a labor of love.  His emotional attachment to the novel runs deep, and in the intro and extras on this disc, he’s very up front about that.  He always imagined Dracula as less of a heartless monster and more of a tragic anti-hero.  As he puts it, we should never forget that this was once a man, and that man lost his soul.

Bringing an audience to the point of being sympathetic to a movie’s villain is a difficult thing to do, but Coppola and actor Gary Oldman do just that.  From his first appearance on screen, as he welcomes Jonathan Harker into his castle, I find myself liking this character.  Could that be because I know he’s apt to cause harm to Keanu Reeves’ character?  Maybe, but probably not entirely.  He’s just a likeable character. 

Visually, the movie is unparalleled.  The costumes (which won the 1992 Oscar for Best Design) are amazing!  As one of the DVD extras proclaims, “The Costumes Are The Sets”.  They really are.  Golds, scarlets, greens and whites all shimmer off the screen.  The sets are amazingly detailed and some of the camerawork is breathtaking.

It can’t be the effects that put me out.  Once again, they are top-notch!  Not one digital effect is used in the entire film.  Everything was done in-camera and it gives the film a look and feel that none of the modern day, over-CGI’d vampire films can even come close to. (Underworld and Blade, I’m specifically referring to you.  Go to the back of the class.  Not you Beckinsale.  Take off that skintight leather suit and come with me to the principal’s office.)

Those are just the visual effects, though.  Don’t even get me started on the makeup.  It’s amazing from top to bottom.  Whether it’s the look of the bat-like Dracula or just the sick and sallow appearance of Lucy as she deteriorates from blood loss, the makeup is fantastic (which is why the film won the Best Makeup Oscar).

So why is it that I can’t keep my eyes open?

I’ve decided to lay the blame firmly in three places.  First, the pacing of the film is a bit slow.  We spend a lot of time on the gothicness and bullshittery of the story.  While I applaud Coppola for taking the time to be so meticulous about this, the movie is a little long because of it.  So, cut out about 20 – 25 minutes and I would probably never have a problem.  In fact, the slow pace generally takes away from some of the most fantastic horror moments in the film.  Having to wade through so much exposition just to get to one scene of torch carrying, rifle toting vampire killers brings my attention span down considerably.

Second and third are the acting of Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder respectively.  Now don’t think I’m going to jump on the Reeves/Ryder bashing bandwagon here.  I’ve liked both of them in many other films, like that one about the bus that can’t stop or it’ll fall in love with Richard Gere in NYC.  I’m just saying that when these two are in a film with a supporting cast including Anthony Hopkins, Gary Oldman, Tom Waits (who is incredible as Renfield), Cary Elwes and Richard E. Grant, their limitations come forward with unimaginable clarity.  In fact, I would argue that Ryder is the worst of the two.  Every moment she’s on screen with Sadie Frost (who completely rocks as Lucy), I begin to get sleepy-eyed.

So I’m guessing you are wondering if I’ve ever seen the film in its entirety.  Yes I have, thanks to home video and the miracle of chapter menus.  Don’t get me wrong.  It’s a good film and definitely worth your time.  Just don’t invite me to a viewing party or the 5.1 surround sound will be interrupted by snores near the climax.

Presentation
Good God above does this thing look fantastic.  The new high definition transfer is wonderful.  The costumes and sets pop like pieces of art.  I’m tempted to just put this on a continuous loop on my wall mounted flat screen and tell people I bought it at a gallery.  The audio is no different.  This version will give you the full effect of the Oscar winning sound effects editing and you’ll definitely get your money’s worth if you’re double-dipping.

Extras
Speaking of double-dipping, I know you’re asking yourself whether you should.  Well if you’re a fan of the film and still enjoy quality special features, the answer is a resounding yes.  Bram Stoker’s Dracula – Collector’s Edition has a number of things specifically included in this release.

First up, you get an intro to the movie and a feature length commentary with Coppola himself.  It’s not the world’s most enthusiastic and entertaining commentary but it is damn interesting.  I found myself staying awake more easily for this than for the movie itself.

Next up you get the Making of Dracula featurette.  This is the same one that was included on previous releases.  However the next three featurettes are new and well, well, well worth your time.

The Costumes are the Sets – The Design of Eiko Ishioka spends a solid 15 minutes exploring the award winning costumes.  Ishioka is a genius.  Coppola would literally come to her with examples of paintings and say, “Give me something that looks like this.”  Her vision of the look of the period firmly establishes this film as one of best in the vampire genre. 

Next, In-Camera – The Naïve Visual Effects of Dracula is the wet dream piece for all you fans of the technical out there.  Roman Coppola (Francis’ son) headed up the effects crew and goes into great detail about how this movie accomplished such amazing imagery using tricks from the early 1900s.  It’s a fascinating featurette.

Method and Madness – Visualizing Dracula explores the storyboarding of the film and how the look and feel were influenced by art from the early 1900s.

Additionally, there are some deleted scenes, an article from Cinefex and the trailer for Coppola’s new film Youth Without Youth.

The Bottom Line
This movie is definitely an awesome example of style over substance but it’s still well worth your time.  It’s beautiful, sexy and scary but you should load up on Red Bull prior to watching it.  Just in case.