Rating: - Fascinating failure
"Bram Stoker's...." represents the last gasp of Coppola's once-formidable talent. Like "Godfather 1 & 2", "The Conversation", and "Apocalypse Now" (the original release only), this film has personality and style to burn. The difference, and this is nearly fatal, lies in Coppola's casting choices. Clearly Winona Ryder and, especially, Keanu Reeves were chosen to grab a younger audience. That ploy may have worked at the expense of period credibiity and thespian gravitas. I enjoyed Oldman and Hopkins in their scenery-chewing glory, an antidote to the flat readings and performance of Reeves. But, what makes the film remarkable is the production itself: the sets, costumes, score, and old-style "in camera" low tech effects created by Coppola's boy Roman create an absolutely unique vision. Too bad that Coppola, who once famously fought Paramount for Pacino over Redford, and for Caan and Nino Rota, so easily capitulated to get the film made. If that was the sole way to get Columbia to greenlight the project, then it was worth it. However, the casting and, to a lesser extent James Hart's script, prevented "Bram" from being a true classic. And yet, after watching "The Rainmaker" last night, a purely journeyman effort without an ounce of cinematic personality, one longs for another effort as interesting as this "Dracula"

Television Show Collectibles

Movie Searches