DRACULA (1992)

This admittedly energetic adaptation of the now all too familiar Dracula story is filled with both artistic flourish and a bounty of blood. It also contains the obligatory amounts of sex and violence necessary to get a modern horror film released in the first place. Added to these attributes are lots of color, atmosphere, and the expected use of Christian symbolism (both Catholic and Orthodox) dramatically displayed as mere fetish objects to a contemporary audience that no longer believes in such things unless they appear in horror films.

What it lacks, besides Bela Lugosi or Christopher Lee, is any real sense of Gothic mystery. But then, it's difficult to establish mystery when everything that should be seen in the dark is instead shown in blazing light and shoved right into the viewer's face. And, really, Gothic mystery is superfluous in a slasher flick, which is essentially what Francis Ford Coppola has made here.

Gary Oldman works hard in another presto change-o type of performance that has finally won him an Oscar for THE DARKEST HOUR. I would imagine the bulk of the movie's budget was used for his various costumes, wigs and facial makeup. Winona Ryder has feverishly entered the scream queen zone and manages to emote with great effort. Keanu Reeves, attempting to speak BBC British, appears to be auditioning for a dinner theater production of Shakespeare, while Anthony Hopkins provides some much needed cynical flair as Van Helsing, vampire hunter. The acting honors, in my opinion, belong to Tom Waits as Renfield. Waits finally has a chance to play full tilt crazy, and he runs with it.

For some reason I was unable to take any of this seriously and found myself wondering what Roger Corman or Mario Bava might have done with this project.

And for a lot less money.