Don't be ridiculous. Ford Coppola's film is by far the closest to the book. It also has a great score by Wojciech Kilar. Oldman really gets his teeth into the role too.
This John Badham version is second best though and is good. 3rd is Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966), because it has a traditional fairy tale-like feel.
"by far the closest to the book"?
I have heard that quite often, but vehemently disagree with it. While the 1992 Coppola film does have certain details that I have seen in no other version, (the part about the blue lights on the ground denoting buried treasure, and the fact that all four of the men [Holmwood, Seward, Morris and Harker] were there to help Van Helsing) it also completely butchers the story. Where, in the novel, was Elisabetta mentioned? Where was the idea of reincarnation even hinted at? I'll give a little clue: it wasn't.
The 1992 Coppola film even changed the basic theme of the story from that of an epic battle between good and evil (the English vs. the Count) to that of a sappy love story between Mina and Dracula.
Now, I liked the 1992 film, as the sets were spectacular, and like I said earlier, certain details were included that no other film has, but it still deviates too much from the book. Both the basic story and even the theme was changed, like it was with the 1979 film with Frank Langella.
So, which film do I like the best? It is easily the 1977 BBC effort with Louis Jourdan as the Count and Frank Findley as Van Helsing. Granted, the BBC changed a few details, for example, Lucy and Mina were here presented as sisters, and the characters of Arthur Holmwood and Quincy Morris were combined into Quincy Holmwood, but the basic plot and theme remained remarkably true to the story as presented in the book.
So, my winner is hands down, the 1977 BBC effort.
reply
share
Thirdover4
8 years ago
I have heard that quite often, but vehemently disagree with it. While the 1992 Coppola film does have certain details that I have seen in no other version, (the part about the blue lights on the ground denoting buried treasure, and the fact that all four of the men [Holmwood, Seward, Morris and Harker] were there to help Van Helsing) it also completely butchers the story. Where, in the novel, was Elisabetta mentioned? Where was the idea of reincarnation even hinted at? I'll give a little clue: it wasn't.
The reincarnation thing was actually from other sources including comic books. I didn't mind the origin story, it actually gives the character a little needed background and anchors him to Vlad Tepes. I thought the characterization by Oldman was closer to the source material than most others. Big time points off for casting Keanu Reeves.
The 1992 Coppola film even changed the basic theme of the story from that of an epic battle between good and evil (the English vs. the Count) to that of a sappy love story between Mina and Dracula.
Again, not the first time.
Now, I liked the 1992 film, as the sets were spectacular, and like I said earlier, certain details were included that no other film has, but it still deviates too much from the book. Both the basic story and even the theme was changed, like it was with the 1979 film with Frank Langella.
I just re-watched the Langella version for the first time in years and was struck by how interesting it was. It is adapted from the play like the Bella Lugosi version was, but the Lugosi version retained the Transylvania portion of the story where as this did not. Langella had a great presence on screen and really made the film. The biggest change to me (besides all the Seward, Mina, Lucy, Harker relationships changed) was how Van Helsing is not the typical Mr. Exposition, or the educated man who gives credence to the superstition. Usually Van Helsing comes storming in fully up to speed on Vampires and makes everyone feel stupid for not believing. Olivier's Van Helsing was somewhat feeble and actually dies at the end.
One of the major themes of the book is that enlightened, western, British people could defeat a powerful, eastern, evil, even supernatural power through education, technology, teamwork and a stiff upper lip.
reply
share