Is this Gary Oldman's best performance ever? Or is this the best Dracula performance?
shareHe was brilliant in TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY.
Facts need to come before certainty.
He is a great character actor, and has done many good roles, but I'm going to agree that this was his best performance.
shareOldman is not a character actor...he is however a great METHOD actor. Dracula was one of his best roles but he always brings it...he was even great in The 5th Element...
shareYou dare disregard his performance in Tiptoes? The performance that the trailer referred to as the role of a lifetime?
There's something wrong with you...
"Is this Gary Oldman's best performance ever? Or is this the best Dracula performance?"
Both.
He allways performe in high level, but in Dracula he performe in the highest level. In my opinion, a top5 all time performance...
His best performance.
The best Dracula by far.
He did three roles in one. Diferent voices, forms of speak, look, smille, walk...
Gary Oldman is one of THEE Best actors of this generation. His performances are good even in the BAD movies he's in. Its practically a crime that the man dosent have at least two or three Oscars by now. As far as Dracula goes, he's the only performance worth watching this movie for at all. Its too bad most of the rest of the cast look horrible playing against him.
"You win some, you lose some. But you live, you live to fight another day."
GO was definitely the best actor in Dracula - head and shoulders above the others, even Hopkins. He made it worth watching and rewatching. Along with DiCaprio he is one of the best screen actors of his generation.
shareI agree 100%. I thought his acting chops made everyone else look sloppy (except Hopkins but he looked like he mailed his in). Keanu looks spectacularly wooden and Winona was only ok.
shareI can take or leave Oldman most times, but I would definitely leave him in this film.
He was taking the same inspiration in the character as Frank Langella did years before. But with some essential elements missing, he is nowhere near as good looking, sexy or aristocratic as Langella.
Oldman should definitely have followed the horror theme more since his looks weren't up to snuff for the romantic version. I thought it was ridiculous that Ryder's character went crazy for him. It was laughable.
kaskait, you've got issues.
shareReally?
The fact that I want a handsome leading man in a clearly romantic role?
Let me put it boldly.
Gary Oldman was bone ass ugly and never should have been portrayed as a handsome "prince" who makes women swoon.
Frank Langella as a romantic Dracula? YES
Gary Oldman, NO.
G.O.D = Gary Oldman as Dracula
you should stick with the Twilight saga, it suits you better. lots of pretty boys, if that's what you really care for in a movie.
PS: Gary was portraying this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlad_the_Impaler
Handsome, innit?
I never watched Twilight and have no interest in it.
But if going the romantic vampire route than even Twilight got it right.
This Dracula got it wrong. Oldman is not a romantic hero.
Oldman was not playing the Impaler. That was just a throwaway story in the beginning taken from RL sources.
The film essentially remade John Badhams's version but with an unhandsome actor.
Why did we have to suffer through all those scenes of Dracula dancing with Mina or buying her supper.
That was the horror in this film.
I'm not even gonna waste my time with a proper answer. You have your opinion, I have mine, and nothing's gonna change that.
Only my opinion is consistent to that of Francis Ford Coppola (not to mention thousands of critics and moviegoers), who clearly had his mind set on Gary Oldman from the beggining. Lots of handsome actors like Viggo Mortensen, Antonio Banderas, Andy Garcia and Gabriel Byrne auditioned for the role - Coppola = not impressed.
As for Gary being ugly, I think Uma Thurman and Isabella Rosselini would disagree.
Bye!
=)
Coppola got it wrong. An ugly actor in a leading man role playing a romantic figure that makes women swoon was not the right decision.
This films was one of the first to be hyped the chop shop way that is prevalent in Hollywood today.
When I saw the film most of the audience was laughing. Especially at the romantic scenes.
Ugly?
That might be YOUR OPINION and taste but the FACT is that millions of women are swooning over him, especially as Dracula. Just read twitter and tumblr and fanfics based on HIS characterization as the young Vlad and see the countless fanarts and Dracula tatoos that female fans have on thier bodies (even on intime parts...)
Coppola got it right. He cast a charismatic, edgy, handsome man for the role. No wonder it's one of Oldman's most popular roles.
If you dont like him, that's fine. It will not change the world out there.
I don't know what young women you are seeing who discuss this film.
Because I have teenage relatives and none of them have ever mentioned Gary Oldman or his work in this film. They do however enjoy Patterson in those silly Twilight films.
Are you going to make the argument that Oldman is in the same league (in beauty) as Patterson? I'm not talking about talent because in that case Oldman clearly wins.
Are you also going to make the argument that Oldman is in the same league as Frank Langella or Louis Jourdan? I don't even think he is as handsome as Christopher Lee.
Oldman is a talented character actor not a leading man type. And it shows in his film work, he is frequently a supporting, character actor.
Coppola got it wrong. He didn't even make an attempt to highlight Oldman's best features except to parade him around in ever more ridiculous fright wigs.
I find Patterson ugly, so Gary Oldman is definitely above him in every aspect, including beauty.
Oldman is an amazingly versatile actor, he can be both a leading man and supporting character actor, doing both brilliantly, proved it several times.
I dont find Lee or Langela particularly handsome or attractive.
But it's all matter of taste, so if you find Oldman ugly while Patterson and the other two better looking and more handsome, that's ok.
And as for teens enjoying Patterson in Twlight... LOL you are really trying to use it as an argument??? Oh please... not to mention obviously they will love Edward Cullen instead of a real bloodsucker vampire...
We won't convince each other.
If you are going to include a romantic love story theme into Dracula (which is just downright perverse because the story is obviously about rape not love) than the lead better be good looking. The lead should be breathtaking.
Many young girls today think that Patterson is that type of guy and they liked him as a vampire in Twilight.
The fact still remains in my experience, when I saw this film, people laughed at Oldman's various cartoony outfits. Which never should have happened. Instead of making him look like Oscar Wilde trying to play straight dude, Coppola and co should have tried to showcase Oldman's best features. Mainly his expressive eyes. Which in the film were hidden by sunglasses, scary contacts or covered in wig hair.
He should have looked more conventional since he was trying to fit into the very conservative, victorian England.
Twilight is an awful trend to use as an example, dont you think? Seriously, I cant believe you are talking about this dude and Twilight in this forum about Francis Ford Coppola's Drakula movie. It deserves better than this ridiculous comparison.
And why should I care what tweens think about Patterson's... er I mean Edward Cullen's looks in that vega vampire movie?
Patterson is for kids, Oldman is for adult women...
You will not convince me that Oldman wasnt a beautiful, sensual Vlad as young Dracula, no matter what Pattersons you will bring up.
PATTINSON
You seem to have a very shallow appreciation for beauty. Some people have more than looks, something much much more. Thats what separates someone like Gary Oldman from one of the twilight twinks. Gary has something deeply disturbing and mysterious about him. And he brings it to all his characters, except for his parts in the Batman stuff. I did not care for that character. I personally find his looks, on the surface, moderately handsome. However, something about his energy is amazing and draws people in. That's a kind of magnetism few people have. That's why he will always be thought of as one of the greats.
As far as being his best role... thats a hard one. I LOVED him in The 5th Element and The Professional..and even True Romance. Every character he plays he completely transforms himself. So I can't really decide. Someone mentioned the Dark Knight.. I can't help but wonder if that person has not seen much of his work. Different stroke for different folks I guess. Cheers.
Everything you've said makes sense because it's sure you watched the film in your living room with your teen nieces. Please, try not to say anything else (troll)
shareIf you are going to include a romantic love story theme into Dracula (which is just downright perverse because the story is obviously about rape not love) than the lead better be good looking. The lead should be breathtaking.
BTW, It's Pattinson, not Patterson. Personally, when this version first came out I, too, thought of Gary Oldman as unattractive. Apparently, maturity, age, experience, (on my part) and familiarity with his other work have resulted in my admiration of his talent, and surprisingly, his looks! I now find him attractive in a way I never would have before. Give it a few years, your tastes may change!!
shareWell beauty is in the eye of the beholder but let me tell you one thing...beauty is only part of what makes a man attractive to a woman. For the most part it's character and the way he carries himself. A beautifull face is just a beautifull face...without character, voice, manners, intelligence....very boring and not attractive in the least.
Gary Oldman I find, as a woman, was very attractive in this role (obviously the younger parts), maybe not so for 15 year old girls. Coppola obviously wanted him for his talent and intensity not for his looks.
Twilight is actually a good example....beautifull boys but utterly unattractive because of the total lack of charisma...
Still find the movies one of the best...I can watch it over and over.
I don't get why you find him ugly? Why is he ugly to you? I thought he was very handsome in his tophat and glasses and long, wavy black hair.
shareCoppola got it wrong. An ugly actor in a leading man role playing a romantic figure that makes women swoon was not the right decision.
[deleted]