Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula

One of the most disappointing things about moving to a place in which you don’t know anyone right before October is that there is no one to watch horror movies with. Sure, if I was more gregarious, I’d go a-knocking on my neighbor’s door inviting them in for some beer and a scare (but I can’t really offer them a beer because that’s not an essential expense right now). So I’m stuck watching scary movies alone, so it’s good that I don’t get super creeped out by them anymore, though the upcoming Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer has me nervous.

Of course, a bonus to being alone is that I can watch anything I like and the other day, I liked to watch Coppola’s take on Dracula. The decision was made mostly because I’m reading Richard E. Grant’s film diaries (don’t ask how I got them [seriously, don’t {ok, they were published}]) and his talk of his experience on the set of the film sparked me to revisit it. I was very surprised to discover how much of Bram Stoker’s Dracula I forgot about; especially with such vivid memories of the last time I watched it (undergrad, in Florida for baseball spring training, and in my teammates’ motel room).
But that’s not what this is about. Coppola’s take on Dracula is like a love affair to cinema history. And why not? The Dracula story has been told repeatedly since the beginning of cinema. It essentially started with Murnau’s Nosferatu in 1922 and never really stopped. So, when you know you are telling a story that everyone knows, you need something to set it apart. Instead of loading it up with the best, most modern special effects or trying to redefine the story, Coppola took the viewer back in time.

What’s remarkable about this Dracula is that nearly all of the films visual effects are in camera: done with forced perspective, miniatures, clever make-up application, etc. IMDB has an very interesting trivia item on some of the effects that I highly recommend checking out. It makes watching the film an interactive experience. It’s fun to watch the scenes and figure out how the effect was achieved. Some are very difficult to figure out and it’s no wonder that the crew struggled to figure out how filmmakers achieved some of the visuals that they did back in the early days of cinema.

The massive sets and matte paintings are incredibly beautiful. With all the location shooting done these days, once forgets how much thought had to be put into building things from scratch or the skill it takes to construct a convincing matte. The film is simply never boring to look at even when the story drags or Keanu Reeves is trying to act (with a British accent, no less).
Perhaps the best parts, at least for lovers of cinema (horror specifically), are all of the nods to films of the past. There are very obvious nods to Nosferatu, The Shining, and The Exorcist. The teardrops to diamonds trick is taken from Cocteau’s La belle et la bete and there are many references to other Dracula films. An old time movie house features prominently and actually recreates as scene from earlier in the film. Simply put, if you love movies, then watch Bram Stoker’s Dracula with cinema history in mind. You don’t even have to care about the story, which you know already. Just watch and you’ll be transported.