Horror Movie Review! Bram Stoker's Dracula

Hometown Ghost Stories

Hosts Rob Coakley, Dave Wilkins, and Jesse Wilkins review Francis Ford Coppola's 1992 horror adaptation *Bram Stoker's Dracula*, weighing its artistic merits against

Key takeaways

• Gary Oldman delivers a standout performance as Count Dracula, playing three distinct character versions that hosts call one of his best roles.
• Keanu Reeves' casting as Jonathan Harker is widely criticized for his British accent, lack of chemistry with Winona Ryder, and 45 minutes of screen absence.

Main topics

• Casting decisions and actor performances
• Practical effects vs. CGI cinematography

Notable quotes

"this is the most miscast movie i think i've ever seen in my entire life"

Conclusion

The episode offers a nuanced breakdown of why *Bram Stoker's Dracula*

Transcript preview

Speaker 2 (0:00) I'm John Grylls from Creepy and I listen to the Be Afraid Podcast Network. Speaker 1 (0:57) Welcome in everybody to HTGS Reviews. I am your host Rob Coakley, joined as always by Dave Wilkins. Speaker 2 (1:04) Hello Rob Coakley. Speaker 1 (1:06) And Jesse Wilkins. What is up guys? And we are reviewing Bram Stoker's Dracula tonight. And I think this is going to be an interesting review. I hadn't watched this movie in a while until we did this review. And I picked up on a lot of things that... Maybe as a first, second, or third time viewer, I wouldn't have until diving in for the review aspect of it. So I'm excited to talk about it. I'm excited to hear you guys' opinions on it. I don't know if I'm going to be in the minority on some of my thoughts on this movie or not. But before we do, as always, Dave, can you hit us with a synopsis? Speaker 2 (1:49) Yes. Bram Stoker's Dracula, 1992, directed by Francis Ford Coppola, starring John Wick, Hannibal Lecter, Lydia Dietz, the dread pirate Roberts, and Winston Churchill as Count Dracula, a 15th century prince who's condemned to live off the blood of the living for all of eternity. Young lawyer Jonathan Harker is sent to Dracula's castle to finalize a land deal, but when the Count sees a photo of Harker's fiancée, Mina, The spitting image of his dead wife, he imprisons him and sets off for London to track her down. Speaker 2 (2:26) You know, I could have gone on with that celebrity cast in this movie because it wasn't just all those guys. It was also Monica Bellucci, Tom Waits, Richard Grant, just like an absolute stacked cast for better or for worse. And what I will say as a positive about this movie is it's probably it's got to be in the conversation for one of Gary Oldman's best performances, which says a lot because the guy is an absolute. just an amazing actor, like a ton of amazing roles, one of which was Winston Churchill, which might be in the argument and also in the argument for his best role. But this was Gary Oldman. Have you seen Tiptoes? I have not seen Tiptoes. Oh my Speaker 1 (3:15) God. I got to make you guys watch Tiptoes. Have you seen Harry Potter? No, dude. No, dude. You guys have to Speaker 2 (3:22) see tip. Speaker 1 (3:24) Do you know what he plays in tiptoes? No. He plays a little person. And... Speaker 1 (3:34) And they just have him on his knees the whole time. And there's times you can actually see his feet on the screen. Or they just tuck him into a couch and stuff. And they were clearly trying to make this an awards movie. Are Speaker 2 (3:48) you serious? Speaker 1 (3:49) Dude, I'm not joking. It sounds Speaker 2 (3:51) like comedy. Speaker 1 (3:53) It's him. It's Matthew McConaughey. The cast is stacked. And it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen in my life. But it's so fun. We'll watch the trailer for it later. But yeah, it's incredible. It's a piece of cinema that you're watching and you're just like, why? Why did this happen? We'll talk about more. Maybe we'll do a bonus episode on that in the future. Speaker 2 (4:19) I'd be down. I mean, it sounds absolutely captivating. But this movie, I watched it a lot when I was younger. I've watched it a few times since, but it actually kind of has been a long time since I've... since I've watched this movie like you, Rob. And, you know, it's after reviewing hundreds of movies as we've done over the past five or six years, whatever it's been, you know, I watch movies differently from a more like analytical standpoint. And, you know, this one has, you know, I would if I had just reviewed it blind, I probably would have given it a five. Maybe I still will. Who knows? But, you know, it's kind of different watching this movie or watching all these old movies that we grew up with. now versus when we were growing up. Speaker 1 (5:01) jesse have any opening thoughts on bram stoker's dracula i think you picked this one maybe you never let me pick anything i absolutely that's Speaker 3 (5:10) true anyways it was not it was it was a unbelievable cast good acting for the most part uh the way it was shot was unbelievable a lot of practical effects so i respect the hell out of that i just have like two like glaring negatives when we jump into that part that i can't look past I don't know. Do you guys just want to guess what my two negatives are? Speaker 2 (5:32) Keanu Reeves. Speaker 3 (5:34) His accent. Keanu Reeves did fine, but I couldn't get past the accent. Don't let him do a British accent. And the other one. Speaker 1 (5:43) The score? Speaker 3 (5:44) No, the hairdo. The score was Speaker 2 (5:45) great. Oh, that's why. I'm going to Speaker 3 (5:48) ask hairdo. Speaker 2 (5:50) Dracula's hairdo? Like white, like the older, yeah, it looks like a butt. Speaker 3 (5:54) What were they doing? Why did they do that? I don't know why they did that. Speaker 2 (5:59) Fair. That's fair. Speaker 1 (6:02) We don't like butthead. That's fair. Speaker 2 (6:05) Butthead Dracula. Rob, I'll let you kick it off because I know what you're... I kind of know where you're going to go with this. I don't want to steal your thunder, but I think one of our negatives are going to line up perfectly and another probably won't. Speaker 1 (6:19) All right. Well, we'll start with my glaring negative of this movie and that is... this is the most miscast movie i think i've ever seen in my entire life everybody almost everybody with the exception of maybe gary oldman is miscast in this movie like i just i just was watching this movie and i didn't enjoy most of the performances in it at all i thought keanu reeves like i love keanu reeves this ain't a keanu reeves movie he don't need to be in here Now, I understand why he gets cast in 1992. He's one of the hottest actors in Hollywood. They want to bring him into this movie, but you got to back up sometimes. Like, this was not a role for 1992 Keanu Reeves. Speaker 2 (7:03) Do you know who Coppola wanted, but the studio was like, no, we got to have Keanu Reeves? I Speaker 1 (7:07) did at one point. Johnny Depp, right? Speaker 2 (7:10) Yeah, they wanted Johnny Depp. That would have been perfect. Speaker 1 (7:13) Johnny Depp. Yeah, he would have been way better in that role. I mean, but he's not even the only bad cast in this. I thought, God, I thought almost everybody was not really good in this. But, I mean. I thought Anthony Hopkins wasn't even good in this role. He started off like in this movie doing this freaking, like it's not even an imitation because the movie hadn't come out, but it's like a Tommy Wiseau thing that he's doing for a little bit. And then he just changes his accent again, halfway through. And then he's just a different character at the end of the movie. Like he goes through like these different phases of his Van Helsing. And I was like, I don't like his performance at all in this. And I love Anthony Hopkins. I think he's great. Winona Ryder felt super wooden in this movie. Hang on. Before Speaker 2 (8:07) we shotgun a whole bunch, on Anthony Hopkins, this is where we're going to disagree. I thought Anthony Hopkins was great in this. Speaker 1 (8:12) I think Speaker 2 (8:13) maybe your contention might be the writing of his character. If you don't like the way that his character changed as the movie went on, that's probably more of a writing thing. But I thought he... he play he's playing this he's playing van helsing who is a dude who literally hunts monsters and vampires he's crazy he's Speaker 3 (8:33) a Speaker 2 (8:33) crazy person i think this is probably the best portrayal of van helsing because he Speaker 1 (8:36) got Speaker 2 (8:36) like you could compare it against like you hear jackman van helsing in those movies in the van helsing movies and he's kind of just like this badass vampire hunter which is fine for what you're going for this felt more on the nose right like no this guy would be this guy is a vampire hunter this guy's nuts this guy the only the only possible better casting was if they just swapped him and tom waits like that probably would have worked too for van helsing just a totally manic insane person playing uh the vampire hunter the guy Speaker 1 (9:05) who hunts ghouls and monsters i thought it was i thought it was great he didn't feel like the same character throughout is my problem with it like i i felt like he started off trying to do something from like the 50s or 60s and then just did like a whole different character towards the end like he was getting different direction or just making different choices i i just personally didn't like the performance um and again winona rider i i thought she was real wooden in this and i like winona rider i think she has some great roles she's a great actress so i wonder like so when you have this cast Speaker 1 (9:41) And does this come down to bad directing on the part of Francis Ford Coppola? I don't think anyone agrees with you. I think Speaker 3 (9:51) it was great directing and I thought Anthony Hopkins crushed it. I thought Winona Ryder was fine. I disagree. Speaker 1 (9:58) I'll push back on Anthony Speaker 2 (9:59) Hopkins, but I'll grant Winona Ryder. I thought she was fine also, but... forget like the role i think was forgettable i watched this movie earlier today and i'm already like kind of forgetting like her like i can't even like think about her performance it's just like she's kind of like a forgettable character but i wouldn't say that's like a bad performance a bad would be like oh i remember how bad that was that sucked if it's forgettable she kind of just blended in with the movie and uh But she shouldn't, Speaker 1 (10:32) right? And maybe this is part of the problem with how good Gary Oldman's performance was. There's no chemistry between the two of them in the sense that you want it to be. There should be some sort of magnetism towards them. And I felt it from him, obviously, because he's doing laps around everybody in this movie. But I didn't feel it the other way for the story that they're telling. her character wasn't working for me. There's a lot of onset stuff between the two of them as well. So that could have played into the performance. Maybe. If you compare Speaker 2 (11:08) her performance with Lily Rose Depp in Nosferatu, which they're essentially playing the same character, it's noticeable how much better Lily Rose Depp was in that movie than Winona Ryder was in this movie. Speaker 1 (11:19) See, I agree with you completely. And there are people that will take us to task for that. Speaker 2 (11:26) People are... Speaker 1 (11:27) Yeah, but a lot of people weren't a fan. Well, there's a decent contingent of people that weren't a fan of Lily Rose Depp's performance in that movie, which I think is insane. Speaker 2 (11:36) Yeah, I agree.