It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Pacing is one of them. It would work better in a TV series. But I think it also has to do with what's implied: a woman being a sexual predator of children. Many of the more violent episodes of the novel, where Dracula is at his most cruel, are often either omitted or glossed over: when he feeds a child to his brides, when he has the mother of said child devoured by wolves, etc.
And it's a shame I think. It kind of neuters a part of the menace of the vampire. I guess they prefer to show Dracula as a seductive figure rather than a predator, which is imo a huge mistake. So yes, next adaptation, make it faithful and bring back the child lunch, the murdered mother and the Bloofer Lady! I mean Stoker wrote horror that had gore before gore existed.
Yeah, but Coppola sanitised Dracula himself, making him a romantic antihero. Him keeping the other elements from the novel made the editorial decisions of his film all the more jarring. The tone was all around the place.
There's so many wrong things about this movie. It was something like Barbara Cartland's Dracula.
I hated it. Thought it was the worst adaptation of Dracula, until, well, other adaptations were made. Among them the 2006 BBC adaptation, then the 2019 one, maybe the worst ever.
I could not go beyond the first episode. There are so many wrong things with it.
Question: apart from Jesus Franco's version, which adaptation give Dracula his novel's appearance, with moustache and all?
I think the Franco version so far is the only adaptation to specifically attempt to represent Dracula as described in the novel. All that's missing are the nails and hair in the palms.
John Carradine apparently wanted to play Dracula as written, hence the mustache and gray/white hair, but he still sported the Hamilton Deane stage play costuming.
Aside from being clad in black without a single speck of colour anywhere, and his cloak during the wall climbing section, Stoker doesn't seem to give many details on Dracula's clothes.
I do like Louis Jourdan's costuming. He wears the cloak sparingly.
I've always been fascinated by the various costuming of Dracula in the movies. I tend to picture Stoker's Dracula wearing the all black attire Christopher Lee wore in the1958 DRACULA. No red lining in the cape until his second outing.
I also love that Lugosi's cape had a toupe/gray lining in the 1931 film and rose/gold in ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN.
1931 cape.
ABBOTT & COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN cape.
Yes. Somehow I have a hard time envisioning Louis Jourdan with the white hair and drooping mustache.
The de-aged Dracula in the book also sports a goatee like Carradine in BILLY THE KID VS DRACULA.. Franco seemed to have let that little detail slip.
For me one of the most the most frustrating elements in the Coppola version is Dracula's costuming. As I understand Eiko Ishioka hadn't been too familiar with Dracula and was given free licence by Coppola to create whatever costuming she liked for Gary Oldman.
I really would've preferred to see him in all black.
Oh yes, Christopher Lee playing Dracula (when deaged) with a pointed beard a bit like the one he had in The Devil Rides Out would have been great. I hate pretty much every decision Coppola took for his pseudo Drac.
Pity Jack Palance isn't around to play Dracula as Gene Colan based Dracula's likeness for Marvel on Palance.
I wouldn't mind a Marvel Dracula providing he looked like he did in the comics back then. I've always liked Marvel's version of Dracula.
True but back then there was no truly established Marvel Cinematic Universe.
Dracula works better in his own "horror" universe, no need to mix him with superheroes. If they did an "enclosed" Tomb of Dracula, then I'd be cool with it, albeit I think it's a pity nobody ever tries to make a faithful adaptation anymore.
Well, she appears in Horror of Dracula and in the 1979 version with Franck Langella. The first time, it's a close call, the second time... Well, poor baby.
BTW, after Dracula, Père et Fils, there was another french parody of Dracula, featuring the group of comedians/singers known as Les Charlots :
Never saw it, don't intend to. After all, it was near the end of their cinematographic career, and their popularity had declined by that time.
Incompetence or corruption? Probably both.