Luc Besson’s Dracula | Caleb Landry Jones, Christoph Waltz

[Pennywise]

Hmm. They should just simply adapt the novel.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Yes, not really interested in Dracula's origin. They did it in Coppola's Dracula and in Dracula Untold. I'm a man of simple taste as far as Dracula movies go. Give me vampires biting and turning people left, right, and centre, and plenty of gory vampire destruction and I'm happy.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Perhaps Luc Besson should not be directing movies.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Perhaps Luc Besson should not be directing movies.

I'm fairly certain The Professional being so damn good was an accident at this point.

 

[Dr.]

Hmm. They should just simply adapt the novel.

I recently watched a Youtuber do a fairly meticulous analysis of “Dracula movies” — looking for the most faithful adaptation of Stoker’s novel. The winner: the BBC’s 1977 production Count Dracula. And a very close second: Coppola’s (1992) Bram Stoker’s Dracula.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

I recently watched a Youtuber do a fairly meticulous analysis of “Dracula movies” — looking for the most faithful adaptation of Stoker’s novel. The winner: the BBC’s 1977 production Count Dracula. And a very close second: Coppola’s (1992) Bram Stoker’s Dracula.

I'm not a massive fan of Coppola's movie (although there are parts I like), but that BBC version is excellent. Great cast. Louis Jourdin, Frank Finlay, Susan Penhaligon, all excellent. I remember watching it when it was first shown and it blew me away.

 

[Boom]

I'll stick with Eggers' Nosferatu.

 

[TheFuture]

I recently watched a Youtuber do a fairly meticulous analysis of “Dracula movies” — looking for the most faithful adaptation of Stoker’s novel. The winner: the BBC’s 1977 production Count Dracula. And a very close second: Coppola’s (1992) Bram Stoker’s Dracula.

I think that was Cinemamassacre, and it really was great analysis. It supported my view that Coppola's Dracula, bar the romance plot add on, was one of the closest we've got to an accurate adaptation.

Speaking of an accurate adaptation, it shouldn't be hard to do but unfortunately most just ignore the book significantly. In the last few years alone we've had The Demeter, BBC's updated Dracula and Renfield; concepts that were much harder and stupider to conceive than just adapting the novel (Episode 1 of BBC's effort an OK saving grace, but it loses its charm upon repeat viewing).

Maybe I'm losing the plot myself but I would have thought that a faithful adaptation featuring an ensemble cast in an atmospheric period piece told over 3/4 episodes would have been a slam dunk for most streamers.

 

[Dr.]

I think that was Cinemamassacre, and it really was great analysis. It supported my view that Coppola's Dracula, bar the romance plot add on, was one of the closest we've got to an accurate adaptation.
...

Yeah, I think that was the guy. And to be clear, the criterion he was using for that particular video was “most faithful adaptation.” But he wasn’t necessarily saying that “most faithful” = “best movie.” It’s quite possible that a movie which deviates from the novel could still, in a sense, be closer to the gothic “spirit” of Stoker’s classic.

Given the dozens (hundreds?) of extant Dracula and Dracula-adjacent films — and the character’s status as a pop culture icon — I’m kinda skeptical that a “new” cinematic version of the original novel would be all that interesting to mainstream audiences. So some revisionism is, perhaps, required. Now, as to whether Besson is the right director for the job… that’s another area of skepticism.

 

[Drizzle]

Coppola's version will always be my favorite. I can even look past Keanu's terrible English accent because everything else about it is so good. When you mention Dracula, the first image that comes to most people's minds is Bela Lugosi but not me. For me it's Gary Oldman in full old man Dracula makeup getting frustrated on set and storming off while a PA follows behind holding up the trail on his costume.

 

[Joe Von Zombie]

500th time's the charm.