Post

I do not understand when people praise Francis Ford Coppola is Dracula as a faithful adaptation of the novel. The moment your version of Dracula is in any way a romantic or sympathetic figure, you've completely missed the point of the original character.

26/10/26, 11:46 pm0 reposts5 likes

Christopher Jones

@christopherjonesart.com

18h

I enjoy elements: I love the vintage, in-camera FX style of the film, and the visuals are stunning, but I find Gary Oldman's Dracula to be neither scary or sexy, just weird. It's nice to see more characters from the book make it to the screen (Quincy!), but the spirit of the novel isn't there.

Christopher Jones

@christopherjonesart.com

18h

The movie revolves around a romantic connection between Dracula and Mina, which just in the book at all. Do you know how Dracula gets Mina to drink his blood in the book? He threatens to smash the skull of her father while she watches if she doesn't. Yeah, really romantic.

Nick Tortelli’s Ignominious Legacy

@nick-tortelli.bsky.social

17h

The movie is 90s excess. It's over-directed and visually exhausting. That said, Ryder and Oldman are at their sexiest, so I think it would have been a mistake to waste their erotic chemistry. A director really needs to keep it zipped if they want to make scary vampires

Christopher Jones

@christopherjonesart.com

17h

Wow, I do not see the chemistry that you see. I love that they tried to have Dracula start out old and become young and vital as he feeds, but this "Young Dracula" feels like the Victorian version of the kid that would have gotten shoved into the lockers in school.