Dracula

[Elise]

Has anyone else read the novel by Bram Stoker? I love it. "Dracula" is the only book I have ever read that really creeped me out. I shudder just thinking about some parts of the story.

[Meg Giry]

I love the book, it's one of my favourites. There aren't many horror novels that I think are truly scary or well written, and I think Dracula is both. Pity the film version didn't have better casting....*lesigh*

[Angelic]

I own a copy of the novel except I haven't read it. Which screen adaption do you speak of Heather? I happened to like Francis Ford Coppola's version, but then again I didn't read the book so there could be many flaws I didn't notice, Lol. Me and my books that I want/own to read, but haven't yet.

[Countess Cain]

I love Dracula. (Well... I like vampire things in general, as long as they're somewhat classy. You know?)

Pity the film version didn't have better casting....*lesigh*

There's a whole bunch of Dracula movies, like Angelic said. D: I didn't like the casting of 'Bram Stoker's Dracula' with Gary Oldman, but I liked the 1931 'Dracula' casting with Bela Lugosi.

But I have 'The Essential Dracula', with info and stuff by Leonard Wolf. (I believe he was the one who did 'The Essential Phantom of the Opera' too.) It's all rather interesting. =D

[Night feather]

I liked the book very much as well, although it was filled with long tiresoem explanations from time to time, but then again, that's very normal for old books. The most creepy part was when I read abotu Mina being bitten, it was 2 in the morning, and suddenly the lights went out. Not very funny I can tell you that.

You thought Coppola's version of the book was bad? I thought it was great, I loved it. Gary Oldman was exeptionally creepy in that role. Very sensual, bloody, scary. I just had to digest it, and then I loved it.

[IamErik771]

I also love the book. It was the first "classic" novel I ever read, and I first read it when I was 8. Soon afterward, I watched two of the films: F. W. Murnau's Nosferatu (1922) starring Max Schreck, and Dracula (1931) starring Bela Lugosi. I loved them both, but I have yet to see the Gary Oldman film you speak of. I also want to see Dracula 2000, with Gerard Butler. :D

[Night feather]

Hahahha well... Dracula 2000 was better than I had expected, but it is not very good. But Gerry is good, as well as drop dead gorgeous.

But the Coppola/Oldman film I speak of is fantastic, I love it, I've not seen anyone of the old ones.

[Countess Cain]

I've heard 'Dracula 2000' really sucked, by people with similar movie tastes, so I never really watched it. I don't like Butler enough to watch a horrible movie...

And I'm going to see 'Nosferatu' as soon as I can. I've got in it by Netflix Queue. :3

I'm going to see the 1931 Spanish version too. D: Has anyone seen that one?

[joplin4]

I have read *most* of the book and love it!!! I am a big Dracula fan. One Halloween, I dressed as a vampire. Nothing elaborate. Just black shirt, pants, and shoes. It's amazing how a normal outfit can turn into just the right costume.

[YoungGiry]

Another one of my obssesions...

I have yet to find a movie that I like as much as the book. None of them really do it justice. Of course, I'm a bit obssesed with acccuracy, so...

I love the novel. I have the Essential Dracula, and it's now rather tattered, with post-its of interesting things. Well, mainly things that help me with my vampire story...

[Angelic]

I like the Coppola version as well and I finally read all of the novel this year, woot, for my Independent Study. I loved the book though at times I did get lost in the explanation, but I enjoyed the journal entries and such. Very fascinating and dark, I want to see "Nosferatu"! And I'm also interested in the Bela Lugosi 'Dracula' since I have not seen any of those old films.

I remember hearing about Dracula 2000, have to admit to me it looked lame. I know Gerard Butler is in it and he looks good, but I didn't bother. I saw five minutes and was done. I love the book overall, I wish they'd make one true to the novel. :duck:

[AAW0487]

Did someone mention Gerry in Dracula 2000? I would love to read the novel and see the movie, but some how I don't think I would be able to sleep again!

[The Floor]

EDIT: Dracula 2000 is one of the most sex-driven, party-animal oriented gorefests I've ever had the displeasure to see on film. If you have the option, I'd strongly reccomend not seeing it. Though Gerry is, as always, undeniably hot. ^_^

Best part of the book: When Dracula has the woman sleepwalking. Always gives me chills. Oh, and the part where whatsherface dies near the beginning/middle. I dunno. It's been about two years since I've read the book, so my brain's a lil bit cobwebby regarding it.

[gerards_angel]

hi everyone i just wanted to say I love phantom of the opera as well as anything Vampire related haha :) I loved the movie bram stoker's Dracula i havent read the novel yet hope to soon lol i liked the movie dracula2000 it was good haha and i love reading books on vampires if any one has any suggestions of novel to read their appreciated and anyone is more then welcomed to pm me:) tina

[gerards_angel]

just a question has anyone read the book named companions of the night? its really good its by vivian van veld its a vampire book if anyone wants to talk about it pm me :)

[northangel27]

Out of curiosity, how closely does the Francis Ford Coppola version follow the book? I have always wanted to read the book and have never really gotten around to it. I thought the casting in the movie was awful, except for Gary Oldman who I thought was creepy, sexy and brilliant, though I have always admired Mr. Oldman's work in general. When he meets up with Mina in the city for the first time, I could totally understand being slowly seduced as she was.

[YoungGiry]

Originally posted by northangel27
Out of curiosity, how closely does the Francis Ford Coppola version follow the book?

It doesn't. It takes the main structure of the book and completely takes every single character out of character (except for Van Helsing) and has them do all sorts of the things that they would never, never do. The most obvious addition was of a romance between Dracula and Mina, which does not exist in the novel. (Except as subtext, for some people). It also does this in a way that seems to be completely unlikely for the characters (Elisabeta? Dracula not wanting Mina to drink his blood for a little while?). Even aside from those characters, it made Lucy, Jack, and to a lesser extent Jonathan completely different from their normal selves.

Bram Stoker's Dracula is quite misnamed. It is an interesting movie, but it certainly isn't the Dracula that Bram Stoker wrote about.

[MystMoonstruck]

I even studied "Dracula" as part of a seminar course my senior year at college: "Supernaturalism in Literature". Our professor looked EXACTLY like Bram Stoker--who was an Irishman, by the way! This was a few months before "Interview with the Vampire" and "'Salem's Lot" hit the stores. I was working at Waldens (now Waldenbooks), and the professor came in to ask me which of the novels he should teach. I believe I suggested "Interview..." though he probably should have chosen both.

"Dracula" is a remarkable novel though the lead character is very little like he is pictured in most films. "The Brides of Dracula" also should be read; the original novel was so lengthy that Stoker's publisher ordered him to cut out part of it--which became the separate "TBOD".

I see that "Nosferatu" (the original) got a mention. Stoker's relatives were so upset by this "plagiaristic film" that they ordered all copies to be destroyed. Somehow, ONE copy survived. It's well worth seeing.

I can't even begin to list the marvelous versions of "Dracula" there are, but I wouldn't include the Coppola one. Actually, I am a major fan of vampire films in general, not necessarily only the novel-based ones.

I have a vast collection of vampire novels and films. After all, I've been reading and watching longer than most phans have been alive! MWAHAHAHAHA!

It was sort of cool for Mina to show up in "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"--although she was cured in the original novel.

By the way, prior to "Dracula", there was "Varney the Vampire"! Also, they blame Stoker for adding vampire bats to the mixture; the bats were a contemporary discovery. Before that, wolves and mist/fog were associated with vampires.

Have any questions about vampy novels and films? I'll try to answer them.

[Constanze Giry]

I love this book! I love how it's written in letters and journal entries. It was really cleverly done. And reading it at night is a must even if it is scarey..it just doesn't seem the same reading it in the day for some reason.

[nikki.phan]

This book is one of my favorite books of all time. though i did get lost several times. i love it!

[tiannangel]

Agrred. Dracula was one of the best I've read in the classics (Is it considered a clasic??) and I just adored it. I've read it over 10 times now, and I still wait to see what happens on the next page.

Bottom line: Loved it.

[angelgirl]

I've read this and although there were a few creepy parts, (the one that really stands out being the part where Dracula's wives find Johnathan asleep. Gives me shivers
just thinking about it,) and it wasn't as scary as I thought it was gonna be. Overall, a great and wonderful read.
A.G.

[Hidden Away]

This is a very hard story for my friends to actually understand. So I'm pretty much interpreting. It isn't as scary as people have described it, I can read it during night and not freak out at the slightest sound. I love the story because well you know it's the greatest thing that I've seen out of anyone's imagination.

[IamErik771]

Heh heh... I finally saw Coppola's film and a few others, and come bearing short reviews! Even though this thread is supposed to be about the book... well, hey, I posted my thoughts on page 1, and everyone else is talking about the various film versions. XD

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992), directed by Francis Ford Coppola: Meh. The acting and production values were good overall (despite Keanu Reeves), and it hit on a lot of the plot details that most versions miss (like Lucy's 3 suitors). However, I really disapproved of a lot of the changes made to the characters' personalities. Making Dracula really the same person as Vlad the Impaler was a nice gesture, but I didn't think it worked all that well. If Bram Stoker were around to see this film, I think he'd say something along the lines of, "Okay, so they read my book... but I don't think they really understood it."

Dracula 2000: ...wow. I usually like Wes Craven, but he's a lot better at coming up with his own monsters than modernizing classic ones. The "Drac as Judas" idea was clever, but poorly used. And the writing, oh dear lord, the writing! I feel sorry for Gerard Butler, Nathan Fillion, Jeri Ryan, and Christopher Plummer for getting roped into this. Needless to say, I will most definitely not be watching the sequels that have been done for this version.

Dracula (2006) - BBC: Strange, yet interesting take on the legend. Basically, in this one, Arthur is suffering from syphilis and joins a cult in the hopes of finding a cure. The cult, he finds out, is involved in bringing Count Dracula (played by Marc Warren) to London. Good acting and writing despite some really weird plot ideas (and the fact that Warren looks a bit too much like a goth singer to really take seriously as the legendary Count). I must warn you, though, that this is a particularly graphic version in terms of both sex and blood/gore... so discretion is advised.

Dracula (1979) - directed by John Badham: This may well be my favorite film version of the story. It's very different from the book in terms of plot -- among other things, Mina and Lucy's roles are switched, Mina is Van Helsing's daughter, we don't see Transylvania at all (no prologue with Jonathan or anyone else), and the ending is sure to leave you wondering. Still, this version captured the book's mood better than any other one I've seen. Frank Langella is superbly captivating as Dracula, Sir Laurence Olivier makes a great Van Helsing, and the vamp-ified Mina is one of the creepiest film vampires I've seen -- great stuff! (If you're prone to nightmares, DO NOT watch that scene in a dark room with the sound way up.) :D

[La Masque]

Dracula is absotively posilutely the best novel I have ever read alongside with Phantom and perhaps Harry Potter and Sherlock, ah Sherlock...but he is in a category on his own as far as I am concerned. Dracula himself is how a vampire should be portrayed. Sexy, (or at least intense), classy, old fashioned, and blood sucking, plus he has all of the original powers such as hypnotism and not being able to cross water. Oh, and DRACULA DOES NOT SPARKLE!! HALLELUJAH!! My friends and I have actually drawn up and are going to order shirts that say Team Dracula, then on the back it says 'sparkling is not an option' or 'We do NOT sparkle' or something along the lines. Either way, ish amazing and I am rambling:wiggle: TA~~:goofy:

[Kitty-Grimm]

I loved that book! It's fun to read and the characters are really cool too. I love looking at the story from different angles.

I have to admit it: I watch Francis Ford Coppola's filmed version every Halloween. It's one of my favourite films, mainly because I love Gary Oldman and I can't quite replace him as Dracula or Sadie Frost as Lucy (I just loved her transformation throughout the film). I did think Anthony Hopkins was hamming it up a bit and Keanu Reeves was a dire miscast, but I still love the movie and the artwork and costumes are AMAZING!

[xXphantomaddictedXx]

Currently reading it, and all I can say is wow because Bram Stoker is made of epic win. Also, I really like the description of Dracula himself, especially the bit about his fingernails. :wink: Oh, and is it just me, or did anyone else immediately think of Christopher Lee after reading the description of Dracula?