“Dracula” follows a 15th-century prince who denounces God after the loss of his wife, inheriting an eternal curse and becoming Dracula.
The film opens to spectacle mixed with emotion. It quickly captures the relationship between Vlad and Elisabeta before shattering it in a matter of moments. The early stages succeed with a whiplash-like approach, cascading through instances of romance and moments of war, filled with religious undertones. This start immediately gives “Dracula” a jolt of life, no matter how fabricated it may feel.
“Dracula” isn’t an easy movie to describe. Its attempts at feeling authentic ultimately come across as the opposite. From the dialogue to the sets to the costume design, it all feels slightly forced. This cheesiness sometimes works in the film’s favor, giving it a “so bad that it’s good” mentality. Most of the time, however, the satirical nature of “Dracula” makes it a drag to sit through.
This starts with the performances. Caleb Landry Jones (Dracula) brings many things to the screen: emotion, desperation, tantrums and comedy. His voice echoes throughout the entirety of the film, for better or worse. Constantly narrating, Jones has to do a lot of heavy lifting. Some of the dialogue works, some doesn’t. Zoë Bleu (Mina, Elisabeta) is more straightforward. She succeeds as the love interest, though her character is written to be trapped within those confines. Because of this, she is never able to showcase her full range. Matilda De Angelis (Maria) and Christoph Waltz (Priest) both steal the show when onscreen. De Angelis brings the perfect amount of chaos, adding an eccentric presence to every scene. Waltz almost feels like a caricature, creating constant laughs with his casual, snarky delivery.
Rather than offering a realistic portrayal, “Dracula” chooses to go over the top. Amid gothic castles, dungeons and chapels, the film places its characters in bizarre sets. More often than not, it ends up feeling like a sketch rather than an actual movie. The character designs are part of this as well, with noticeable CGI gargoyles, parodic armor and, of course, the Count himself. For horror fans, the film does deliver moments of bloodshed. The violence leans more theatrical than visceral, however.
With all of these choices, “Dracula” could have easily fallen completely flat. But it doesn’t. Employing dark humor to its advantage, it continuously supplies an abundance of laughs. This may not be “good.” It’s at least somewhat entertaining.
With a 129-minute runtime, though, it’s still overlong. Labeled as “a love tale,” the film fails at its core idea because the supporting characters are so underwritten. This lack of investment causes “Dracula” to drag time and again.
Between Luc Besson’s bold yet bizarre decisions, the film overcomplicates things. Never committing to a tone in the process. It flirts with tragedy, leans into parody and then swings back toward melodrama. This could work if the elements were seamlessly blended together. Here, it’s just jarring.
Danny Elfman’s score adds to both the emotional and comedic moments. At times, it features a soft piano sound, while at others it almost feels modern. This contributes to the movie’s strange overall tone on numerous occasions.
“Dracula” attempts to reimagine a classic tale. Instead, it comes across as a cheap parody. There’s fun to be had within Besson’s strange take, but… what’s the point?
Rating: 1.5 out of 5
