MovieChat Forums > Dracula (2002) Discussion > Good Adaptation?

Good Adaptation?

posted 20 years ago by Trampyre
2 replies | jump to latest

Actually, DRACULA'S CURSE(the American video title for this Italian TV miniseries)is actually an interesting adaptation of Bram Stoker's novel- more faithful than most, including BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA.
The most fascinating aspect is the updating of the novel to current times. It totally works. Even brief mentioning of the "fictional" Dracula of film and literature compared to the "real" terror is addressed in dialogue. Peter Bergin is most effective in the title role, believable in both his elder and youth visages. Although a little lacking in "sex appeal" as the younger Count, he's spot-on as his older version. Noted Italian actor Giancarlo Giannini is strong as Van Helsing (note- several of the characters are renamed in this version), no-nonsense and determined. However, the acting honors go to Hardy Kruger Jr as Jonathan(strong yet conflicted...the first film "Jonathan" who's not a wimp), Stefania Rocca(level-headed yet passionate) as Mina and Muriel Baumeister as Lucy(beautiful and coquettish).
And now- the SPOILERS(DON'T read on if you haven't seen this yet!!!). Because this is an edited version of a miniseries, continuity is terrible: One example is the handling of Renfield- while the DVD has "deleted scenes" which includes Renfield's escape from the Sanitorium, his fate is left unresolved. Gone is the Vampire Hunters trek to Castle Dracula, once again eliminating the death of Dracula per Stoker's novel(even worse- the closing scene reveals two puncture wounds on Mina's neck, which should have vanished when Dracula "bit the dust"...perhaps some sort of sequel was envisioned!). In the novel, Dracula is first seen as an aged, withered old man- here, he's first shown young and virile, and alternates throught the film between young and old...Huh?(He appears as both himself and his "nephew", to explain the difference). The dispatching of both Lucy and Dracula lack any sense of drama- they are brief and to-the-point...no suspense at all, let alone any sense of terror.
But OTHER than this, this will definately hold your interest- Novel purists won't be as disappointed by this version as others that promised a true adaptation.

[–] mrs_strock 20 years ago

I absolutely agree 100% with you! The camaraderie of the friends was captured for perhaps the first time by a film. Also, there was quite the restraint on foul language, sex, violence. It played like a Universal or classic Hammer. My sincere kudos to the filmakers! This movie successed where Coppola's version failed. Christopher Lee most likely would even approve, as he has been waiting for a faithful adaption. It was nicely updated, as well.

[–] melsen 10 years ago

It's a pretty good adaptation I think not worthy of (the) bad reviews, even if some characters are dubbed, like Jonathan and I think Quincy (this character is one annoying dude). The edited version is not that great and best avoided if possible, plus Artisan's release is a mess in sound and picture. I suggest viewers find the mini-series which is a lot better than the movie version anyway, and available on R2 UK DVD. Baumeister is a dream of course, as she always is and speaks her own lines (wears a wig though). Someone like Dario Argento should've jumped at the chance of working with her (co-star Rocca is in his Card Player, by the way) because his own more recent version of Dracula is downright terrible, even if it has an okay Count in Thomas Kretschmann (Baumeister's co-star in a 1995 TV movie, incidentally).