MovieChat Forums > vikramwagh90 > Replies
vikramwagh90's Replies
Except for Francoise and later Sal, before that when Richard and the others are fishing and he manages to spear a fish which he screams triumphantly about, among those who cheer him are a bare breasted woman (wearing a hat) who is part of the community
This I did not know in addition
It's unknown whose sperm is being used by him to fertilize the egg responsible for her creation but unless it's that of Fitch himself, I don't think that amounts to him being her father except in terms of indirectness. However, I think his sadness comes more from having to kill a being little more than a child and also because he had never performed an act related to fatality, let alone (the real possibility) being sadness in aborting a dream that he could have achieved which was combining an alien and human together
You're right, Dracula was not a romantic character in the book at all but Coppola's film made him one in order to focus on the origin of the character and trigger the story into following exactly how the novel was although some parts such as the origin of the character as being the (real-life) Romanian Price Vlad Teppes was not part of the book but was one of the many references to the elements that make us think of Dracula and Vlad's title Dracula (meaning son of the Dragon) was used by Bram Stoker for the villain of his book instead of 'Wampyr'
The original ending which had no inclusion of Mina putting Dracula out of his misery but instead reuniting with Jonathan saw them, Van Helsing, Jack and Arthur later attending to Quincey's lifeless form. When the film had its first test screening, audiences were dissatisfied with the ending causing Coppola to reshoot it and it was the suggestion of his close friend, (Star Wars creator) George Lucas to introduce the ending that we see in the final film where Dracula is given peace by Mina
I haven't seen Meridian Kiss of the Beast entirely actually, but I have in parts (and I would love to watch the whole movie one day), and I know what you mean. I don't think the scene in Dracula is a sexual situation though when it comes to the sleepwalking Lucy being drawn into Dracula's claws, it isn't really sex between the two but more in the sense that Dracula has Mina in his grasp enough for him to bite her and given her sleepwalking situation she isn't aware of it even after Mina comes to help her which scares Dracula away because he notices Mina watching him
In the novel, Dracula does have facial hair which wasn't realized on screen until 1970 when Christopher Lee returned to the role after several films in the Hammer Series and this time not only was a portrayal of the character attempted at being faithful to where he came from but also his story was attempted to be shown faithfully as well. This pattern would later be repeated in Coppola's film with a gratified success with the exception of Dracula's origin which is only implied in parts at the start of the novel yet confirmed towards the end. Also, unlike Coppola's film, Dracula retains his facial hair throughout the novel. Another differentiation to that in the novel and the film is when we first see Dracula in the film, his beard is similar to that of the lord himself and during his deathly appearance his facial hair is absent. His appearance as a young man shows him with different facial hair through a moustache and goatee which is repeated even during his final moments at the end before he is put out of his misery by Mina (who had no connection with him in the book)
Yes, that part is strange because in the book, it's revealed during his time as a Székelys, he made a pact with the devil by the practice of black magic which came to his aid when during battle when he was killed and hundreds of years later rose from his death as a vampire, something that the heroes find out when making plans to destroy him
Yes that was Van Helsing
You probably refer to the Dracula film Brooks made in 1995, three years after this film released, not this one. Brooks' film did borrow some parts from this film but his was a comedy not Coppola's
Actually, following Lucy, another aspect related to her is when he chose to take her instead of Mina when Mina chose Jonathan over him causing Dracula's heartbreak. On his way to permanently transform Lucy into a vampire like himself, Dracula does kill a passer-by before managing to get by Quincy and Arthur and smashing his way into Lucy's house to condemn her to the life of an undead soul with a never-ending appetite for blood although Lucy is eventually freed from her vampiric state by Van Helsing and her comrades before they join forces with Mina and Jonathan to avenge Lucy by killing Dracula
I share your sentiment. In truth in some parts, it could have been more faithful to the book but for the most part it is (in other words more faithful than not). It is also the kind of Dracula that not only subsumes the book that inspired it yet also makes references to what inspired the creation of the book in the first place
She didn't give a damn about a funny boy like him. She was just using him to sire her offspring so she would have killed him anyway even if he didn't realize who he was sleeping with. However, I did feel sorry for him when I realized before his death at her hands that he was never successful in dating, and I personally believe that he should have told any woman (on and off screen like the latter was depicted) who either wasn't interested in him romantically or already had a partner that he wished he was in a relationship like they were. Whatever their responses were might have been different but at least he would have been able to let his saddening feelings out
Yeah. The movie's pretty nice despite a few bad reviews (By opinion while) I personally don't think there was a need for sequels, the film in itself in distance from its successors actually is the topmost. Natasha Henstridge (who made her debut with this film) was actually 21 when it released. I only found it a pity that they killed Fitch off but I think that may have been with certain reason due to his careless thinking and little-to-no concern about others which makes him another villain apart from Sil. While he was killed off, I think it might have been good if he at least took some responsibility for his actions when they were tracking down Sil though to some extent that actually shows during the climax of the movie shortly before his death which along with that of Arden is avenged when Dr Baker and Dr Preston kill Sil while succesfully rescuing Smithson
You're absolutely right. I happen to have Aspergers myself and when I first saw the film, his behaviour was not representative of a real Aspergetic but rather like a few Autistics really are. He should have said right away that he was Autistic rather than Aspergetic
It may be the case, but it also might be implied (though it can't be said for sure and my statement's theoretical only), that Neil's father mostly saw his son as an object through which to live out the dreams and opportunities that he never had and thus was not going to let his son waste what his father could not have. If Neil's father (and mother) was devastated at his son's loss, then he would have taken some kind of responsibility for his son's death such as either confessing publicly that he drove his son to take his life. It's unknown whether or not he (or his wife) would have been arrested but if they really loved their son, then they should have understood that they were using their love for him in the wrong way and were not seeing his point of view in doing what he wanted to do and if that were the case Neil would not have died but yes, he did have a choice not to and despite what people say, he was too afraid to talk to his parents and explained how he felt so if he felt brave enough to having the experience of been on stage like he wanted (to be), he mustn't have felt like his life was over because his family was not allowing him to do what he wanted and bravely lived how he wanted to live, not according to what his father (and mother) wanted
I don't think Neil was gay at all and the movie doesn't focus on his sexuality. His story was that he was unloved (in certain parts) and unsupported (as well as tormented) by his parents (mostly his father) to take a path that he never wanted and was unable to tell his parents how he felt and what he wanted, perceiving their misuse of parental protection and concern about where they wanted him to go in life as abuse. Despite what people say, he is clearly a coward and thinks it's easier to commit suicide rather than live out his dreams regardless of his parents' uncaring attitude. His choice to take his own life was not at all logical since he had so many things to live for and should have at least thought about the devastation it would cause his friends and Mr Keating whose thoughts in his mind could hopefully have saved him (in addition to achieving what he wanted)
No, I'm not saying what I would have done to help Neil, I'm simply saying what I would have done if I were him. I know very well that Keating never told Neil to cheat but try to talk to his father. I know suicides do happen and it's a fact of life depending on who is strong enough to defy oppression and yes, Neil was tormented by his father (let alone helped by his mother) but yes he did have a choice not to kill himself even if his father was driving him to do so and he could have been brave enough not to take his life and instead changed his view and still lived out his dreams despite his parents' actions.
I guess but I can only hypothesize on undisputable terms that it may or may not have been possible for them to have gotten back together depending on what the circumstances would have been but that was really up to him. He chose not to pursue her to resurrect their relationship (by telling her that he would never be unfaithful again) in the end which is a pity
Not saying this angrily or anything like that but while I think your belief despite being unfair is not an opinion to be challenged, I thought she did a great job because when I first saw it (though it was the second film of hers that I saw), I actually believed that the character she was playing was really what she might be in real life (and normally I've only felt that about Hillary Swank)