Dracula

User Score
8.9

Universal acclaim- based on 223 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 6 out of 223
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Aug 23, 2010
    5
    Francis Ford Coppola's take on Bram Stoker's Dracula.
    Even though it has a fantastic cast, it's all a bit shallow. Anthony Hopkins & Tom Waits come away with decent performances but the rest of the cast are a bit like cardboard cutouts.
    I saw this at the cinema when it first came out & thought it was average then. Gary Oldman is my favourite actor but this film doesn't do him any favours &
    Francis Ford Coppola's take on Bram Stoker's Dracula.
    Even though it has a fantastic cast, it's all a bit shallow. Anthony Hopkins & Tom Waits come away with decent performances but the rest of the cast are a bit like cardboard cutouts.
    I saw this at the cinema when it first came out & thought it was average then. Gary Oldman is my favourite actor but this film doesn't do him any favours & the less said about Keanu Reeves & Winona Ryder the better.
    Considering it's a love story, you don't feel for any of the lead characters at all.
    Expand
  2. j30
    Jan 26, 2012
    6
    Even though the movie stays some-what true to Bram Stoker's classic book, the movie fails to bring any suspense or surprises to the table (Keanu Reeves still sucks at acting). It is hard, however, to look away from the brilliant costumes, make-up, and set designs. The film is great to look at, but the chilling mood from the book is still absent.
  3. Jul 13, 2015
    5
    Visually stunning but creatively challenged, this adaptation of Dracula is a visual experience but an emotional snoozefest. The plot is not the focus point of the film, so anyone who is looking for a story that will immerse them and take them on a journey will be surely disappointed.

    The film is backed by a good cast and good directing, but it's writing falls short. Its a feast for the
    Visually stunning but creatively challenged, this adaptation of Dracula is a visual experience but an emotional snoozefest. The plot is not the focus point of the film, so anyone who is looking for a story that will immerse them and take them on a journey will be surely disappointed.

    The film is backed by a good cast and good directing, but it's writing falls short. Its a feast for the eyes but not very stimulating it terms of plot. It's not terrible, just mediocre. I feel as though it doesn't take as much from the book as it should have. Also, Dracula's beehive hair, need I say more? But even with that, the art director for this film deserves an oscar, it looks beautiful.

    The film is disappointing all around. But the visuals bring it up from a 4 to a 5.
    Expand
Metascore
57

Mixed or average reviews - based on 17 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 17
  2. Negative: 3 out of 17
  1. Dracula has the nervy enthusiasm of the work of a precocious film student who has magically acquired a master's command of his craft. It's surprising, entertaining and always just a little too much.
  2. 75
    Oldman and Ryder and Hopkins pant with eagerness. The movie is an exercise in feverish excess, and for that if for little else, I enjoyed it.
  3. 60
    Dracula, which also stars Winona Ryder, Keanu Reeves and Anthony Hopkins, is an evocative visual feast. But the meal is spectral, without the dramatic equivalent of nutritional value.