|Posted on October 25, 2017 at 4:30 PM|
It’s been a while since I’ve seen the 1992 film of Dracula portrayed by Gary Oldman. As I was browsing images of the movie on Pinterest two thoughts crossed my mind; is the movie truly a horror of the classic or an infused love story? My second question is why in the heck does Dracula look the way he does in true form? Whose idea was that? These two questions may not pose a concern for most but I have been scratching my head over them and have some thoughts as to what could be the possible answers to them. I don’t know about anyone else but I prefer the classic cape wearing, fang showing, I want to suck your blood, I am Vlad the Impaler type of Dracula. The man who looks as he always does and doesn’t hind behind a facade because he’s an oddity.
Is it a horror or a love story? At first glance and thought you think it’s the same telling of every other version of Dracula and you would be right. Dracula comes into town, meets Mina and Jonathan, uses his allure over Mina, Jonathan doesn’t know what’s going on and everyone finds out what Dracula is and stops him. (Great quick telling of the story right?) However in the 1992 version I feel it’s more love-inspired and infused and a lot more sexual. Back in the day of the original love stories weren’t taboo but sex was but even then Dracula wasn’t exactly Casanova or Mr. Suave to Mina but in the 1992 version he is and the passion and love within the movie is a lot more different. Why is this? Well there’s three reasons, one obvious and the others may not even realize until now. The first reason is simple; it’s a different telling of a story with that director and producer’s vision on it. Same story but different, themes, moods, feelings, etc.
The second reason? It was he nineties. Vampires were already becoming over sexualized and by the time the nineties rolled around everything had a love, sex, passion vibe to it. In this instance it was no different. They took the Dracula classic and turned it into a more love inspired movie because it was the thing to do in the 90's. Reason number three is probably the one you would least suspect but after you hear it you’ll start to ponder it for yourself. In the film, Gary Oldman plays Dracula, he’s odd looking as a vampire(I’ll get into this later) but to keep up appearances he of course portrays a suave well looking gentleman as a human. If you take a closer look though you’ll realize Gary Oldman looks a lot like Vlad Tepes aka Vlad the Impaler(coincedence?) but the Vlad connection doesn’t stop there. For those who know the tale of Vlad the Impaler know he was a ruthless and cruel man but there’s more to him than that.
Upon his return from war, Vlad found out his wife jumped to her death from their castle Dracula. Vlad was devastated. Bram Stoker didn’t just take the violent, bloodthirsty part from Vlad the Impaler to create Dracula, he also used the sad history of a man who loses the love of his life. In the 1992 film, Dracula in many ways is like Vlad the Impaler who longs to be with Mina because she reminds him so much of his late beloved wife. This is perhaps why to me the movie seems more love-infused than other portrayals because the director did his research and really decided to use the background of Vlad the Impaler and give the film a more deeper meaning and effect. Also because of the bigger lover effect it’s why the film is a lot more sexual than other versions.
Finally, why does Dracula look the way he does in the film? Why does he look like the love child of George Washington and Bette Midler? For one, perhaps the director wanted to stay away from the classic cliche and decided to make his Dracula look far, far different from the original usual versions. Perhaps he wanted to make his version look more like the old creature that he truly is or maybe even give him a look that is hideous compared to his other versions he dawns during the film. So there you go, a little analysis on the 1992 film of Dracula and why it could be more of a love film and why Dracula looks the way he does.