Kate Nelligan is stunningly beautiful as Lucy. She plays her as strong and liberated and a willing participant in the Count's plans. Laurence Olivier is wonderful as always, in a performance that's about as "over the top" as he'd ever done. Also good are Donald Pleasence, marvelously insubtle as Dr. Seward, and Trevor Eve, as a more "macho" than usual Jonathan Harker.

John Williams' lush score adds a lot to this film, which though it departs radically from the original book, has a lot of atmosphere, exotic sets, and sumptuous (though darkly hued) cinematography.

I find the Dracula legend fascinating, and don't think I've missed a single filmed version...this is one of the two I have watched the most, the other being the Coppola one, and both films get better with repeated viewings...so if you're a Drac fan, don't miss this voluptuous twist on the old tale.


WHO IS MARSHALL FINE?   August 6, 2004
 37 out of 48 found this review helpful

He's nuts. I don't agree with any of his criticisms. The script is streamlined and the dialog and believable. The special effects only complement the mood and the actors seem at ease. This is one of the better versions of the classic tale.


Once well-received, now forgtotten??? Now in B&W!!   August 7, 2004
 19 out of 19 found this review helpful

Odd how this 1979 little gem of a "different take" on "Dracula", based on Frank Langella's Broadway version, was fairly well-reviewed when it was first released, and considered a handsome and sumptuous updating of the old Bram Stoker chestnut, only this time with a mesmerizingly charismatic Count, with lush locations and costars like Laurence Olivier and Kate Nelligan.
Perhaps it wasn't perfect (they get Mina and Lucy, for one thing, mixed up--- but then, how many filmed "Dracula" versions are all THAT faithful to the book?!?) but it had a melancholy mood and texture that was quite absorbing and did quite well, justly, in '79.

Today, it's reputation has fallen from 'mediocre' to 'huh?'

It's been said that Langella's stage performance "gets lost" amongst "trendy special effects", and I have to confess that I never saw Langella do the Count on stage [I understand he turned taking-off his cape into an artform], but anybody who can virtually wipe even Olivier off the screen as Langella does in the movie can't have had ALL of his stage-presence removed in the film!
And as for "trendy special effects"? The "effects" are subject-appropriate; nothing excessive. Good job of directing by John Badham, and music score by John Williams.

Of course, I've yet to see the DVD quality-- hope it's good.

UPDATE 3 MONTHS LATER AFTER POSTING THE ABOVE REVIEW (8/04).... Well, guess what?--- it's NOT good (the DVD). I just got mine and what should I find? It's virtually now in black-and-white. And guess what else? Director John Badham did this DELIBERATELY for the DVD release, as he explains in the DVD commentary for the film: he states that they couldn't "drain" the color out of the film to his satisfaction in 1979, for mood purposes, so now he can [and DID] for the DVD.
The problem is: the movie didn't NEED this "improvement". The (original) photography, now completely counteracted on the DVD, was rich and atmospheric and, as it was shot in England (and artfully so), it had been dreary and drab in all the right spots--- but SOME scenes, expecially the low-lit interior moments [like the candlelight dinner between Langella and Kate Nelligan] had been wonderfully warm as an effective "counter".... Well, not no more, Drac-fans... The skins tones are gone, anything once orange is now dull white...

The DVD has been ruined, and on Badham's misguided orders...

There's even that one scene by the cemetary between Langella, Lord Olivier and Miss Nelligan at sunset--- and during the commentary, Badham talks about how the actors and crew had to wait all day in order to get just the right natural light, and that "today" they'd just put in the sunset with computers... But Badham's stating this as you watch the scene with the sunset now REMOVED by computers, specially for DVD! The pink stripe across the sky they waited for hours to get is no more! It could be just another foggy noon in England-- in which case, the Count should be in bed... And after seeing this travesty, so should I.

I feel SOOO ripped-off... Why do directors go back, so many years later after they've lost all objectivity, and "fix" good movies they got right to begin with ('cause aint nobody fixin' the BAD ones!)

One last knife-turn: during the closing credits, Badham states he now wishes he could re-edit the film and speed it up "so it kicks ass".... [long eye roll on my part here] Terrific. So then it'll be yet another shrill, frenetic, off-paced piece of incoherent tripe we're getting in the theaters today, where you can't even follow the plot and the "mood" is non-existent because everything is screaming at you at mach-speed without relent.

Only Mr. Badham would apparently also do so in virtual black-and-white, which is now the approximate color-scheme the "Dracula" DVD.

Thanks, Mr. Badham... It's yours to destroy.


A Very Underappreciated Vampire   September 1, 2002
 16 out of 17 found this review helpful

The sreen is black. A wolf howls. The main credits start to appear with the images created by Maurice Binder (of James Bond fame). John Williams' majestic main theme sounds triumphantly. From that moment, I realized -and I still do -that I'm watching a movie version of "Dracula" that would be classically romantic and terrifying at the same time.
Frankly, I may never understand why people are so critical about this version. I mean, you have Frank Langella portraying a character that won him the Tony Award in Broadway, and he gives total charm to the bloodsucking count. There is Laurence Olivier, who plays a Van Helsing that appears to be giving poetic justice. I mean all the cast give a touch of class to this vision of Dracula. And then there is John Williams' majestic music score, giving a chilling romanticism that's very strange in horror films.
Many people may think John Badham's direction has been sloppy, and the dialogue from W.D. Richter may be weak, but I don't care: I simply love this movie version, one of my great guilty pleasures.


Blood + Seduction + Vampire + Langella= 1 hell of a cocktail   January 15, 2001
 14 out of 16 found this review helpful

Being 18, no one would hardly suspect that someone of this new generation would have a soft spot for this movie, despite it's age. I beg to differ. I don't find the need to talk you thorough the basic premise, for Dracula is a fairly well-known figure; however, one this is for sure is that John Badham's retelling of the classic horror story has thrown in a far more obvious sense of dependency, seduction and temptation. The sheer atmopshere of this movie is set from the very beginning upon the doomed schooner and is continued through the magnificent ruin of Carfax Abbey, Seward's home and the sanitarium. The set construction is a beautiful feature that truly stands out and creates a lasting impression, along with the wonderful landscape photography. The acting also lives up to the movie's visual beauty with an absolutely highly erotic performance by the great Frank Langella who exudes a sexuality that truly does overcome the grave. Commdendation also to the lovely Kate Nelligan who provides a solid 3D performance as Lucy, the woman who captures Dracula's heart and thirst. Laurence Olivier and Donald Plesence give their characters of Seward and the great vampire hunter Van Helsing with gusto and skill. A special mention that I must make would go to Janine Duvitski, the actress who played the eccentric Annie. If you really do want a different flavour to the tale of Dracula, that gives the word "temptation" a new name, please, give John Badham's version of "Dracula" a chance. Hey, if a 21st century young adult can enjoy this movie, you can too!