NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/rec/arts/movies/33236

Text File | 1992-11-18 | 1.9 KB | 38 lines

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!gumby!destroyer!csd475b!newsserv!cbolton
From: [e-mail] (Chris Bolton)
Subject: Coppola's Dracula:  False Advertising
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Environmental Research Institute of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Date: 19 Nov 92 01:53:44
Lines: 27


  The biggest problem that I had with Dracula was that it wasn't at all
like the book.  Coppola repeatedly claimed that he would stay true to the
story and did not.  I have no problem with his changing things (well,
actually I do with such a classic story, but I won't dwell on that), but
don't tell me something untrue just to get me into the theater.
  Sure, he pulls quotes directly from the book, and some of the scenes
reflect those described in the book, but the characters personalities or
actions create a completely different image and, in many cases, change the
context of the scenes entirely.  To compare it to something on a much smaller
level, consider the following cartoon:

  Wile E. Coyote, a sympathetic, loving creature is on a quest to help an
endangered Roadrunner.  He frequently offers the Roadrunner birdseed, free
of charge, so that he may rest assured that the bird will never have to go
hungry.  However, the Roadrunner is evil and sadistic, and repeatedly attacks
Wile E., bludgeoning him with large iron balls, throwing him off of cliffs,
and hurling him into the path of oncoming trucks.  After seemingly endless
abuse, the poor Coyote gives up his quest, merely a shadow of the individual
he once was.

  Now the action on the screen might be very similar to the events portrayed
in the classic cartoons, but the entire thing is different.  Same goes with
this Dracula movie (in my opinion).

                    -Chris Bolton
                     [e-mail]