A Pigment of My Imagination

Back when I was still at College of DuPage in Illinois, I took a number of film classes. Mostly they were more discussion based, not actual production courses, and they were more literary based, actually in the English department, which was a very interesting spin, focusing on very critical and in-depth analysis, which I loved. By far my favorite teacher there was Dr. Robert Georgalas, a terrific man and film expert, I took three classes with him. My last with him(taken this summer), “Film as Literature” was a great course, looking at the more literary elements of films, and how novels/plays/etc are translated into films. For a final paper in the course, we had to pick from a list of adaptations and analyze whether the novel–>film translation had been successful. I choose to write about Coppola’s “Dracula” movie. My teacher loved this essay and had it submitted into the school’s student writing magazine, but unfortunately it never won anything. Anyways, I will break it up into more manageable chunks, and this time it will come illustrated! enjoy!

…

(film’s teaser trailer to put you in the mood)

…

    The character of the Count Dracula has captivated readers for centuries. Bram Stoker’s seminal work, Dracula, sparked a flurry of stories about vampires and a near cult following of vampirism that lasts till this day. Filmmakers have also been seduced by these classic stories and hundreds of films have revolved around the vampire mythos. Yet, inescapably, these films are drawn back to their classic birthplace—Dracula himself. Classics like F.W. Murnau’s Nosferatu in 1922, and Tod Browning’s 1931 Dracula, starring Bela Lugosi, have cemented the character as a cinematic icon since the earliest days of film. Count Dracula, the king of the undead, has been reborn in countless film adaptations, although many stray far from the storyline of Stoker’s original. Enter legendary filmmaker Francis Ford Coppola. Coppola was a fan of the original novel and wanted to make a more faithful adaptation. Released in 1992, Bram Stoker’s Dracula was a successful re-imagining of Stoker’s gothic masterpiece.

   Bram Stoker was an Irish author born in the nineteenth century. In Dracula, Stoker drew from a rich heritage of vampire legends of the Middle Ages and added a historical realism to the story by incorporating the tale of Vlad “the Impaler” Tepes and thus immortalizing the Dracula myth. Stoker’s novel, published in 1897, was also making many commentaries about England and the world in a time of great social change (“Dracula”).

   Adapting Stoker’s words into the 1992 film proved a difficult journey. Screenwriter James V. Hart first wrote a take on the story that emphasized the love story, and turned Dracula into a romantic anti-hero. The script was originally intended to be used for a TV adaptation, but was rejected. Eventually, Winona Ryder came across the script and it was she who sought out Coppola. The director saw the filmic potential in a new retelling of the tale, but was only interested if the adaptation was faithful to Stoker’s vision. At the same time, Coppola wanted to create something fresh and inspired, giving the audiences something they had never seen before. Coppola fell in love with Hart’s take on the story, and days later the project was in motion (Schumacher 438).

    Bram Stoker’s Dracula is a largely faithful adaptation of its source material, although inevitably, in the translation from one medium to another, some changes were made. Many previous Dracula films had selectively chosen elements of the original and expanded on those in their own way, removing various secondary characters, setting the story exclusively in Transylvania, transporting the whole myth into a modern landscape, and taking major creative liberties with the portrayal of the Count himself. Hart and Coppola, however, were enamored with Stoker’s complete story and Dracula’s threatening voyage from Transylvania to the protagonists’ home turf in England. Hart also kept previously discarded characters like Lucy’s suitors, Arthur Holmwood and the Texan, Quincey Morris, and the Count’s servants, the Tartars, who gave the book a more complex and diverse backdrop. Coppola also follows the book’s pattern of the Count’s reverse aging, becoming younger as the story progresses. True, many details from the novel are passed over for the sake of a more rapid storytelling, yet the film preserves the overall plot structure and settings intact (Dracula).