But didn't. This movie had all the right elements, but it just seems to miss. It's a visually opulent movie, it captures the look and feel of the victorian age better than most any movie I've seen. Excellent special effects blend in with the imagery, as often we see several events happening at once on screen. Thankfully this movie only indulges slightly in the MTV video inspired zig-zag mile a second camera action so many modern movies use. The cast was wonderful, and it's more true to the original story than probably any other Dracula movie.
So where did it go wrong?
I'd say most of the problem was a weak story; fantastic and wonderful images are placed on screen, but there's not much to tie them together. There's too much gore for a movie that claims to have a love story at the center, and finally Gary Oldman appears in more incarnations than you can count. He's a fine actor, but when you don't know what he's supposed to be from one moment to the next - it gets confusing. Still, the imagery makes the movie worth watching.
So where did it go wrong?
I'd say most of the problem was a weak story; fantastic and wonderful images are placed on screen, but there's not much to tie them together. There's too much gore for a movie that claims to have a love story at the center, and finally Gary Oldman appears in more incarnations than you can count. He's a fine actor, but when you don't know what he's supposed to be from one moment to the next - it gets confusing. Still, the imagery makes the movie worth watching.