Dracula reboot described as faithful yet different.

Dracula reboot described as faithful yet different. Jun 10, 2020 19:27:37 GMT via mobile Salzmank likes this

Quote

Post by masterofallgoons on Jun 10, 2020 19:27:37 GMT

Jun 10, 2020 18:54:15 GMT Salzmank said:

Jun 10, 2020 18:44:55 GMT DarkManX said:

They've tried to be faithful to the book before. Francis Ford Coppola did that (kind of) and there was a was mini-series that also did it.

I'd skip the formalities and just have him meet Frankenstein or the Wolfman.

Well, none of them has really been faithful… Coppola added the ridiculous romance subplot that ruined the character and messed up the plot (and made a few other changes). The 1970s miniseries was obviously not a movie—and, while far more faithful than Coppola, changed character relationships and Dracula’s appearance and excised certain key scenes.

Now, as I mentioned, I’m not usually a faithful-to-source absolutist—but in this case doing a faithful adaptation, after so many versions that just used elements, would be the real surprise, and it would work (I think) because the book is so cinematic.

The book is, and is not, cinematic. There's a lot of adaptating to do, largely because of the 'epistolary' approach the novel takes. The Coppola film presenting many of the documents as voice over does actually sort of get at the structure of the novel, but as you noted, deviates in a lot of ways.

As I understood it, the novel was not a very big success, but then Stoker adapted it as a play himself and found it lucrative. So Nosferatu was obviously influential, and the Universal film was a direct adaptation of the play. So ever since then we've mostly gotten versions of the film/play.

Anyway...

If you look at her quote in the article it inspires some confidence that Kusama has an understanding of the novel and the ways other adaptations haven't really grasped the book.