Bram Stoker's Dracula vs. The Masque of the Red Death



Yes, Roger Corman beats FF Coppola. Good things about Bram Stoker's Dracula are limited to Gary Oldman and Winona spending half the film in paroxymal ecstasy at Dracula's heavy breathing (if you like that sort of thing). The Masque of the Red Death is mad & bad, but better.

Red Death, at least I felt, was truly campy. I mean, it's good at times, but also at some times it just goes over the top. It's interesting, to say the least, and it also never got me bored. I can't say the same about Coppola's Dracula, which, frankly, just bored me to bloody tears. It's almost plotless and there's not much to like about it. Most of the acting is truly horrible, at Ed Wood levels in my honest opinion. It's empty and it's not much other than boring and not creepy. Beautiful imagery isn't really enough to keep a movie thrilling or at least plainly entertaining, especially if you're just doing absolutely nothing with that imagery.