(Apologies in advance for bad spelling) Mel Brooks had long since lost his touch by the time he embarked on what looks like his final movie. It was certainly a wise move to use subject matter famous the world over and simply begging for parody after the hugely pretentious "Bram Stoker's Dracula". So how did he cock it right up? Like all Mel Brooks failures it starts with the script. Mel and co. didn't even try this time. Whole stretches of the film take place without even an attempt at comedy. There are some dim in-jokes for those only familiar with previous Dracula movies and then there are the very, very rare moments when someone says or does something that looks almost like it was intended to be funny. Out of this barren waste land of a "comedy" there are some gags that do amuse. Hardly a great selling point though is it? "Come see Dracula: Dead And Loving It and very nearly crack a smile once or twice!" It's difficult to be objective about a film made by the man who was once king of parody. However, taken on its own terms, without any knowledge of the director's awesomely surperior previous movies this movie would still tank big time.
Leslie Nielson gave a brilliantly dead-pan performance in Airplane! and the Naked Gun trilogy. He had become famous for his association with movies that specialised in zany spoofs. I can understand, then, why an Executive Producer with no artistic sense would think casting Mr. Nielson as the lead in a Mel Brooks movie would be perfect. Mel should have known better. Nielson can do goofy pratfalls wonderfully as a Detective because he looks the part. But when it's Dracula ... This is how I see it. The art of spoof is to undermine the serious elements of the subject matter you are mocking. For that to work everyone you see in the cast must look like they have walked off the set of a serious movie. If you were making a serious adaptation of Dracula, would you ever think of casting Leslie Nielson? For the pratfalls to work, the film must LOOK genuine for the comedy. Casting someone who could be cast for real as Dracula who then slips on bat s*** and falls down the stairs would be funny!
Didn't mean to moan for as long as that. Anyway Dracula : Dead And Loving It does have some funny bits which is why I recommend you watch the trailer rather than the movie itself.
Leslie Nielson gave a brilliantly dead-pan performance in Airplane! and the Naked Gun trilogy. He had become famous for his association with movies that specialised in zany spoofs. I can understand, then, why an Executive Producer with no artistic sense would think casting Mr. Nielson as the lead in a Mel Brooks movie would be perfect. Mel should have known better. Nielson can do goofy pratfalls wonderfully as a Detective because he looks the part. But when it's Dracula ... This is how I see it. The art of spoof is to undermine the serious elements of the subject matter you are mocking. For that to work everyone you see in the cast must look like they have walked off the set of a serious movie. If you were making a serious adaptation of Dracula, would you ever think of casting Leslie Nielson? For the pratfalls to work, the film must LOOK genuine for the comedy. Casting someone who could be cast for real as Dracula who then slips on bat s*** and falls down the stairs would be funny!
Didn't mean to moan for as long as that. Anyway Dracula : Dead And Loving It does have some funny bits which is why I recommend you watch the trailer rather than the movie itself.
Tell Your Friends