By Jacob Cameron

Dracula is another take on the classic novel written by Bram Stoker. It seems as if the movies, tv shows, and other adaptations of the book will never end. But the original novel is a classic; along with the 1931 Dracula, 1958’s Horror of Dracula, and 1992’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula. So, for any Dracula adaptation, there is an inherent expectation of quality. With this in mind, this newest version is solid enough to be entertaining.

Dracula was directed by Luc Besson, whose notable works include The Fifth Element, The Professional, and Lucy. It starred Caleb Landry Jones, Christoph Waltz, and Zoe Bleu Sidel. It takes its angle of the Dracula story from the 1992 Bram Stoker’s Dracula film. Prince Vladimir of Wallachia, played by Caleb Landry Jones, loses his wife in battle and renounces God. Over the next 400 years, he becomes a vampire with a lust for blood and a lust for finding the reincarnation of his beloved wife.

One of the biggest positives was the set and costume designs. I appreciate the commitment to making this look and feel like it belongs in the 1800’s. Another positive is that of Caleb Landry Jones, who is the best part of the film overall. Jones has one of the best scenes of the film where he describes to Johnathan Harker his 400-year-old odyssey to try and reunite with his beloved. There’s a montage narrated by Dracula about Dracula attending a party in France and fully becoming a vampire, which is well done.

Christoph Waltz is good but is not given much to do as the nameless priest. Christoph Waltz, as a vampire-hunting priest, drips with potential but is never really followed through on. Other than Jones and Waltz, the performances are just serviceable. There’s nothing really memorable about the performances of the supporting cast.

That’s the frustrating part of this film; it’s solid, but it could’ve been more. This is a Dracula film that feels like it fades into the background instead of taking a risk on a bold vision. As an example, Bram Stoker’s Dracula is a truly unique Dracula experience: the striking uses of color, Gary Oldman’s performance, Keanu Reeves’ not-so-good performance, Anthony Hopkins as Van Helsing are examples of the potential of this film. This Dracula film feels like it’s playing things safe; with everything being perfect fine and forgettable instead of being imperfect but memorable. 

Additionally, there’s not that much blood or gore in this one as compared to other Dracula films. While the 1931 Dracula film showed that you don’t need those things to be scary, there is a little blood in the 2026 version, but it’s limited. Like the film is trying to fill a certain requirement because vampire films are thought of as bloody affairs.

Ultimately, this is a competent film, but it’s too competent for its own good. It’s good in bursts but ultimately not that memorable of a film.

2 ½ stars