Last night I got current on my Dracula adaptations with Luc Besson’s Dracula (formerly known as Dracula: A Love Story.) How does it compare with those which have preceded it? Let’s take a look.
A Carpathian prince loses the love of his life, denounces God, then spends 400 years looking for his lost love’s reincarnation. Shenanigans ensue.

I heard things about this one so I went into it not expecting much. Which turned out to be the right attitude towards the film. Dracula is ripe for adaptation and new interpretation, so I didn’t slight Besson for moving many of the characters to France and setting the events during the 100-year anniversary of Bastille Day. I’ve seen poorer choices and the French setting didn’t have much of an impact on the story overall. What I do hold against Besson is lifting so much from Francis Ford Coppola. In fact, this film could have been called Luc Besson’s Francis Ford Coppola’s Dracula. When ancient-looking Dracula answers the door of his castle looking like he’s been holding Gary Oldman’s hairdresser and customer prisoner, my eyes did roll and I uttered an audible, “Really?”
I didn’t expect much of a horror film given the movie’s original title. It is, at its un-staked heart, a love story, after all. Leaning towards this genre rather than horror is likely the reason we get an awful subplot where Dracula spends centuries making the most alluring perfume on Earth. No, really. He uses the scent to entrance the female population of Europe in hopes his lost love will be attracted to him. Despite having telekinetic and pyrokinetic powers, I guess vampiric hypnosis was a bridge to far for Besson and a more mundane, yet outlandish, workaround was needed. Oh, and the perfume ends up having nothing to do with his eventual finding of his lost princess, so you be the judge if that part of the movie’s running time was well-spent.
The film is not devoid of pleasure. An inspired scene uses Dracula’s increasing treasury as a means to shorthand the passage of time and—spoilers—when Dracula finally perishes, having all the flames and fires in his castle go out was a nice touch. Christoph Waltz (playing “Priest”) delivers his usual greatness, but I fear he’s in danger of being typecast as the unconventional mentor figure. I had hoped for some excellent costuming and set design given what I assume was the film’s decent budget, and there are, but not enough by far. Oh, and Besson joins the parade of filmmakers guilty of Quincy Morris erasure. Goddamn it! Is it so hard to fit a cowboy into a vampire movie?!
Rating: It’s all been done better by others, meaning Dracula (2025) goes back to the grave with only 2-and-a-half skulls out of 5.








