Compared to the nearly constant physical humor that infused "Blazing Saddles" and "Young Frankenstein," this is a very low-key Mel Brooks film. The more sophisticated humor--at least in spots--may reflect a more mature (but just as delightfully silly) Brooks.
The fact that Stoker is given writing credit also reflects the fact that the script follows the original book quite closely up to a point (the ball, for those who don't know both the movie and the book). Brooks catches the sexiness inherent in the book and exaggerates it, but because he follows the tradition of most Dracula movies and also truncates the action of the book in the same way, he leaves out the really high-tech flavor of Stoker's novel. I wish he had left in the real zinger that made me do a double take when I read the book: Renfield is visited by the spirit of Dracula, who urges him to come to him. The doctor, who has placed Renfield close to his office in order to monitor him, is dictating notes into an early Edison-type machine when Renfield tells his "master" "I'm coming!" The doctor too says, "I'm coming." Clearly, in the context, the doctor is not talking about locomotion.
The blood transfusion to Lucy, the long trip to Europe and Transylvania to catch the fleeing Count by the fastest known means of transportation (the train), the transcription on the train by the once-bitten Mina of the doctor's notes on a portable typewriter (a new-enough-fangled machine as a whole--but a portable!), all this length in the novel is cut to the chase in the usual way. The film certainly follows Stoker more closely than the original "Nosferatu," which couldn't mirror the novel too closely because Stoker's widow was using even the copyright law of those days to quash the film, which she whittled down to 2 copies that escaped to the modern day--not with her permission. (Stoker was a theater manager in London. When "Nosferatu" appeared, movies were considered to be competition with theater, and his widow--he died of syphilis when still relatively young--was scandalized that his book should be turned into a movie and not a play.)
But the garlic--ah the garlic. Not a single film has gotten that right. The book makes it clear that they had to send to Holland for garlic *flowers*, yes flowers. Not garlic bulbs. That alone is a gag that no one will catch except Stoker readers, another subtlety in this most subtle of Brooks's films. Last, but certainly not least, the very funny Anne Bancroft appears early on
and on and echoing on--who knew, when she played Annie Sullivan, that she would marry a comedian & become one!
The fact that Stoker is given writing credit also reflects the fact that the script follows the original book quite closely up to a point (the ball, for those who don't know both the movie and the book). Brooks catches the sexiness inherent in the book and exaggerates it, but because he follows the tradition of most Dracula movies and also truncates the action of the book in the same way, he leaves out the really high-tech flavor of Stoker's novel. I wish he had left in the real zinger that made me do a double take when I read the book: Renfield is visited by the spirit of Dracula, who urges him to come to him. The doctor, who has placed Renfield close to his office in order to monitor him, is dictating notes into an early Edison-type machine when Renfield tells his "master" "I'm coming!" The doctor too says, "I'm coming." Clearly, in the context, the doctor is not talking about locomotion.
The blood transfusion to Lucy, the long trip to Europe and Transylvania to catch the fleeing Count by the fastest known means of transportation (the train), the transcription on the train by the once-bitten Mina of the doctor's notes on a portable typewriter (a new-enough-fangled machine as a whole--but a portable!), all this length in the novel is cut to the chase in the usual way. The film certainly follows Stoker more closely than the original "Nosferatu," which couldn't mirror the novel too closely because Stoker's widow was using even the copyright law of those days to quash the film, which she whittled down to 2 copies that escaped to the modern day--not with her permission. (Stoker was a theater manager in London. When "Nosferatu" appeared, movies were considered to be competition with theater, and his widow--he died of syphilis when still relatively young--was scandalized that his book should be turned into a movie and not a play.)
But the garlic--ah the garlic. Not a single film has gotten that right. The book makes it clear that they had to send to Holland for garlic *flowers*, yes flowers. Not garlic bulbs. That alone is a gag that no one will catch except Stoker readers, another subtlety in this most subtle of Brooks's films. Last, but certainly not least, the very funny Anne Bancroft appears early on
and on and echoing on--who knew, when she played Annie Sullivan, that she would marry a comedian & become one!