Differences Between Mina And Dracula

733 Words 3 Pages
Besides Lucy, the most significant difference in Bram Stoker’s Dracula the movie was probably Mina. Although she becomes one of the main characters in both the book and the film, she plays a more prominent role in the movie. In the film, she had many of the same traits and characteristics that she did in the book, but in the film, she is also the reincarnation of Elisabeta, Dracula’s first wife who committed suicide. This eventually leads to Mina falling in love with Dracula, even though she marries Jonathan. However, the story from the novel depicts Mina as herself, not as a reincarnation of another, and never mentions anything of Dracula’s first/former wives (excluding the three undead brides). There is a good chance that this was …show more content…
An example is when the undead brides rape Jonathan and suck his blood early on in the movie. Then, in a different scene, Dracula drank Lucy’s blood, all the while raping her in his werewolf form. Not only that, but near the end of the movie, Mina freely sucked Dracula’s blood from his chest. Unfortunately (and what I mean is thank god), no scenes in the book give as much description as the scenes in the movie. However, some are sexual, such as when Dracula forced Mina to drink the blood from his chest, and even Dr. Seward commented saying, “The attitude of the two had a terrible resemblance to a child forcing a kitten’s nose into a saucer of milk to compel it to drink” (Stoker Chapter XXI, 283). Then, when one of the undead brides went to sink her teeth into Harker’s throat, as …show more content…
In the book, Jonathan describes him as “a tall old man, clean shaven save for a long white moustache, and clad in black from head to foot, without a single speck of colour about him anywhere” (Stoker Chapter II, 40). Jonathan also notes both the Count’s sharp teeth and fingernails respectively, as, he says, “The mouth… was fixed and rather cruel-looking, with peculiarly sharp white teeth” (Stoker Chapter II, 42) and later, “The nails were long and fine, and cut to a sharp point” (Stoker Chapter II, 43). However, in the movie, Dracula is wearing a long red cape, and although his white face and hair make him look very old, he does not have a mustache. In addition to this, the Count does not have sharp-looking teeth showing until he is biting someone’s neck, but his fingernails look exactly like how they are depicted in the book. Looking at how Stoker wanted to portray Dracula as a fiend that sucked others’ blood, Coppola probably wanted to give people the same image of him in the movie, a dastardly bloodsucker. In both the book and the movie, the Count’s fangs did a good job of portraying Dracula as a gruesome figure, because “In the traditional sense, a vampire’s fangs… when bared, are a gruesome and intimately brutal way to achieve sustenance” (Sherman Chapter 2,

Related Documents