Dracula (1992)

Yeah I'm pretty happy with this one.

I don't know whether or not the reception of this film has went up or down over the three decades since it's release, but I'm in the camp of liking it a good deal. Easily the most lavishly produced, faithful, and striking adaptation of the story in film, Francis Ford Coppola bet it all on this movie to save his sinking film company with a solid budget of 40 million and pulled in over 200 million when all was said and done, and I can understand why. True the movie leans a bit more into romance than abject horror, but it didn't bother me all that much. The stuff that is creepy, freaky, and just plain horrific had a strong effect on me. Never once in all vampire media have I ever cringed and shirked away from seeing a vampire consume blood, but the razor scene in this movie mm-mmm. No way, that creeped me right the fuck out man, gave me the heebie-jeebies! And the romance while assuredly dramatic I bought into, it strangely worked for me. Only a handful of details I noticed didn't make the jump from page to screen, but all the things that did make it give a lotta brownie points to this film! The production is batshit insane, I cannot believe the visuals in this movie, and to think everything was done in camera with next to zero post production or computer graphics work kinda blows my socks off. The sets, the costumes, the scope of it all, it's almost illegal how grand this movie looks. Star studded cast and I gotta just say real quick oh ho boy this is gonna be sacreligious, Gary Oldman had such a perfect voice and presence for what was required in this role. I know, Bela Lugosi is THE voice, he is friggin' Dracula as long as the world keeps turning. However! Gary got me creeped out, entranced, and invested. The hair at the beginning though, absurd. But I can't change it so I gotta live with it, and everything else was great about him. Winona Ryder as Mina was very nice, and I'm actually happy she has more of a role to play cause in all seriousness Mina and Lucy are barely even there in any adaptation. Anthony Hopkins was riding a high and beautiful wave in the early 90s due to Silence Of The Lambs and I did like him a fair bit, I mean this is the most exotic and foreign Van Helsing I've seen since Edward Van Sloan. Keanu my son, I'm thrilled you have a shining career nowadays and I understand you were burnt the hell out making this, so I will not trash you here but I do feel a different actor would have worked more. I do however wish we got more Cary Elwes, Richard E. Grant, and Billy Campbell as Arthur, Seward, and Quincey respectively cause well I'm a sucker for Cary and Richard, and huzzah Quincey is proper texan and was kinda awesome! I do find it hilarious though they had to cut about 20 minutes of gore effects out though the film was in no danger of getting a higher rating than an R, but they absolutely kept every breastises and charged erotic moment in this movie no problem. I mean I think they were in a moooood making this movie, my God Hammer wasn't this gratuitous and revelling in the sexy aspects, but here? Make sure the kids are in bed or out of the house before flipping this on. Lawd have mercy! Moving swiftly on. I really digged this movie, I loved the lavish design and tone, I was most definitely entertained, I give it 3.5 stars and an 8/10! Next week, it is high past time we pay our respects to the king of low budget pictures with his acclaimed and memorable Poe series.

Dracula [Espãnol]

It feels like home again.

Wow, wow, wow let me tell you! I have heard about this for some time but seeing it for the first time I feel like a fool for not seeing it sooner. Now you may be wondering exactly what it is I'm reviewing here, well in short Universal Studios shot two versions of the 1931 classic Dracula, one for english and one for spanish speaking audiences. They used the same basic script but made changes here and there, the same sets, the same costumes, and the spanish crew shot during the night while the Lugosi version shot during the day. It is such a fascinating experience to watch this, because I've seen the Bela Lugosi version countless times since I was about 8 years old, I know that movie super well, so to see something oh so similar and yet very different the only way I can explain it is like if they remade the movie, not shot for shot, but did an even better job than the original! It was almost a game to see what elements they kept and what they changed. Yeah I am firmly in the crowd of the spanish version being superior to the vastly more famous version, but it might be hard for me to articulate why. The one big element that blindsided me was the fact that this movie pushes an hour and forty-five minutes for the runtime while the Lugosi version is an hour and fifteen minutes long, so you get a movie that takes it's time and has more room for slower moments, character moments, and flat out stuff that was not in the english version. In fact I was profoundly impressed with how much material from the book was presented, it makes the Lugosi version look so truncated and abridged in comparison. The movie is a bit more hardcore too, you barely see a damn thing in the english version and while that has it's own scary effect, you see the bite marks, you hear not one but two stakings, and not to sound piggish or anything but Lupita Tovar's dress is significantly more revealing than Helen Chandler's. I know Americans are kinda prudish and certainly during that time especially, but the spanish audience does not screw about and God bless them for it. I greatly loved the performances given here as well, Carlos Villarías is a very very good Dracula obviously making the role his own, but the way he carries himself and the facial acting gives a different edge to this Dracula, with Lugosi it's a creepy smile and careful lighting around the eyes but with Villarías he looks like he's about to tear people limb from limb and feast. Eduardo Arozamena as Professor Van Helsing I saw a good bit of Edward Van Sloan in, and he had a great presence with a strong worldy knowledge for our vampire hunter so a lot of love there. Lupita Tovar I actually got to see before the film, they had this short little interview probably shot in the 90s as she discussed her time making the picture and you could tell she had a lot of love and appreciation for the role, and she does damn good, truly stunning too I mean holy cow, the Count has very fine taste in ladies for sure. Pablo Alvarez Rubio as Renfield, good God I didn't think you could outcrazy Dwight Frye but the man is unhinged in this movie and I love every second of it, nothing but a glowing review of his talents from me. Even Barry Norton as Juan I felt was way better than David Manners' John, never to put down David's performance but he was just a teeny bit of a little bitch in Tod Browning's film but here he seems much more the unshakable heroic leading man. Again it's not the easiest thing to expound upon my points but if you have a back to back comparison viewing the results are as clear as daylight, hell if you watched this and Dracula's Daughter as a sort of introduction to golden age vampire films you'd have a grand time. I know I would! It is fully worth your time seeing if you're any fan of the Universal Monsters, Dracula, or horror films in general. I'm just so happy to be back if even for just a moment in time writing reviews again like I used to, but even more so now that I've seen this slice of cinema. Big time 4 stars, 8.5/10! And our business with Count Dracula is far from over and I will see you next time with a Christopher Lee Dracula film we haven't touched on yet.

Dracula (1931)

The very first week of horror reviews, we look at the Universal Monsters collection.

Dracula has all the elements of a proper chiller. Fog, castles, bats, bonechilling atmosphere and acting from the great Bela Lugosi, and one of the best adaptations of the Bram Stoker novel. The film is one of the earliest and one of the greatest horror films, and one of the big advantages it has is being one of the first sound horror films. True, there is a lack of music but it only enhances the fear and the atmosphere in the film. Need I even say anything about Bela Lugosi's immortal performance? The first line he ever says is unforgettable, "I am...Dracula." and his performance is all in his presence. It's how he walks, and speaks, it's all in the eyes and the voice and the hands! Dwight Frye is perfect as the insane Renfield, with a amusingly creepy laugh and a manic personality that leaps from the screen. In fact, all the cast is very good but it's Lugosi that of course steals the show. One of my favorite things about not only this movie but all the Universal Monsters movies is both the impact they still have on today's culture and strangely, how very short the movies are. The films are barely an hour and a half long but still can pack so much grand things in them that really you don't mind that they are that short. If you aren't even a horror fan you should really watch the most iconic of the Universal Monsters movies, you will enjoy them and would most likely view them again around Halloween time.

Well, that's it for today. Tune in tomorrow where we look at the most famous monster of all time.