Classic Horror 

 

Dracula (1931) 

The most famous monster, the Transylvanian Count Dracula (Bela Lugosi), moves to England for new hunting grounds and to seduce Mina Seward into his dark world.  But vampire hunter Van Helsing and Jonathan Harker fight for Mina's soul and to destroy the undead fiend.

I rate this a "must own" movie, but not unequivocally as I think it fails as a film.  No shouting yet, gentle reader; give me a moment to explain.  First, if I call it a failure, why do I rate it so highly?  Because it succeeds as a series of visual poems.  Moments of this film are absolutely wonderful (meeting Dracula, "The Children of the Night" speech, Renfield crawling across the floor).  Bela Lugosi's expressions, piercing eyes (enhanced by lighting) and stylized voice combined death and sensuality in a way that had never been done before and has seldom been approached since. 

However, Dracula suffers as a film in several ways. It is such an early sound film (it was released to some theaters as a silent film) that Hollywood didn't know how to use sound and viewers were not ready for what could be done.  Scenes are often slow, lacking needed dialog and filled with pantomime so that the silent version would still make sense.  Also, notice the absence of a needed musical track, left out because it was believed audiences wouldn't accept music without an on-screen source.  The new DVD has an option of adding a new musical track by Phillip Glass, but unfortunately, it is a quite uninspired track adding little or no suspense.  It also suffers from a common problem of films in the silent era.  The main "youthful" characters are incredibly boring (it was a film tendency to make milquetoast males to cling to a false image of "decency" in society).  It is hard to care if something bad happens to Harker as he barely exists as a person. Mina is no better.  Elderly characters are not much of an improvement.  They had personality, but were the voice of morality and proper behavior (and just how involving is the voice of proper behavior?).  The old, "wise," Van Helsing is such an unpleasant human that I feel like cheering Dracula on (which really shouldn't be the way it works in this film).  Finally, there is the anti-climatic ending.  Characters should have to struggle at least a little to win, but not here; it is easy for the "good guys" to kill Dracula. In fact, with Dracula's rather foolish plan of just grabbing the girl and then lying in his coffin, I can't see any way for our "heros" not to win, particularly as everyone knows his address.

Recent releases of Dracula include the Spanish language version (Drácula) that was filmed at night as the English one was filmed during the day, using the same sets and the same script, more or less.  Drácula has a better pace, more complete explanations, and moves a step further from the silent era.  In it Mina is sexier and more charismatic, making it easier to care about her and understand why Dracula wants her.  But that film lacks what makes the English one a classic—Bela Lugosi.  Carlos Villarías' wide-eyed vampire isn't terrible, but neither is it remarkable.  Lugosi makes Dracula worth seeing repeatedly.

   Back to Classic Horror