Jamie Kennedy's favorite movie review site
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 

Overall Rating

Worth A Look: 21.28%
Just Average: 23.4%
Pretty Crappy: 0%
Sucks: 4.26%

3 reviews, 29 user ratings

Latest Reviews

Old Guard, The by Peter Sobczynski

Greyhound by Peter Sobczynski

Guest of Honour by Peter Sobczynski

Miss Fisher and the Crypt of Tears by Jay Seaver

Dealer/Healer by Jay Seaver

City Without Baseball by Jay Seaver

Invisible Man, The (2020) by Rob Gonsalves

Hunt, The (2020) by Rob Gonsalves

Da 5 Bloods by Rob Gonsalves

Hamilton by Peter Sobczynski

subscribe to this feed

Dracula (1931)
[AllPosters.com] Buy posters from this movie
by David Cornelius

"Listen to them. Children of the night. What music they make..."
5 stars

It is the most famous and best remembered of all Bram Stoker adaptations, and yet the 1931 “Dracula” is also the film that ventures furthest from its source material. The film has been criticized over the years for straying so far from Stoker’s classic novel (it instead depends mostly on the popular stage play of the 1920s), and yet these critics ignore the simple fact that on its own, the movie works. Oh, it more than works: it became a milestone, one of the most important movies in film history, kicking off an entire era of screen horror, leaving us with images that are forever burned in the pop culture subconscious.

Consider that in 1931, there were no supernatural horror movies being made. All thrillers at the time were given cheap finales to explain away the mystery. Not so “Dracula,” which stated quite boldly that the title character is indeed a blood-sucking, undying, mist-and-bat-turning-into, creature-of-the-night vampire. Audiences, of course, loved it, and quickly Universal worked overtime to follow their smash hit with a string of genre films that would later be hailed as a golden age, the era of the Universal Monsters. (And, let’s not forget, other studios were falling over themselves trying to duplicate Universal’s success.)

While the film ushered in an entire new genre of filmmaking, it also worked to make a cinematic icon out of its star. Bela Lugosi, the Hungarian actor who also played the title role on stage when the show came to Broadway in 1927, would sadly never reach the heights of greatness promised in his film debut (although he would come very close in a few Universal follow-ups, most notably “The Black Cat”). And yet his performance here as the vampire count is one of the film’s main ingredients - remove Lugosi, and the movie collapses. Lugosi played the count not like the disturbing monster of “Nosferatu,” but instead as a seductive foreigner, an exotic man of mystery whose allure is impossible to escape.

Indeed, it’s the sheer foreignness of Lugosi’s delivery that draws us in. Listen to his line readings, the cadence he brings, the way he places his accents. When other actors let loose with the immortal line “children of the night, what music they make,” it sounds like anyone else reading that sentence. When Lugosi says it, his rhythms are slightly off (perhaps intentionally, perhaps due to his shaky grasp on the English language); he puts an emphasis on odd words, like the “they” in “what music they make,” and the effect is an uncanny blend of seduction, mystery, and otherworldliness. Which is exactly how we’ve come to see the Dracula character over the decades.

Main ingredient number two is cinematographer Karl Freund. Freund, who previously photographed such silent classics as “Metropolis” and “The Man Who Laughs” (and who went on to direct two of the best horror films of the 1930s, “The Mummy” and “Mad Love”), provides the film with its unforgettable atmosphere. His camera captures the creeping mist and dark shadows of Dracula’s castle, the chilling darkness of the boat to England, the terror of the sanitarium, and so on. And while his camera remains stationary for most of the film, it does get mobile for a handful of shots, some of the movie’s best, most notably that introductory shot of Dracula’s castle and the lonely coffins found within - it’s this shot that best sets up the cold, unnerving ambiance that is to follow.

Side note: consider how we never see Dracula rise from his coffin. We see the coffins open, and in the next shot, Lugosi is simply there, standing, staring us down. The jump cut disturbs our logic, and by throwing us off, we’re set on edge. A simple storytelling device, and a highly effective one.

In fact, “Dracula” works almost entirely on deceptively simple filmmaking tricks; the most famous is perhaps the repeated shot of Dracula’s face that finds a bolt of light falling across his eyes. As if Lugosi’s stare was not hypnotizing enough, Freund lets the actor’s face sit in shadow, only his eyes peering out at the audience, a glance that shoots right through us and allows us to feel the power of his character’s gaze.

The final main ingredient in “Dracula” is director Tod Browning. The veteran filmmaker and longtime Lon Chaney collaborator (“London After Midnight” and “The Unholy Three” are among the pair’s most well-known works) brings to his third sound film an eye trained on years of silent moviemaking. While the script itself sticks closely to the stage-bound source material, which leaves the story as a series of one-room scenes, Browning elevates the material by allowing for an operatic look to the picture. Browning’s grandiose imagery is most effective in the early scenes, where Dracula’s castle (hats off also to Charles D. Hall’s art direction) allows for instant chills, but he also finds the right moments later on in the London scenes as well, such as the story’s visits with the demented Renfield (played by the outstanding Dwight Frye). And in the scenes that require little visual thrill (such as the interior scenes involving Dracula and Edward Van Sloane’s Van Helsing character), Browning finds the right tempo for his cast, working with the natural pacing of the stage play, letting the characters deliver their dialogue without feeling stagebound by the setting. Here is a director who finds so much with which to work in his material, and he uses every inch of it for maximum effect.

Adding to this effect is the choice, not an uncommon one in the early days of talkies, to present “Dracula” without a musical score. The only music found here comes during the credits (as well as during a concert scene); the rest of the film is filled only with cautious dialogue and the occasional sound effect. The result is eerie, the silence drawing the viewer in even more, always on edge. It’s as if the silence itself was a character in the film. Again, deceptively simple.

(In 1999, Universal released a version of the film that featured a newly produced musical score from Philip Glass. While the score itself is a good one, putting music in Browning’s film actually takes away from the ethereal nature of the film. Universal’s DVD release of “Dracula” allows the viewer to pick from either soundtrack; I highly recommend going with the original. Leave the Glass score as a curiosity piece.)

You may have noticed that I have not yet discussed the plot of “Dracula.” There are two reasons for this. First, most of you are already familiar with the story, if not in detail, then at least with the basics, and repeating such information would only waste time. Second, let’s face it, plot is not of major importance to “Dracula.” In this telling of the story, the plot is merely something to get us from one set piece to the next; it’s paper thin and presented almost as an afterthought. This is a film that is more concerned with mood, with style, with characters - how they act, not what they do. By story’s end, we’re interested in this strange battle of wits between the man of good and the creature of evil. We’re interested in the otherworldly sexiness (and the fear that comes with it) found in Dracula’s seduction of Mina (Helen Chandler). With “Dracula,” it doesn’t really matter how we get there.

Modern audiences may have a hard time getting through “Dracula.” The pace is unlike anything found in today’s films, the horror is far more subtle, the entire tone is subdued, requiring more attention. And yes, I’ll admit to chuckling at the rubber bat technology when I first saw the movie years back. But once you get into the rhythms of the film, you’ll discover a masterpiece. Browning’s film was unlike anything that had ever come before it, and while it inspired many followers, the trio of Browning, Freund, and Lugosi keep “Dracula” from being unlike anything that’s come since. This is gothic chills at their finest, and one of the greatest horror pictures ever created.

link directly to this review at https://www.hollywoodbitchslap.com/review.php?movie=2885&reviewer=392
originally posted: 10/08/05 19:24:16
[printer] printer-friendly format  

User Comments

9/21/17 morris campbell dated 4 sure but a classic lugosi is the best dracula imho 4 stars
4/09/12 keith miron Classic monster movie, even it is a little dated. 3 stars
6/05/11 art this one,and nosferatau 1922,and count dracul 1970;are the best. 4 stars
9/12/10 David A. The definitive classic monster movie--Lugosi is to vampires as AC/DC is to rock and roll 5 stars
7/28/10 art HOLD EVERYTHING FOLK"S!, 1922's NOSFERATAU was the GRANDPA of all vampire flick's! 1 stars
5/31/10 User Name A dated vampire flick that creaks like an old coffing; but Lugosi is worth watching. 3 stars
7/09/09 Josie Cotton is a goddess Lugosi is the best Dracula ever! 5 stars
2/05/07 David Pollastrini very well done for it's time 5 stars
11/11/06 J The 75th Anniversary edition is the best print and sound to date. It's about time! 5 stars
8/22/06 David Cohen It's shortcomings are well documented, but the film has its merits 4 stars
3/29/06 Dethbyhashi Slow, and wooden but still a great Movie 4 stars
11/21/05 Kurtis J. Beard A classic. Legosi at his creepiest. 5 stars
10/10/05 Carolyn Rathburn What can you say about Bela Legosi, "I Want To Drink Your Vlood? 5 stars
11/17/04 chris creaky and slow 3 stars
8/30/04 John atmospheric and has its moments but its very very slow 3 stars
8/25/04 American Slasher Goddess Dated, but still one of the great vampire movies of the 20th century. 5 stars
5/16/04 gman "The are far worse things awaiting man than death" 5 stars
1/21/04 I Would Fuck The Lost Boys, fuck Blade, fuck From Dusk Till Dawn, this is a true vampire classic 5 stars
4/16/03 ZzanoKISShead Could have seen more blood and fangs, still a great flick! 4 stars
2/03/03 Charles Tatum Aged but still entertaining 4 stars
11/23/02 Amy The facial expressions are too funny to miss out on. 4 stars
7/30/02 Diego Montoya Yeah, what John Linton Robertson said. Some memorable parts, but it's antiquated 4 stars
2/24/02 John Linton Roberson Tedious, dated, stagey; but its iconic images, esp. the 3 Brides,are still powerful. 4 stars
11/14/01 Zizzerzazzerzuzz The old black and white makes it even eerier somehow... 4 stars
8/18/01 Andrew Carden Very Boring At Most Parts, but The Ending Is Extremly Good. 3 stars
7/22/00 Tyler Peterson A great classical horror film 5 stars
11/25/99 Dr. Acula Lugosi at his best, eerie atmosphere,Dwight Fyre's Renfield is haunting. 5 stars
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:

Discuss this movie in our forum

  DVD: 26-Sep-2006



Directed by
  Tod Browning

Written by
  Garrett Fort
  Dudley Murphy

  Bela Lugosi
  David Manners
  Helen Chandler
  Edward Van Sloan
  Dwight Frye

Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
Privacy Policy | | HBS Inc. |   
All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast