Dracula (1931)

[alkytrio666]

Originally posted by The_Return
It strays a fair bit from the novel, just so you're warned. While nowhere as good a film, Coppola's 1992 version is much more faithful.

So I've heard. I bought both, and I'm planning on a Drac marathon when I finsih the book. Return, you know if I was anywhere near Canada you'd be invited. But I'm not.

[Zero]

Originally posted by The_Return
It strays a fair bit from the novel, just so you're warned. While nowhere as good a film, Coppola's 1992 version is much more faithful.

apparently - the original plan was for a more faitful (epic) adaptation and Lon Chaney as the star -- two things happened 1) The Great Depression hit and squashed Universal's big budget potential and 2) Chaney died of lung cancer.

Interestingly, Carl Laemmle Sr. hated the idea of making Dracula - it was Jr. who pushed the project - - - so we all owe thanks to CL, Jr.

[The_Return]

Son of Dracula on the Legacy collection is really good, too. Dracula's Daughter left alot to be desired....and I havent watched House yet. Contrary to popular belief, I think Cheney Jr. did a great job as the Count in Son of Dracula.

[hollywoodgothiq]

The 1931 DRACULA is a flawed film that survives on the strength of the performances by Lugosi, Edward Van Sloan, and Dwight Frye Junior.

Whatever its weaknesses, it is not have so overrated as NOSFERATU, which survives mostly on the basis of its undeserved reputation -- it's German and it's silent, so it must be a masterpiece!

Talk about the emperor's new clothes... this one is absolutely stark naked.

[alkytrio666]

Originally posted by hollywoodgothiq
The 1931 DRACULA is a flawed film that survives on the strength of the performances by Lugosi, Edward Van Sloan, and Dwight Frye Junior.

Whatever its weaknesses, it is not have so overrated as NOSFERATU, which survives mostly on the basis of its undeserved reputation -- it's German and it's silent, so it must be a masterpiece!

Talk about the emperor's new clothes... this one is absolutely stark naked.

I agree with your Dracula comment. Dracula is a pretty damn good film, but no where near the book. It's performances make it easier to accept this.

Nosferatu, however, is a different story. Have you seen Nosferatu? And, if so, do you consider yourself a tolerant movie watcher? I think Nosferatu is an amazing film, it's pretty well adapted from the book (for what they had to work with) and it's very chilling. It also sprouted the vampire genre, but nothing else (with the exception of maybe the 1992 Dracula film) touches it.

[hollywoodgothiq]

Have I seen NOSFERATU? Let me tell you about it!

I first saw it in 16mm in a junior high school class -- a version edited down so it could be screened in a one-hour class (no Renfield character, for example). The movie was borin and dated, and generated lots of laughter -- but hey, we were just kids, so what did we know?

A few years later, I saw a complete version courtesy of PBS. The movie was longer but no better -- just as stiff and dull as I remembered.

Then the movie showed up on video, with the frame rate corrected so that the film ran at the right speed -- approximately 18 fps instead of the 24 fps second of sound movies. Once again, the film was longer, slower and duller -- and absolutely no better.

But still, I continued to give the movie a chance. In the 1990s it screened at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences theatre in Beverly Hills, with a restored score performed live. The print was straight from Germany (with German subtitles that were translated on a second, smaller screen off to the side). This print was billed as a complete one, and I do indeed recall being surprised by occasional bits and pieces I had not seen before. Again, the movie was longer but no better (although the live music was a pleasant diversion).

Of course, the film came out on laserdisc and DVD, and there was much brouhaha about restoring the image so that all the detailing of the sets could now be seen. Great, I thought, now I can actually watch the paint dry!

Finally, some low-budget distributor put the thing out on video yet again, this time with a soundtrack comprised of songs by the Goth-rock group Type-O Negative. Once again, I subjected myself to this misbegotten false classic, and once again it bored me to tears. (In this case, the music made it even worse than before.)

So yes, I have sat through the film many times and given it every chance, but the bottom line is it's a tired movie whose reputation is built almost entirely on the details surrounding it.

It's perceived as being part of the German Expressionist movement that gave us CABINET OF DR CALIGARI, and it was directed by a man who went on to make great films later (like FAUST). Because of this, we're supposed to think that some of this greatness rubbed off onto NOSFERATU, but it didn't.

Having said all that, I will admit to liking one brief moment, which I saw in the German print that screened with the live music. Just before an intermission break, after Krolock/Dracula has killed the crew on the ocean voyage, there is a nice shot of the unmanned boat riding the waves, and the subtitle reads, "The ship of death had a new captain." It's a nice touch.

Bottom line: every step of the way, people tell me this movie is a masterpiece. Every time a "new and improved" version is released, I check it out and give it another chance. And every time, my original perception is confirmed.

[Zero]

to each their own. . . i actually really respect older silent films and sometimes think current filmmakers 'tell too much' as opposed to the older more choppy silent films.

i saw a restored version of Metropolis in London a few years back that was really amazing. but, that's just me.

[hollywoodgothiq]

I meant no blanket slur against silent films. I'm always happy to sit down and watch METROPOLIS (or HAXEN or THE GOLEM or THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA).

I just think people give NOSFERATU too much "benefit of the doubt" because it's old, German, and silent. If they extended half that much courtesy to the 1931DRACULA, we would never again here complaints about that film's staginess and slow pace; we would just focus on the virtues: the atmospheric art direction and Lugosi's performance.

[alkytrio666]

Originally posted by hollywoodgothiq
I meant no blanket slur against silent films. I'm always happy to sit down and watch METROPOLIS (or HAXEN or THE GOLEM or THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA).

I just think people give NOSFERATU too much "benefit of the doubt" because it's old, German, and silent. If they extended half that much courtesy to the 1931DRACULA, we would never again here complaints about that film's staginess and slow pace; we would just focus on the virtues: the atmospheric art direction and Lugosi's performance.

Yes, you hit it right on the dot. I only pretend to like Nosferatu because it's German and silent. You know me much too well. :rolleyes:

Listen, pal, just beacause YOU don't like a movie, doesn't mean it isn't great.

[hollywoodgothiq]

Don't know you, don't pretend to.

But I am familiar with a certain kind of thinking that overlooks egregious flaws in old movies because they have an established reputation.

In my posts regarding the Lugosi DRACULA I've admitted I something similar myself, ignoring that film's shortcomings because they are outweighed (for me at least) by its virtues.

The difference is I at least admit the flaws exist. Unfortunately the defenders of NOSFERATu prefer to turn a blind eye to the molassas-like pacing and the anti-Semitic subtext.