Quote:
Originally Posted by metternich1815
If you are talking about the Dracula from 1931, then I could not disagree more. I loved that film and have ever since I was young. It is easily my favorite Classic Universal horror film. Nosferatu is good, but Dracula (1931) is better, in my opinion. I would actually say that it is my second favorite vampire movie of all time.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadyJ
Dracula is stagy and slow, even by the standards of its time. ... No offense, but I think the respect for Dracula is generally unwarranted and rests solely on Lugosi's great performance. Of the Universal horror films, it is my least favorite.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by metternich1815
Like I mentioned, I do not think the respect for Dracula is unwarranted in any way. I did not realize there was any hate for the film. I love Freaks as well as many of the Universal films, but Dracula is my favorite horror film pre 1950s, easy. I thought the film was excellent in many ways, not just due to Lugosi's performance. I still regularly revisited it and find it quite interesting.
|
Let me say upfront, I far from hate Dracula, I really like it. I do happen to agree with ShadyJ that it is relatively stagey and slow. Which isn't surprising because much of it was recreated from it's stage play script, play sets, and blocking/performance. The framing and editing bother me in spots too, such as the ending scenes in the crypts. The worst aspect of Dracula is the sound. Perhaps I've just heard bad copies, but the hiss to voice volume ratio is really bad, and many of the actors voice scenes sound chalky, some spoken too fast, some hard to understand.
The sets, such as the opening scenes inside Dracula's castle, are fantastic. I don't think anyone has done a better performance of Dracula than Bela's. Still, despite being a silent film, I think Nosferatu created a more fighting film version.