Review of Dracula

Dracula (1931)
5/10
Strictly for fans of old time horror
30 August 2003
This is yet another of those dreary classic films which people desperately WANT to love for purely sentimental reasons. Certainly, it cannot be denied its place in Hollywood history. But it needs to be evaluated for what it is - a fairly unprepossessing example of the genre.

It's a sad comment on any sound movie to say that it compares unfavorably to an earlier silent version but that's the undeniable truth in this case.

In 1922 director F.W. Marnau filmed the first screen adaption of Bram Stoker's "Dracula" in Bavaria under the title of "Nosferatu". With this landmark production Marnau created an extremely chilling piece of cinema which contained some genuinely spooky images. Nine years later Hollywood sanitized the whole concept and came out with Lugosi's painfully slow and almost comical remake.

Today, this sleepy clunker is, in all honesty, only of interest as an historical curiosity. It moves along with all the pace of a funeral procession (appropriately enough). The dialogue regularly stops for long periods and with nothing much happening on the screen to fill the void you'll find yourself glancing over at the video shelf to consider other options.

The almost total lack of incidental music throughout the picture also doesn't help the situation. Bela pulls his usual collection of rather idiotic facial expressions most of which will lead you to believe that he's just spotted something nasty on the carpet.

As far as being a viable source of entertainment is concerned, it's unlikely that this movie will hold much appeal for anyone other than the most perservering of old time horror fans .
27 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed