Rating: 
Summary: A DVD that NEEDS to be back in print!
Review: I think this is the best Dracula film made in sound, period. It's certainly more gothic and creepier than newer, more over-the-top violent remakes like Bram Stoker's Dracula -- heck, Christopher Lee's first Dracula movie is really the only other sound version that matches this one in my view.
Lugosi's Dracula has a genuine European gentility only matched by Lee's Dracula. As much as some have made fun of Lugosi's intonations and accent, I've felt that they actually add quite a bit to the role and in addition to his facial expression have sealed him as the real deal as far as Dracula is concerned.
Fans of older silent German expressionist films will also appreciate the lighting and eeriness in this and other Universal horror films. Really, in all honesty,I've felt that the lighting effects and atmosphere in many B & W films of the 30s and 40s is BETTER than what's managed today in full color!
That said, WHY are the black and white Universal horror films ALL OUT OF PRINT? This just doesn't make sense! Honestly, I managed to snag 4 films before they disappeared and I would have loved to collect the further screen adventures of Karloff, Lugosi, AND Chaney (who I completely missed out on).
It's amazing that Universal let these films go out-of-print. They're much loved by people, and we should be able to see them on DVD anytime we want and at more times in the year than just Halloween. Oh, it's nice AMC and TCM are showing the films now, but I'm at the mercy of their scheduling and availability of tapes and DVDs (if they have them) at the local videostore! Universal is BLOWING it as far as die-hard fan collectors of these films are concerned by limiting their availability. These should be back in print, ASAP!
I can't for the life of me understand WHY they let the films go out of print and WHY there was no major Disney-like announcement to the fact that Universal let the films' DVD print runs end.
Rating: 
Summary: Bela Was The Epitome Of Old European Aristocratic Style
Review: As far as three generations of horror fans are concerned, Bela Lugosi was "Dracula." The original talkie version of "Dracula" (1931) is a showcase of Bela's formidible acting skills and powerful stage presence. Even though he learned much of his dialogue phonetically, his mannerisms and intonations were right on target. Not only in "Dracula," but in virtually all his movies whenever he enters a scene it becomes his---no matter who his co-stars may be. Most horror fans know the tale of how Lugosi turned down the role of "Frankenstein" because he believed such a made-up, non-talking role was beneath his aristocratic bearing and thespian abilities. To a certain degree, Bela was correct. The Frankenstein monster as originally concieved for film by director Robert Florey was a lumbering, grunting monstrousity that did seem beneath the regal Lugosi's dignity. But it was poor timing on Bela's part to assert his ego. In his stead, an unknown British truck driver-turned-actor named William Henry Pratt assumed the role and went on to great fame as "Boris Karloff." Karloff essayed the role of the monster despite the fact that he and newly assigned director James Whale never hit it off. On the other hand, Universal never forgave Bela for turning down the role and for asserting his fiery independence. Bela continued with Universal Studios through the mid-1930s and made some genuine classics like "Murders In The Rue Morgue (1932)," "The Black Cat (1933)," "The Raven (1934)," and "The Invisible Ray (1936)," the latter three with Karloff as his co-star. He even made the cult classic "White Zombie" for the Halpern Brothers in 1932. But by the late 1930s Karloff had surpassed Lugosi as the horror meister, as the former actor's superior language skills enabled him to assume more and better roles from Universal as well as from other studios. Conversely, Lugosi began a string of poverty row films; and despite a few great performances like "The Human Monster" in 1939, Lugosi was forced to take scripts that were indeed beneath his talent and his dignity. Late in 1939, however, the great director Rowland Lee felt sorry for Bela and built up an otherwise secondary role for Bela in "Son of Frankenstein" as the deranged hunchback "Igor." Lee's faith in Bela was well rewarded as the great European stage actor turned in a remarkable performance that literally stole the show from Basil Rathbone, Boris Karloff, and Lionel Atwill. Lugosi's "Igor" is now considered, like his "Dracula," one of the immortal horror characters of all time. So good, in fact, was Bela's performance that when Universal decided to do another "Frankenstein" sequel called "Ghost of Frankenstein" in 1942, Bela's "Igor" was the centerpiece of the film. Despite this welcome respite, Bela again returned to lesser roles as he still had not mastered the English language even as late as two decades after his arrival in America. In part, this was Bela's own fault since he socialized almost exclusively with fellow Hungarian-Americans like Victor Varconi, Michael Curtiz, and Paul Lucas. His linguistic limitations stereotyped him in mad scientist roles in which his Central European accent fit well. But Bela's choices of roles were far more restricted than those of Karloff. By the late 1940s Bela was again relegated to poverty row productions, and his addiction to painkillers from the early 1940s on (originally prescribed for a painful back injury) only made matters worse. As the 1950s rolled around he was forced to take B movie roles for miserly financial remuneration, and after an emaciated Lugosi courageously spent time in a drug rehabilitation clinic, he died in 1956 literally penniless. Ironically, Bela's legend grew in leaps and bounds after his death to the point where today his memorabilia outsells that of his rival Karloff by two to one. Critics now unanimously agree that Bela's stage presence was far superior to that of Karloff; and while Karloff's comfortability with the English language enabled him to play a more eclectic range of characters, Lugosi more than held his own despite the language barrier. Bela's star is firmly ensconced at the forefront of the Horror Hall of Fame right next to that of Boris.
Rating: 
Summary: Universal made some great films.This is not one of them !
Review: This is yet another classic example of people kidding themselves that an old and HIGHLY over rated film is a "Masterpiece" for purely sentimental reasons .Fans of the genre desperately WANT to love this dreary old clunker because they feel some sort of misplaced and undeserved reverence for it . The harsh reality , however , is that this movie will put the overwhelming majority of contemporary viewers to sleep in record time . In short , it offers about as much entertainment value as a public reading of your next door neighbour's light bill . The absurdly dated dialogue regularly stops for long periods and with nothing particularly interesting happening on the screen the whole thing doesn't exactly encourage prolonged concentration . .Bela pulls his usual array of idiotic facial expressions which will make you think that he's just spotted something nasty on the carpet and the almost total lack of incidental music throughout the picture does little to ease the pain . It's a sad comment on any sound movie to say that it compares unfavourably to a previous silent version but that's the undeniable truth in this case . Nine years earlier , the Director F.W. Marnau made "Nosferatu" in Bavaria . When stacked up against this wonky offering there is simply no comparison. Universal sanitized Marnau's confronting and genuinely spooky production to churn out Lugosi's childlike snooze fest with unfortunate results . Sadly , "Dracula '31" has long since joined the ranks of Hollywood's "Living Dead" along with all the other bloodless corpses which got a thorough "Going Over' at the hands of the venerable Count. I'm not knocking Bela . He had plenty of style and he delivers his lines with considerable panache but the studio let him down BADLY . In the end , however, he proved to be a "One Trick Pony" . Universal was a GREAT organization and it made some GREAT films. This is not one of them. Keep moving !
Rating:
Summary: A Heck of a Movie.
Review: I really enjoyed this film. I'm reading the book right now.(If you like the movie, you'll like the book)People are right- the movie doesn't go on the exact same story as the book. It doesn't matter. This movie is one that will always be one of my favorites. There are so many lines that I remember so often. It was really a masterful way that they put together the scenes. The absence of music after the beginning credits really sets a deathly tone over the whole thing.The thing that most amazed me is that this movie is so advanced as far as movies went over 70 years ago! Yes, the bats on strings are a little cheesy; but I assure you you'll get off the couch and for weeks say,"Listen to them:children of the night. What music THEY make."
You'll enjoy this one.
Rating:
Summary: Awful music, ruins the whole movie.
Review: I remember viewing this when I was a child and as an adult. I always felt the power of the movie rests with the silence of the scenes. This version with the awful, corny music by Philip Glass ruins the whole atmosphere and acting. I am sending this crummy video back and not because it is too old in terms of the special effects we see in many of the modern movies. It's that horrible accompanying music. I have never, ever returned any item ordered from Amazon.com but this will be the first. I do not even have the receipt because I thought I would be viewing the film as it was when I was a child. Amazon.com, you can keep my money. I only hope I can find this version of Dracula minus that dopey Philip Glass "music." I certainly will try to find the original version without that [bad] music. It's horrible. If anyone out there knows of one, please let me know.
Rating:
Summary: Why are the monster films out of stock
Review: I just wanted to say as most of you already know this movie is a classic in every way, shape, and from, but why are all the universal monster films out of stock on DVD? They need to re-release them. I only had the chance to buy Dracula. It's a real shame, cause it's a real good DVD with ALOT of nice bonus features! They REALLY need to get it back in stock ASAP!
Rating: 
Summary: This is a bad movie
Review: This is quite possibly the most overated film of all time. It is not a good movie. Keeping in mind the time in which it was made, it is still bad compared to other movies of the time. The acting is bad, it doesn't even come close to following the book (but then again, what Dracula movie does?), and the camera work is extremely shoddy. The only plus of this movie is that there is a pretty gloom and creepy atmosphere to it. But the fact that this version is so highly touted and the Coppola's version, although far from perfect, is so bashed is a testament to how bad film critics are at thier job. Very dissapointing movie.
Rating:
Summary: The Grand-daddy of them all!
Review: Okay, we're not talking about many special effects here, because this is an old classic film, and it's also horror. Lugosi was a craftsman at this kind of thing, and you need to watch the film with the year 1931 in mind, because this movie is about the mind. And you should read the book, too, because the movie takes its cue from the book. I saw this in black and white, and its images are unforgettable. The stares, the eyes of Lugosi, the victims, and the haunting environment, as well as the "Transylvanian" accent are sometimes humorous, but again...that's how they made these kind of movies back then. All in all, this is a lot of fun, and you won't lose any sleep because of it. Recommended with a smile.
Rating:
Summary: Dracula Scores on Moody Scenes & Great Lines
Review: For those modern audiences who have seen Dracula only in the many versions following Bela Lugosi's original interpretation back in 1931, they have been conditioned to focus more on what the Count does than on why he does it. These reincarnations of the celluloid vampire are rife with hammy acting, multiple vampires, and the quick shock cinematography. To see the first DRACULA is a lesson on how to scare an audience more with mood than with gory special effects. Director Tod Browning plucked Bela Lugosi from the stage to reprise Lugosi's role based on the Bram Stoker novel. Lon Chaney was the original choice, but his unexpected death opened the door for the Hungarian born Lugosi, who rich accent layered his scenes with an ever present undertow of menace. The lack of a musical score for nearly all the film requires the audience to focus on the dark sets that begin in the count's castle in Transylvania, then later on the ship that brings him to England, and finally culminates on the dreary streets of a London that emphasized a formless horror. DRACULA is a film of memorable lines as well. When Renfield (Dwight Frye) tells the count that he fears the howling of the wolves, Lugosi intones, 'Ah, the children of the night. What music they make.' Shortly afterwards, Lugosi turns down a glass of sherry with, 'I never drink (pause) wine.' Such lines as these today could only be played in a campy context, but coming from Lugosi's lips, they resonate with the chilling menace that director Browning clearly intended. Lugosi was capably backed up by Dwight Frye, who invested his role as Dracula's mad assistant with a maniacal weirdness that lingers even after seven decades. Helen Chandler as Mina comes across as a victim who seems fascinated by the count even as she clearly recognizes his evil. It is her inner tug that pulls her first one way than another that involves the audience in deciding just where does victimhood ends and willingness begins. As I watched Mina's matamorphosis from victim to violator, I was reminded on a similar change that Patty Hearst went through fifty years later as a kidnap victim of the Symbionese Liberation Army. The truly outstanding films have the capacity to yank you out of your seat, place you into the action on the screen, and force you to recognize that what you see from the safety of your chair could also happen either to you or to someone else you know. DRACULA is one such great film.
Rating:
Summary: Dwight Frye steals the show!
Review: For the age of this film, the acting is really quite good. Despite some great preformances by Bela Legosi(Dracula) and Edward Van Sloan (Van Helsing) the mad man played by Dwight Frye(Renfield) is the best part. Just like wine is refined by age so is this film, a must have!
|
