Rating: 
Summary: The Greatest Dracula!!
Review: This is a must for your DVD collection. It is Dracula. Ok, we all know the story so here is the rest. This DVD has the version directed by Tod Browning with Bela Lugosi in it as Dracula. There isn't much to say other than its fantastic. If only the production company hadn't cut some of Browning's other erie scenes. This DVD also contains the spanish version which is around 20 minutes longer and almost as equally good but it lacks the charisma of Lugosi. Get it and compare for yourself!! I enjoyed many of the actors better in the spanish version with the exception of Lugosi, Dwight Frye, and the american version of Martin's character. Those are better in the american version than in the spanish version.
Rating: 
Summary: Falls Very Short of Langella
Review: I understand that this version came out before Frank Langella's version, but in all honesty, this version comes nowhere near Frank Langella's. On one hand, the scenery is well done. Lugosi performs the role with some dignity, and the effects are well done. The story moves at a good pace, and as classic Black and White horror goes, this movie does a fairly decent job. But those are the only good things I can really say about this movie. Lugosi does not have Langella's malignant charm. I understand that Langella reused some of Lugosi's lines, but Langella put much more life, drama, and intensity into the same lines. The heroes do not have the superb, delicate, and exquisite interaction of Olivier, Eve, and Pleasence. I understand that it may not be fair to compare this earlier Abraham to Laurence Olivier, but in all honesty, he does not even come close to Laurence Olivier's superb and unsurpassed portrayal of Abraham. In this version, Abraham is not driven to discovering Dracula's identity by the death of his beloved daughter. Unlike Langella's version, there are no intimate moments drawn with shadows. Also, this version lacks the unsurpassed combination of drama, suspense, subtle humor, and pure terror. The end is nowhere near as intense and terrifying. This may be the classic version, and it probably is wrong to ignore it, but if you ask me, Frank Langella and Laurence Olivier beat this by a long shot.
Rating:
Summary: Great DVD!!
Review: I recommend this DVD to anyone who is a Dracula or Lugosi fan. This DVD has the spanish version of Dracula also. The American crew show Lugosi's dracula during the day, then the spanish crew came on the same set with different actors and shot the spanish version at night. I viewed both versions one afternoon. If you watch the Spanish version with English subtitles, it's a true treat! The Spanish version is a lot longer than the English version. I highly recommend this DVD for you.
Rating: 
Summary: Older is better.
Review: I have the older version of this wonderful old horror classic and it it truly great. For some reason the version here has been scored with the modern Phillip Gloss. The modern score is scarier than Bela Lugosi. In fact the modern drumming music is often so loud that the actors can not be heard. How could they ruin this fine old flic? This is very sad indeed!
Rating:
Summary: Does not withstand the test of time...
Review: The definition of a classic is a film that still looks fresh years and years after it was made: like Citizen Kane or Nosferatu. Lugosi's Dracula is one of the most overrated "classics" ever hyped up by the movie industry. While his version of the Count does still evoke some command, his ridiculous accent made Dracula a joke for years until Christopher Lee shattered it in Britain's fine update of the tale in 1958.Certain aspects of the film are admirable. The opening scenes evoke a certain dark mood, but the flat shooting of this Broadway adaptation of the book condemns the entire film to a sequence of tableaus without any powerful, directing dynamic. The vampire's end is lame, caught in a box and basically finished off stage. The sound is terrible. Compare this ossified fossil of a movie to FW Murnau's 1922 silent film Nosferatu--which still evokes a real sense of creepiness in spite of the lack of sound and aging of the footage.
Rating:
Summary: I Actually Rate This Movie A 6! VAMPIRES RULE! : - (=
Review: DRACULA! DRACULA! DRACULA! Dracula is the coolest movie of all time. Bela Lugosi gives a stunning performance. There is no movie like Dracula. He really looks like a vampire. I am a vampire master. I have said this when I rated "Vampires" By: Nancy Garden. I know all about vampires. I know a good vampire story or movie when I see it and THIS IS AWESOME! This movie is sooooooo eerie and so scary! This movie dosen't have blood, guts, gore or extreme violence. This movie has something better. FEAR! No other movie (besides the original House on Haunted Hill) has such scary moments. Bela Lugosi is so freaky! This movie may be in black and white, it may be 69 years old, but IT IS SOOOOOOO COOOOOL! BUY THIS MOVIE! Buy it, buy it, buy it, buy it BUY IT! You have never seen a movie like this. It has horror, suspense, romance, action, and more! You can't go wrong with Bela Lugosi's performance. This is the greatest movie I have ever seen! VAMPIRES RULE! VAMPIRES RULE!
Rating:
Summary: The all-time best vampire flick!
Review: Almost 70 years after its initial release, this version of Bram Stoker's classic novel remains the definitive horror movie, and Bela Lugosi is the definitive Dracula. While many actors played the part of the hypnotic, blood-sucking count, Lugosi is the only performer who truly lived the part. He was known to walk around town in his cape and give interviews while inside a coffin which he kept in his home. This guy was truly dedicated to his art, though that might be putting it much too mildly. This film is actually a recreation of the role Lugosi played on stage in 1927. Purists argue that the movie is more of an adaptation of the stage play than the actual novel. But who cares? When Lugosi is on-screen, that's the only thing that matters. He's such a strong, commanding presence and few actors have ever taken their roles as seriously as Lugosi took this one. In fact, one might say it was his life rather than just another movie role. I get chills every time I see this film even though I know the outcome. Seeing Lugosi prowling around the foggy streets of London after midnight and preying on beautiful and innocent young women for their blood still gives me the same morbid excitement that it gave me the first time I saw Dracula over ten years ago. Truly the best of Universal's monster movies in the '30's, rivaled only by that same year's FRANKENSTEIN starring another horror legend, Boris Karloff.
Rating: 
Summary: The original archetype - you have to know your roots
Review: If only the camera would not pan away everytime Count Dracula got out of his coffin or anything exciting happened, this celebrated film version would hold up a lot better. Still, this book is the primer on vampires for everybody else that comes on down the road, so this is where you want to start. Renefield alone is worth the cost of renting the tape. But if you have not seen Bela establish the model, you cannot appreciate what Anne Rice, Joss Whedon and others have been doing all these years. Check out the Spanish version made at night while Tod Browning was making this one during the day. Screen them back to back.
Rating:
Summary: "There are far worse things awaiting man than death"
Review: I'm not sure why this movie is considered such a classic when it seems silly at best, Bela Lugosi's portrayal of Dracula is almost comical. Then again I was born 49 years after this movie was released. I was expecting something much more sinister and scary. The actor who played Renfield was the most enjoyable character in the film, he did a fine job as a psychopath. I'm just guessing that for every scene with Dracula in it some short person stood directly in front of him shining two small flashlights under his eyes. I couldn't help but laugh when the opossum appeared (my only theory is that it was supposed to represent a giant rat) but I was almost crying when the armadillos were shown! The image of Dracula that Lugosi has made the stereotype of vampirism is probably the only endearing quality in this film. The Max Schreck portrayal of Dracula in the 1922 Nosferatu was much more engrossing and frightening, and that was without sound! This is a must see for Horror fans if not just to make your own judgement call. The dialogue and the Wallachian accent of Lugosi make this enjoyable, but scary? Not by a longshot.
Rating:
Summary: The VHS sounds better than the DVD ...
Review: ... if you like the new Philip Glass/Kronos Quartet music that is! I do, and recently purchased the DVD for it's wonderful option of the Spanish version, the 'standard' version, but also for the promise of the "CD-quality sound". In the latter only was I disappointed. The VHS sounds better. I verified this to myself through back & forth switching between the two versions through varying scenes in the early part of the film -- a VHS is less useful for forwarding to a precise place in the film for comparisons. Specifically the VHS appears to have the music louder & more 'forward' resulting in an appreciably more beautiful string tone. It also seems as if when mastering the VHS the film's audio track was muted at times when there was no spoken dialogue, again resulting in increased clarity. This does not seem to be the case with the DVD, which appears to add the Glass music on top the original noisy audio track. Does anyone else share this perception/observation? My next step is to check with someone at Universal Studios. If I'm correct it is the only 'flaw' in the otherwise outstanding DVD production -- but a not insignificant one, when you consider that a VHS analogue tape in a Hi-FI VCR should NOT sound better than a modern DVD -- but it does!
|
