Lugosi's Dracula

Last year (or the year before. I can't remember right now) it was Karloff's Frankenstein for the first time. This year it's Béla Lugosi in Dracula. In all these years, I had never seen either. And I thought it was high time I saw them both.

Much like Basil Rathbone's The Hound of the Baskervilles, you can criticize the 1931 Dracula for both the changes made to the story as well as the stereotypes it created for the character for many years to come. Like the long black cape and the heavy accent which nearly every actor (with a few exceptions) has been imitating when they don the fangs.

But in Lugosi's case, the accent is genuine which makes his portrayal more believable than someone trying to fake it.

And much like Rathbone's Hound, it's a classic for a reason. And a great deal of that is due to lead actor.

For those who are into fast-paced gorefests, you will find this film (much like many films of that era) to be very slow and sleepy. Even though the original novel is even slower and sleepier.

And another thing that makes it strange to watch is apart from the suite from Swan Lake during the opening credits, there is no incidental music throughout the movie. For people who have not watched a silent movie or any old movies, they might find this to be a bit strange to watch at first. But keep in mind, Dracula came out when talking pictures were still a new art form.

Another thing that makes the film great to watch is the atmosphere. There's something about black and white movies that helps us to forgive some of the less than spectacular. But the set design for both Dracula's castle and the abbey are fantastic. The spider webs, the long sweeping staircases. The armadillo's.

Yeah, you'd have to watch the film for that one. But I've seen it and I can't make sense of it. Although, it seems to fit in a strange David Lynch sort of way.

And even the lack of music adds to the tension of scenes. We don't have incidental music following us in real life, so this lack of music does make Lugosi's Count Dracula seem like vampires could be real and this could be happening.

Although, if you're someone who would get somewhat itchy watching a film without any music, there is an option on some of the Dracula releases where you can watch the film with a score by Philip Glass.

I prefer the bare bones version myself.

What I don't like is how they take the mystery out of the character at the beginning of the film. But then again, we all know Dracula is a vampire. It's sort of like most of us know Bruce Wayne's parents are going to get shot and he's going to become Batman.

But there is something about slowly peeling the onion away. Jess Franco's Dracula does that to an extent when they introduce Christopher Lee at the beginning. We suspect that it's the Count picking up Harker at the Borgo Pass. But his face is covered, so we are left with that mystery.

We really do not get to see Dracula until he opens the front door to his castle. And like I said, most of us know the story of Dracula backwards and front. But it does add a level of mystery to add that.

Franco's adaptation is another movie I feel has excellent parts and parts that really fall flat. But much like the Lugosi film, it has a strong lead actor with Christopher Lee as the Count.

Nevertheless, I was very happy to finally get the opportunity to watch both. I find myself liking Lugosi's Dracula a bit more than Karloff's Frankenstein. Both are excellent films and both have great actors anchoring the film. But Lugosi's wins out because of it's set design and atmosphere.

For those of you who do pen and ink art, it'll make you want to race to the drawing board and break out your pens.