From the far reaches of the Milky Way Galaxy, It's Retro Nerd Girl with a film review for you.
Today I'll be reviewing the movie Dracula released in 1979.
Starring:
Frank Langella, Laurence Olivier, Donald Pleasence
Directed by:
John Badham
Genre:
Horror, Romance
Rating:
R
Budget:
$12,164,000 (estimated)
IMDb Rating is currently:
6.4
The Synopsis is:
In 1913 Dracula comes to a Gothic town and sets his sights the aristocrat, Lucy, who is engaged to Jonathan Harker and so the eternal struggle for Dracula continues.
Pacing:
At 1 hour and 49 minutes, it works for me. It doesn’t just keep you engaged, but the way the film is shot, your eyes keep looking for things you might have missed.
Story:
This is an adaptation of Bram Stoker's book Dracula released in 1897. The film departs from the book in several ways, but the most common change is the switching of the names of the main female characters, Lucy and Mina.
The film follows the 1927 theatrical play, which combined Mina Harker and Lucy Westenra into a single character (named Lucy); and omitted the suitors for the original Lucy.
The producer of the film, Walter Mirisch saw the revived, Broadway theatrical production and was so enchanted with what Frank Langella did with the character of Count Dracula and decided to make the film with Frank in it.
The film met with low box office numbers as this was one of seven vampire films released in 1979,
- Graf Dracula in Oberbayern
- Love at First Bite
- Nocturna
- Nosferatu the Vampyre
- Salem's Lot
- Thirst
- And, Vlad Tepes
Audiences may have been burnt out on the vampire theme to notice this unconventional version of the tale at that particular time. These things have to be timed just perfectly.
However for those of us who were mesmerized by the film, we never forgot.
Challenge:
I suppose as always, the big bad vampire bat is the villain here, Count Dracula, but I always seem to side with him, even in the more scarier versions.
Indeed he is violent, but his violence is a necessity in his eyes, and blood is for sustenance, not a gorging feast to get drunk on humanity’s fear, like Nosferatu, where Count Olaf nearly offs the whole town.
Besides being incredibly dangerous, he has a remarkably romantic charm that makes him likeable.
In this film, he is seeking to expand his reach in the world of high society seeking the company of people who are witty and daring.
The sickly Mina Van Helsing is his first victim as she is called to him when he arrives in the area, being the lone survivor of a shipwreck. He charms the locals with his aristocratic demeanor performing a bit of hypnosis on Mina with a slight movements of his hands and capturing a glimpse of a more interesting prize, Lucy Seward as she is strong willed, which excites him.
He’s lonely, dark, and mysteriously cunning, but he is also very passionate about life and admires the living. And I do believe that is why he bites Mina in a different way than he bites Lucy.
When he chooses Mina as his first victim, he is simply carrying out his lust for blood as being a vampire dictates. She is weak and sickly, such an easy prey, but the perfect vehicle to get his foot in the door.
When he bites Lucy he is choosing her as his bride and as his life partner, so he allows her to drink his blood sharing a part of himself with her.
Empathy:
The empathy portion is really hard for me when it comes to Dracula films because, I always really want Dracula to win. Then I have to face the fact that he is a killer and these guys are just trying to get some justice for poor Mina’s horrible death, and save the life of someone they love.
The Jonathan Harker in this film is probably the most likeable version of the character I have ever seen, because he’s got guts and valor. I usually don’t like that character very much, because he was designed not to really pose a great threat to Dracula, but act as a support for Van Helsing. In this film, you actually buy the relationship between Jonathan and Lucy. He looks visibly angry and jealous of Dracula and that emotional touch really works to make his character enjoyable.
The most important good guy was of course Professor Abraham Van Helsing, which is a marvelous character in any version to me because he is rich with information and gives the audience the most insight about what Dracula is doing and how his bite affects his victims.
In this version, more than any other, it is through Van Helsing you feel the devastation of Dracula's actions as he not only lends his professional medical expertise to figure things out, but for this Van Helsing, this is deeply personal.
Dracula is a monster in his eyes, that has taken his precious daughter, Mina away from him. The stakes are much higher for Van Helsing. This is an excellent motivation for his character to get fanatical about destroying him.
Lucy is somewhere between the obvious states of good and evil. She is much stronger than any of the brides previously on screen for Dracula. Lucy not only falls in love with Dracula, she protects him and stands up for him, the way I’ve never heard anyone do. It is through her words that you finally get to understand what is lovable about Dracula. She vehemently believes that he is good and noble man and not a monster. In an effort to protect him, she manifests her strength to a physical plane when it takes 3 men to subdue her.
Dr. Seward, Lucy’s father is a supporting character for the others to facilitate access to various buildings and the surroundings.
Mina is unfortunately the sacrificial lamb here, but what happens to her defines the roles the other characters are going to play in the rest of the story. Dr. Seaward, Professor Van Helsing and Jonathan Harker, bond in a strange brotherhood vowed to stop Dracula after seeing Mina transformed so horribly into a monster, having to violently kill her and dispose of her remains.
Lucy is affected by Mina’s death, because at the time she considers her to be a sister bound by Dracula’s power. When the group of men kill Mina and dismember her, Lucy considers the men her enemies. If she had any loyalties to her human life, in that instant it was demolished.
Technical:
The Gothic style of this film was impeccable. The interior of Dracula's home, Carfax Abby, was exquisite, with bat statues, glorious spiderwebs, candles galore and it had a wonderful ancient whimsy about it, like an elaborate tomb. The detail put into the set design was outrageous. It was so beautifully done with so much love for the project. Each scene is a work of art.
Dracula’s balcony was just wonderful. It looked like someplace in a secluded fairy tale forest from a dream. Just gorgeous.
The cinematography was incredibly stunning capturing the natural wonder of great estates, landscapes and the story elements in a way that pays homage to much older black and white horror films. In fact, director John Badham wanted to shoot the film in black and white but that idea was rejected from Universal Studios.
However, he found a workaround, with the film’s color grading which was just as brilliant as it had a way of making the film look black and white. The desaturated colors wonderfully set a rich Gothic mood throughout.
The special effects were sometimes dated, and then sometimes remarkable. It couldn’t be more obvious in the different makeup technique used for the two brides of Dracula.
Even though horrifying, Mina’s vamped look resembled many of the b movie makeup effects. She is only dead for a day and she looks as if she has been rotting for weeks. However, Lucy’s vamped look was hauntingly beautiful so she can entice victims if need be. And maybe that was a statement about the way Dracula bites the two women differently. Mina is discarded and made to look hideous. Lucy was his chosen bride who drank his blood and was probably given many of his powers of illusion.
One of the most talked about dated effects in the film was the love scene between Count Dracula and Lucy. In the middle of it, there is a strange light show that appears with the use of laser lights. It is something that was used in many live shows and music videos for an interesting effect.
I didn’t mind it, but many people were put off by the scene.
However it was explained by director, John Badham in the documentary, The Revamping of Dracula, to be the proceedings of a vampire wedding between the two characters.
What? Well, after learning that, it became one of most beautiful moments in the for me, because such a thing would be otherworldly as it is presented in the film. As well, it is the only place in the film where there is a bold saturation of color.
There is a strange goof in the film where Van Helsing is searching for the un-dead Mina underground and he sees her reflection in a deep puddle of water. It is later creatively explained by Badham in the same documentary, that prior to the reflection, there was none, until Van Helsing's cross fell into the puddle, thus making the water, holy water, which indeed casts reflections on all things.
I thought that was a very clever contrivance and I bought it.
Performances:
Frank Langella was the natural choice to play the title character Dracula because the film was conceived during his performance in the Broadway revival in 1977.
He made sure not to play the role as it was iconically presented by Bela Lugosi. He also didn’t want to play it like Christopher Lee. He made the character, irresistibly romantic and his own.
On a side note, actor Raul Julia took on the role in the play after Frank left in 1978. Golly gee willikers!
Frank Langella, like the actor, Bela Lugosi, never wore fangs for the role of Dracula, which was one of two stipulations that he insisted upon when accepting the role. The second was that he would not do any commercial promotions as Dracula. Smart man. He was determined not to stifle his potential as an actor. In fact, he has never played the role again.
I didn’t miss the fangs even though they are quite the signature of the vampire’s image. Not wearing fangs really added a sophistication to the character, keeping him pure in a way. When he dives into a neck, you know what he’s doing. I love that simplistic approach.
Frank Langella suffers from an eye condition, which causes one's eyes to move involuntarily. It may seem as a disadvantage as an actor, but in this intense role his wavering stare was another layer to allow his character to emote depth and charisma. It was an integral part of the performance. Along with his smooth velvety voice and his commanding body language. He uses his whole self to play Count Dracula. And for me, this is one of the best portrayals of the character.
Donald Pleasence was notorious for using prop candy and food as his chance to create more material for his character. This proved effective as many of his scenes were kept in the film, just to preserve the continuity. However, those moments were brilliantly establishing the tone for his nervous character. What a brilliant performance.
Sir, Laurence Olivier playing the role of Professor Van Helsing was fantastic for me being that I am such a fan of his work. I loved his subtle creative touch on this film giving Van Helsing an accent.
Frank Langella has said that at the time he was ill with a disease that made him very easy to bleed during the filming and points out how ironic that he was in a film that centered around blood. He plays the role with a natural weakness in his condition, but it also helped to show how weak Van Helsing was as a human being in comparison to Dracula. It also emphasized that his intellect would defeat the vampire.
Kate Nelligan was quite good as Lucy, bringing a new dimension to Dracula’s bride, I had not seen before in other performances of the character. Her deep voice and timeless beauty, also helps to show her sophistication and maturity at so young of age that I understand why Dracula would find her character fascinating and choose her above all others. Imagine being a young actress having to hit Sir Laurence Olivier in a scene? She does it genuinely and you believe the power of her performance.
Best:
Some of the effects such as Dracula walking up and down the walls of buildings. Wow, that was cool and well done, when he just looks in the camera's direction for a few seconds. It’s thrilling.
The score by John Williams sends chills and thrills through the fabric of each scene. It’s both mysterious, sad, and grand when it needs to be. It enhances the moments when his work it is presented. He just knew how to get those violins going at the very right moment to take your breath away.
And for me the romance between Dracula and Lucy is one of the most incredible attributes of the film for me. Wow, did they really light up the screen together. And the vampire wedding scene is my favorite.
Wish List:
I wish the character of Renfield had a more of a visible descent into madness. What if he was an aristocrat before Dracula’s arrival and then a raving lunatic who has lost everything to Dracula, by the end. Because Renfield has always been the precautionary tale character of what happens when men are seduced by greed, first for money and then for lives to give to the master.
In this film, his presence doesn't really hold much weight other than to demonstrate that Dracula is dangerous.
The ending:
The ending was great. When I first watched the ending, I was a child and I didn’t understand it, but now I have a different understanding of it. It left a lot unsaid and it leaves you wondering, which is the best way to end a wonderful story like this.
Lucy and Dracula may meet again one day.
There is a scene though, that I didn’t notice before where Dracula and Lucy talk about him going away and meeting up again one day when the air has cleared. He says, “you must go on a bit longer as a creature of the sun. Only until we have left behind those who would destroy us. Then you will join me on a higher plane...
Enjoyment:
I love his film. It's just as simple as that. It’s romantic and sophisticated, it just sweeps you up into the love story of Dracula and Lucy.
I saw this in the theaters when I was a kid at 9 years old and loved it ever since. It feeds into the female fantasy of being taken over by love. Frank Langella’s version of Dracula is the Don Juan of vampires. But I also hear many guys state how much they love this version of a more romantic Dracula and I think that the appeal of this Dracula is that he is more of a man who can love deeply than a supernatural beast. His thirst is not just for blood, but for love and life.
I am so glad so many people still remember this film fondly, because to me, it is one of the best modern adaptations of the book Bram Stoker’s Dracula and one of my favorite vampire films.
My Rating:
9.2
That sums up my review. I hope you liked it. This is Retro Nerd Girl signing off! Take care movie lovers! I'm off to the next review!
If you enjoy my content and want me to continue you can help at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/retronerdgirl
Follow Retro Nerd Girl on twitter: https://twitter.com/Retro_Nerd_Girl
Like Retro Nerd Girl on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/retronerdgirl
No comments:
Post a Comment