I just want to start out by saying that I am not usually an enthusiast for old black and white movies, but ever since I saw It's A Wonderful Life many years ago, I began to dabble into some of the classics. That movie changed my views on old movies, as a child I looked down on their colorless images and unfortunately lost sight of the movies themselves. I was incredibly blown away by the stories in some of those classic movies once I finally gave into the colorless images that so often clouded my judgement. Now onto Dracula....
I enjoy Halloween to a point. I enjoy the feeling of the fall season, and the idea of what Halloween represents for children. As a child, I've enjoyed my fair share of Nightmare On Elm Street and Friday the 13th movies. My sister and I rented hundreds of horror movies from our old video store, we were almost obsessed with them. But, as of late I have lost the enjoyment for horror movies, that is until I saw the old 1931 Dracula with Bela Lugosi. Lugosi brilliantly performs the Dracula that so many others have mimicked time and time again. He was creepy, had that legendary Dracula stare and his voice was brilliant for the old Transylvanian vampire.
These are some of the negatives (they really aren't negatives), and remember, these are only my opinions. These did not ruin the movie in any way for me because of it's age and the technology that was limited to their time. I always find it odd watching an old movie and noticing there is no film score. It makes the movie feel so empty. The good news or bad news depending on how you feel about it is that Universal added a Philip Glass film score to the film that you can turn on or off in the menu as an added bonus. I enjoyed watching the original film as it was intended, with no film score, and then checking out how it would have been if there was a film score added to the movie. Not necessarily a negative, but something interesting anyways. The only other thing I noticed that could be a negative was the quality of the film's blurriness in some scenes, and how the lighting would get dim and then brighter in certain scenes, but again, it is from 1931 and I would not have expected too much more than what I saw, so really it isn't a negative for me.
Now onto the positives, I realize I neutralized my negatives by explaining why they aren't really negatives, but honestly, it's the 1931 classic Dracula movie. It is from 1931 and the movie itself has held up great in the 81 years it has survived. This movie should live on as one of the great classic horror movies, although not scary in todays standards since we have become so desensitized. But it has held up well with its creepiness factor. The acting of Lugosi, and his great voice has made Dracula a legend in the horror film world. Dwight Frye's rendition of Renfield, who also had a great creepiness to him, was also done very well, he had to play two parts, and he pulled it off brilliantly (Renfield and Renfield under Dracula's influence). Like any typical old black and white movie, there is usually a feeling of emptiness left by the lack of a film score, the acting definitely made up for the emptiness in the film. Anytime they would show the creepy gaze of Dracula, or even Renfield for that matter, it almost made it even creepier to not have the music. The silence added to it's creepiness.
To summarize this film is a classic, and hopefully will stay that way for hundreds of years like the great music of Beethoven and Mozart, I hope this film lives on forever. It will be a great watch for me and my family every Halloween, to add to our growing catalogue of great movies. If you are looking for a horror movie that will scare you, this movie probably won't do that. But, it will leave you appreciating what a "real" horror movie is, and how the actors really helped solidify the characters we still talk about and love today. Dracula is the kind of movie you watch to be entertained if you enjoy classic movies. The story itself will always be a classic, and since there are so many versions of this great story, this movie stands out to me as the beginning of its film heritage (even though Nosferatu was filmed in 1922). And what a great beginning it was. Universal did a great job restoring this 81 year old film, and adding some great features to this classic. Again, I am not familiar with any of the Dracula releases, some of these features could have been carried over from them, but I still liked the variety of features there were to choose from. I can't wait to dive into the other Universal Classic Monster Movies.
Here is my breakdown:
Video: 3/5 (It is probably in the best shape it could be in for an 81 year old movie.)
Audio: 4/5 (Although there was no film score, there was crisp dialogue. The option to add a film score was a pretty cool feature)
Acting: 5/5 (It's awfully hard to overlook Lugosi's Dracula, because of how brilliant he was, but the supporting cast did a great job as well, keeping the movie entertaining.)
Bonus Features: 4/5 (There can always be more, but in my humble opinion what was there was very well done, and added to the movie significantly)
Overall: 4/5 (Legendary status for a reason 81 years later.)
No comments:
Post a Comment