Dracula (1931)

“This is very old wine.  I hope you like it.”  13 July 2021

Is there any reason to do a plot summary for Dracula?  Any person with even a passing interest in horror or classic films is aware of the basic story.  So instead, I’ll start this by saying I understand and fully appreciate Dracula’s place in film history.  Whether it’s the creepy castle, the sense of dread and death in the film’s atmosphere, or Lugosi’s most iconic role, Dracula is a special film and definitely worth seeing.

Having said all that, Dracula has never been a particular favorite of mine.  I find much of the film terribly stage-bound, complete with an overly exaggerated and dramatic acting style that doesn’t appeal to me.  Director Tod Browning’s “plant and shoot” method of filmmaking doesn’t help matters.  Things are horribly stagnant.  And much of the film moves at a snail’s pace.  Please note - I realize that most of my complaints are based on the film’s age and the technology and filming techniques used at the time.  Still, I can’t help it if I don’t find it as entertaining as other movies from the period (see Frankenstein, M, or even the Spanish language Dracula for examples of films from 1931 that I enjoy).  It may be blasphemous to some, but to me, Dracula is one of the best (or worst) examples of a dated film I can think of.  As for the Dracula character, I much prefer the noirish sequel Son of Dracula (1943) or Hammer’s Horror of Dracula (1958) with the decidedly more animated Christopher Lee in the title role.  

As I’ve said a number of times, entertainment is the primary driver behind my ratings.  Based on all of the issues I have with Dracula, I can’t in all honesty rate it higher than a very average 5/10.   

5/10