The session: "Bring Your Own Movie Month"
As in past years, we each take turns bring a movie and presenting it.
Week 2 (Dave): Dracula (1931)
Directed by Tod Browning
My Level of Prior Knowledge
I was aware of this movie's existence, and of much of the plot points. But had never seen it.
Plot:
A mysterious Transylvanian nobleman, Count Dracula, travels to England, where he begins to prey on the blood of young women and is pursued by Professor Van Helsing, who suspects his true identity. As Dracula’s influence spreads, Van Helsing races to stop the vampire before he claims more victims.
Reaction and Other Folderol:
This, the first Dracula talkie, set the model -- both for portrayals of the titular vampire and for Bela Lugosi characters. Lugosi's vampire is a well-dressed, well-groomed, polite man of manners. The consummate gentleman, if you'll forgive the whole neck-biting thing. And that has been the dominant portrayal of Dracula since then. As for Bela Lugosi, the Dracula role defined and typecast him. I'm thinking, for example, of his role in 1932's White Zombie. His character, Legendre, was very clearly influenced by Dracula.
Related to that, one of the most interesting things about seeing this was comparing it to Nosferatu -- the 1922 silent film that was based on the same material. The vampire in the 1922 film couldn't have been presented more differently. He was gangly, and gaunt -- appearing barely human. He had sunken eyes, pointed ears and rat-like teeth. His arms and hands were evocative of spiders. It was a huge leap to the suave gentleman of Dracula. Some of the aspects of the early part of the story bear strong similarities to Nosferatu, though the resemblance is much weaker in the latter half of the film.
Produced at a time when the industry was still trying to figure out how to do talkies, the movie seemed like it was part of a transitional creature. For example, there was a lot of use of printed narration for exposition. And the staging made it feel like a play -- much of it taken directly from the stage version (which had also starred Lugosi). That, Keith explained, was a big reason for the movie seeming to slow during the second half.
But this was a visually interesting film -- especially when judged for its time -- with an interesting story and a compelling protagonist. I gave it high marks for all of that.