MovieChat Forums > Dracula (1931) Discussion > Oh, those first couple reels...

Oh, those first couple reels...


...were absolutely amazing and reeked with atmosphere. After Dracula arrives in England the movie quickly loses steam, but it’s still worth watching.

Can you imagine how great this movie would be if they’d been able to maintain the creepy, malignant atmosphere of the opening scenes?

reply

Well, to be fair, the actual book it's based on also has the premise of Dracula going to London. But the novel actually did have creepier scenes in London than the movie. If you haven't read the novel I encourage you to do so. It has a lot of good scenes that couldn't make it into the movie for obvious reasons. I like this movie but the thing about it is the movie had its budget cut due to the Great Depression. You should check out the Spanish version of the film as it is a better made film that even includes the mostly cut subplot of Lucy as a vampire. A more true to the novel version is the BBC Count Dracula which stars Louis Jordan as Dracula. It actually is closest to the novel out of all of the movies made. Braham Stoker's Dracula is second closest but I don't like it as much because of the whole Lucy falling in love with Dracula crap that was never part of the story.

reply

I'm thinking we still have room for a genuinely good adaptation. The BBC one with Louis Jourdan is very dull and, as you say, the B.S. Dracula contains an idea which was first used in the Jack Palance version - It was bad then and no better some twenty years later with operatic overkill. Also, Coppola's Dracula is massively over the top in it's design. I think a bit of realism in the settings and a touch of subtlety could sell the whole thing.

reply