Bela Lugosi?


I know he's not listed, or apparently doesn't appear in the film. But I remember a picture, I'm not sure which film it was, it wasn't teh 1931 version, and it has Bela's Count Dracula with a young woman, and he has his hands on her shoulders.

I thought the picture was for DRACULA'S DAUGHTER, but he's not in it.

Spread The Fear,
Toyland Chairman

http://www.freewebs.com/demonictoys/index.htm

reply

I believe the phot you refer to is from MARK OF THE VAMPIRE, which used a widely circulated still of Lugosi with Carol Borland.

"If you don't know the answer -change the question."

reply

That must be it. Thanks.

Sean Wallace
Screenwriter
Wallace Entertainment

reply

Bela may have a cameo in DRACULA'S DAUGHTER. There is a scene in the first fifteen to twenty minutes of the film when two doctors are discussing the death of one of the victim's. In between the two doctors is a surgeon still wearing his surgical mask listening to the conversation. Even though only his eyes and upper head is visible the actor has an uncanny resemblence to Lugosi.
I heard this rumor years ago that Lugosi was disappointed that he wasn't cast in the film but a friend at Universal got him the cameo to secretly stick to Universal.
Not sure if this is true but the actor in the surgical mask make one wonder.

reply

[deleted]

****SPOILER ALERT***
Although the picture you refer to is certainly from "Mark of the Vampire"(which interestingly features no Vampires) Lugosi was down to reprise his role as Dracula and he appeared in some early publicity shots. As we know in the end he did not appear, but he had a "Pay or Play" contract with Universal at the time and was paid anyway.

Ironically it was one of the highest fees he ever received.


time flies like an arrow-fruit flies like a banana

reply

It's really crazy that Lugosi got paid more for DRACULA'S DAUGHTER than he did for DRACULA, and he's not in it.

Similarly, from what I read tonight, one of the directors they hired got paid $17,500 to work on the film, but DIDN'T-- and was replaced by the guy who did the film, who was paid $5,000. So you had a director who did nothing who got paid MORE than the real director.

And then of course there's all the scripts that were written and never used...

It's no wonder the studio was the victim of a "hostile takeover" and the production heads were booted out... sad, sad end to an era.

reply

[deleted]