Dracula (1931) Full Reaction!
Added 2025-10-30 13:08:17 +0000 UTC
Comments
For some reason, I have an easier time with the reminding myself about when stuff was made, and expectations of the time. On a certain level, I get where that is a big hang up for people, yet I almost always have a reasonably easy time with it, save for when there’s the societal shit like the sexism that’s treated as ok/we’re not meant to find it bad, even though it is. Timing was great that shortly after seeing this film, they released the seventy-fifth anniversary dvds for this and Frankenstein, with lots of behind-the-scenes goodies that improved the experience. Bela alone, I can buy responses from people back then. Seeing Jess jump as she did shows Bela being phenomenal still ages very well. This being pre-code helps a lot. Good note on how Browning cuts off the one scene making it creepier. (Always annoyed with the Spanish version with breaking up the flow of the big verbal duel.) Edward Van Sloan is the other major part of this movie that just works so well. Well said on how he just knows what’s up, and he does what he’s got to do. Doesn’t even waste time, and just jumps the mirror move on Dracula, where Bela sells well how old Drac is genuinely impressed by the cleverness. It is unfortunate how the change made makes Harker even more like an overconfident bore than Brad Majors. Not seen the film with Margot Robbie in a bubble bath, but I understand the reference, and I see where you’re roughly at in the adapted screenplay category. Even without reading the behind-the-scenes and the biographies, I knew that this was made in the depression, so a major pass is given there, whilst conceding the criticism. Given effects budgets back then, the wolf sort of works better just left to our imagination, much like Mina describing Dracula making her drink from his arm. I get the complaints, and yeah, it would have been cool to see something. I know the complaints about the ending. The cowboy is in the Coppola version, though yeah, don’t recall Morris in any other version. When I first saw this on the vhs, Dracula’s dying cries were not there, nor was Renfield’s cries of despair; he just went silent when Dracula hoisted him up, save for the quick “Urk!” when Dracula grabs his arm. Again, this is third behind The Godfather and The Silence of the Lambs for being my favorite film. It’s impact and legacy is really hard to overstate. I could watch this film any day of the week. Nice to hear that you go back to watch it much more than certain other movies you technically find more entertaining. Good point on this aiding matters if we get Jess reacting to the new Nosferatu. I’d be down for reactions to the old one too. Just love how Jess really enjoyed this as she did. As to It, yeah, when I saw the episode, knew what you were speaking about. I’m just ecstatic to have now seen Jess react to this movie.
Thomas Corp
2025-10-31 00:46:41 +0000 UTCHeard about Disney throwing the damn towel. Present question is how or where we watch the upcoming stuff. Still waiting to see about Billie, though you say that you buy that she won’t last long as the Doctor, (if she is the Doctor,) well, it is seeming likely, and it wouldn’t surprise me, put it that way. Can see the adverts for the Coppola version being the first real exposure to Dracula, followed by Mr. Burns. You always saw the imagery, and the parodies like Sesame Street, Looney Tunes. Scooby-Doo and the Reluctant Werewolf being a particularly fun one. Bride of the Monster is probably the least bad of the Ed Wood films, and I adore the “I have no home.” scene. As mentioned, saw this when I was about fifteen, and it had the profound effect. Later research and reading do give much greater context on stuff, grant you that. The book, of course, is amazing. Yeah, the film does sort of have the Full Metal Jacket structure to it. Love what is perhaps the very first occasion of setup of the smug normie who refuses to listen to the warnings of the “superstitious” townsfolk. The funny thing is Renfield is so ingrained into the public consciousness that you hear people are surprised to learn that Harker goes to the castle in the book. The randomness of the bee and the armadillos add greatly to the unnatural quality of the castle. And Bela with almost entirely his eyes makes one of the most striking entrances in film. Good Gowron comparison with what Bela could do with his eyes. And how he falls back on his earliest English work to make it sound like Dracula just is not used to speaking with people is a superb touch. Love the bit with the spider web. Bela and Dwight Frye are two of the biggest parts of this that just carry the film. You feel bad for everyone in this who got cursed with the typecasting, and yeah, you feel especially bad for Dwight. I would have loved to have seen that Woodrow Wilson project. Big adoration for the Mel Brooks casting with the parodies. Seeing Jess have the response she did to Dwight as Renfield was such a delightful part of the reaction. Was not expecting it, but it made me so giddy.
Thomas Corp
2025-10-31 00:26:21 +0000 UTCYeah, let's rip this one off: to appreciate this movie you very much have to remind yourself of the time it was made, and the expectation people had of movies back then. There are well-documented stories of people running screaming out of showings of Dracula, which looking back now is very hard to believe, but as the saying goes, history isn't there for you to give your approval. It also helps that this was the famed pre-Code era, where movies could show material a good deal raunchier than you think of for the time. Most of all, there's the chilling bit of Renfield crawling toward the passed out nurse; the original version showed he just picks a fly off her face and eats it (we know this because it was left intact in the Spanish version Thomas mentions), but Browning made the daring move of cutting away just before that and letting your mind fill in the natural and much more horrifying implication. Also helping this whole part of the story is Edward Van Sloan as Ven Helsing, a character so iconic that he’s now typically considered the general nemesis of EVERY classic monster. Best of all is that he unquestionably believes everything we know is really happening, and doesn’t really care if anyone else does; he’s just going to do what he needs to, even directly confronting Dracula with his lack of reflection rather than work against him more covertly because there just isn’t time for that. I do have to mention this is also where changing Jonathan’s role works against the film, as in the book his still being under Dracula’s effect on some level goes a long way to understanding how thick-headed he is about all this, rather than being so inexplicably overconfident in his own ability to keep Mina safe that he always seems about to say “Any of you fellows know how to madison?”. Sometimes I just want Van Helsing to say to everyone “Look, maybe you guys would understand this better coming from Margot Robbie in a bubble bath. I’ll see you in a few minutes.” The movie also suffers from a budget that’s clearly far lower than the story demands, so that over and over it’s forced to have characters describe epic visual scenes after the fact (or at its most embarrassing, “Dracula turned into a wolf! Trust us, that’s what you’d be seeing if the camera just turned a bit to the right!”). It even completely cuts out the resolution of poor Lucy, who as far as we know is still wandering around as the Lady in White, but hey, she doesn’t have a boyfriend to miss her, so who cares? And of course there’s one of the most anticlimactic villain defeats in movie history, which is actually the improved version since for decades even Dracula’s dying moans were removed from the soundtrack for being too disturbing. Though I honestly can’t say the book’s climax is much better, inexplicably involving the sudden appearance of an American cowboy who has understandably never once made it into any adaptation. But for all that, I still really do appreciate this film and what it did for the entire horror genre. I’ve certainly gone back to watch it much more than certain other movies I technically find more entertaining, just because there’s something about it that keeps me thinking I should really check it out one more time. And hey, if Robert Eggers’ Nosferatu ever does make it to a viewing spot, you now have much more context for what it’s doing, so that will be nice to see. But while I was writing all this, it looks like you posted the first episode of Welcome to Derry, which given the typical delay in these things I guess means my warning came a bit too late. But it should make for a good time, and I’ll be getting to that right now.
Ryan
2025-10-30 21:47:22 +0000 UTCBefore getting to the movie, I have to address this week's news that Doctor Who is officially on again after Disney finally nutted up and made it official they were out. And so far there's word of an upcoming special next year, but everything after that is seemingly still up in the air, which just increases my suspicion that this is all Billie is getting. Though even with that squared away, I'm still picturing RTD panicking a bit as he thought he'd have an extra year or two to figure out what the hell he's doing, and now he's running around the office screaming "I don't know what to do, my whole brain is crying!" I first came to Dracula a bit ass-backwards, as I was 8 years old when Francis Ford Coppola's adaptation was released, so those commercials were my first impression (and Mr. Burns taking inspiration from it helped). But of course in the background there was still the impression of the classic Dracula, referenced by the likes of Looney Tunes. And then Mystery Science Theater 3000 introduced me to Bela Lugosi by showing Bride of the Monster, and I distinctly remember thinking even as a kid without any context for who he was, and in the middle of all the cheesiness and riffs, he was a genuinely compelling screen presence who made me want to keep watching just to see what he'd do next. And in due time I became aware of the various other Dracula media out there, and first saw this movie sometime in my teen years. Which was probably too early, as I found it a big letdown after all the buildup, but I appreciate it much better now that I have such a better understanding of its context and its place in movie history. I've also read the original book, which is one of the scariest stories I've experienced in any format. It's a blessing and a curse that the film is extremely front-loaded with its best and most iconic material. How many horror films have used this setup of the smug normie who refuses to listen to the warnings of the "superstitious" townsfolk, and here is, if not the very first time it was used, definitely what made it popular. It was also a smart move to streamline the book's story so that rather than Jonathan having this initial encounter with Dracula and escaping, it's Renfield who has the bad luck to be sent to him and from there he's doomed, giving a much more concrete demonstration of how powerful Dracula is. And I adore all the weird little touches like the bee with its own coffin and the armadillos, seemingly pointless but all adding to the feel that everything about this place is wrong. Capped off by Lugosi himself, who just like Robert O'Reilly knew very well how powerful his eyes were and took every opportunity to make use of them. Then you add in that fascinatingly odd line delivery due to his difficulty with English, along with a very smooth editing trick that may make you wonder if you actually saw him magically walk straight through a giant spiderweb, and the atmosphere is fully established. But then there's still the rest of the movie to go, and much like the second half of The Search for Spock it can't help feeling like a bit of a letdown after what we've already seen. Luckily, there's still Bela and Dwight Frye to carry us through it. Just about every actor in this movie resented how much it typecast them, and I feel worst for Frye, who was struck down by a heart attack at 44 just before he would have starred in a prestige biopic of Woodrow Wilson that might well have gotten his career back where he wanted it. To really illustrate his range, Mel Brooks parodied him with both Marty Feldman and Peter MacNicol, and both fit perfectly. And it was a treat to see he can still get to you so much even with so much else about the film's idea of horror not having aged the best.
Ryan
2025-10-30 21:47:01 +0000 UTC
