DRACULA (2020)

 "YOU ARE WHAT YOU EAT!" 

It just goes to show you, no matter how old and familiar the subject matter, there's eventually someone who comes along to give it new life.  Raise it from the dead, in other words.  Such is the 2020 BBC production of DRACULA from executive producers Sue Vertue, Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffatt;

the same team that brought us the revival of SHERLOCK.  Of course, SHERLOCK series 3 was a dumpster fire but they got themselves together to finish out the programme.  And here, the team is on top form again.  Done with a lot of wit, the three-part DRACULA is still based pretty much on the Bram Stoker novel but with changes which are interesting, fresh and really work (much in the same way their SHERLOCK update worked).  And yes, while the first two parts take place back in the time of Stoker's original novel, part three does indeed rocket us forward to the current day.  Apparently, some viewers were shocked and dismayed at this sudden change of venue and, while loving the first two parts, griped about part three's modern setting.  I think whether or not that bothers you is an individual reaction.  However, forewarning may take some of the sting out of it as you'll be expecting it.  This old warhorse that everyone is overly familiar with is actually fresh, surprising and a treat to watch as a new interpretation of the Bram Stoker story.

Jonathan Harker (John Heffernan) is a lawyer who once again travels to Transylvania to meet with Count Dracula (Claes Bang) about the purchase of Carfax Abbey.  Harker once again is left to wait for the Count's coach by a jittery driver and, once again, is picked up by a coach driver whom we can assume is Dracula himself (all we see of his face is a shot of his glittering eyes peering out of the darkness).  In Castle Dracula, Harker encounters an elderly, heavily-accented Dracula who offers him food and drink, smashes Harker's mirror and gets all squirrelly when Harker cuts himself.  There's even the baby in the bundle.  But all this, though familiar to anyone who has read the book or seen any of the countless film adaptations, is done in such a way as to seem interesting and new.  Most of this is due to Claes Bang's irreverant portrayal of the Count; not a comic one but a performance which shows that not only does Dracula have contempt for the human race but also thoroughly enjoys being a vampire!  Bang straddles right up to the line but never crosses over into parody or camp.  Heffernan as Harker is, by contrast, achingly doomed no matter how much he tries to free himself from his inprisonment in Dracula's castle.  In fact, part one starts with a terribly deformed and ghastly Harker in a convent being interviewed by Sister Agatha (Dolly Wells) who is trying to get to the bottom of what happened to Harker and how he managed to still be alive after his encounter with the prince of vampires. 

Wells' performance as Agatha is a sheer delight and her line readings are always wonderfully unexpected.  Also in the convent is the Mother Superior played by THE THICK OF IT's Joanna Scanlon.  And Mina Murray is played by Morfydd Clark as a no-nonsense, "modern woman" of the time.  In a letter to her fiancé Jonathan (which Harker reads on his carriage-ride to the castle) is playful and funny as she tells Jonathan that, if he happens to stray before they are married she will understand and marry him anyway -- but just remember that she is surrounded by a bunch of eligible men (and even one woman that has taken her fancy) which she will also be free to 'sample' before the couple get hitched.  Jonathan gets a big kick out of the letter and we immediately like this couple more than practically any other Dracula film depiction of them.    Part One (superbly directed by Jonny Campbell) mainly concerns Harker's travails inside Dracula's castle (in flashback) as well as Harker's interview in the convent with Sister Agatha.    Of course, Dracula eventually shows up at the convent but is held at bay by Sister Agatha and the stake-wielding nuns who know full well he cannot enter without being invited inside.  Naturally, I'm not gonna go into any more detail since I don't want to spoil any of the surprises in store.  Part Two shows us the sea voyage on board the Demeter (and is much more enjoyable than the very disappointing LAST VOYAGE OF THE DEMETER). 

Seriously, this episode is what THAT movie should've been.  Directed by Damon Thomas in the vein (yeah, pun was intended) of Agatha Christie's AND THEN THERE WERE NONE shows the Demeter crew and passengers as fully-rounded characters all of whom we care about and are interested in.  This is also down to the wonderful writing of Gatiss & Moffatt as well as the flawless performances of all the actors.  That's what this -- what??? -- three episode mini-series (where each episode is feature length!) has really going for it; besides the superb writing and direction, every single actor in it is excellent.  From the smallest character role to the topper-most of the popper-most, the embarrassing wealth of acting talent in the U.K. is on full display.  Every crew member/passenger  on the Demeter is finely drawn and beautifully played.  And a treat for us genre fans is also the appearance of old AND new favourite actors:  new in the form of Sacha Dhawan (current Master in DOCTOR WHO) as scientific Dr. Sharma and the magnificent Catherine Schell (SPACE:1999 and the classic DOCTOR WHO story CITY OF DEATH) as the elderly Duchess Valeria. 

Fan service is also given by the presence of Lord Ruthven and his wife; a nod to the John Polidori vampire but not the same character AT ALL!  Amongst the crew, I must make special mention of the quasi-comedy team of Samuel Blenkin and Youssef Kerkour and tyro cabin boy Piotr (actually Marius masquerading as his brother Piotr) and hook-handed cook Olgaren.  Inexperienced Piotr is initially an annoyance to Olgaren but soon the cook warms to the lad; especially after Piotr keeps telling him that everything "needs paprika".  As each member of the cast gets offed one by one by ole Drac, the characters constantly search the ship and try to figure out who the murderer is among them.  But frankly, they can be excused from even suspecting Count Dracula since he's so charming and nonchalant that I wouldn't have suspected him either -- until it was much too late.  As I mentioned already, the third and final episode takes place in the present day and how we got there and why will have to remain for you to go and watch for yourself as I'm not throwing any spoilers about it here.  Needless to say, this adaptation of DRACULA is pretty fantastic and will be joining my frequent rewatch schedule ESPECIALLY for the month of October.  Gatiss and Moffatt . . . you have redeemed yourself for SHERLOCK series 3.    

THE TOMB OF DRACULA {1980}

 DRACULA - SOVEREIGN OF THE DAMNED! 

As you can tell by the "TOMB OF DRACULA" logo, this takes as it's jumping-off point the classic 1970's Marvel Comics run written by Marv Wolfman and pencilled by Gene Colan.  Now, I've only read issues here and there of the classic comic book but did all the wild and wacky stuff shown in this Japanese anime-version actual come from the comic?!?!?!  I can't believe it if it did because this is bat-shit crazy (pun very much intended).  Because it's the seventies, a Satanic mass is going on and Dolores is being offered to Satan as his new bride.  When summoning Satan, the cult must've gotten the wrong number because Dracula shows up and falls in love with Dolores at first sight; whisking her away into the night.  The cult apparently text-messages Satan because he appears finally and is none too please that his bride sacrifice was . . . . um . . . . bridenapped. . . . . even if her name WAS Dolores.  We get quite a big romance story involving Dolores and Drac (which many find to be less than exciting).  Meanwhile, the vampire hunters from the comic book (Frank Drake, Rachel Van Helsing and Quincy Harker)

are hunting down the King of Vampires to put the stake in him but good.  At one point (I can't for the life of me remember why . . . ) Dracula is unvampirized and becomes human (now I think of it, it was probably Satan that hexed him).  Drac goes to New York City to get the vampire Lilith to bite him and turn him back into a vampire . . . . although she's called Layla in the English dub. 

Lilith/Layla isn't too cooperative.  Don't worry, Drac doesn't stay human for too long.  Oh yeah, at also at some point Dracula becomes a mugger and steals a guys wallet

so that he can go to a restaurant and get himself a burger (Yum Yum Eat 'Em Up!). 

Somewhere in all this mess, Dracula marries Dolores and they have a bouncing baby boy named Janus.    And then baby Janus gets killed.  And then buried.  And then resurrected.  And then he turns into an adult in a superhero suit. 

Who's out to get Dracula for being a naughty vampire.  And copious amounts of other crazy stuff happens.  Worth a watch simply for all the bonkers shenanigans that happen.   

DRACULA 3D aka ARGENTO'S DRACULA [2012]

 I DIDN'T HATE THIS. 

One of the most lambasted of all Dario Argento's films and (as of this writing) his last film (unless you're still waiting for THE SANDMAN or even BLACK GLASSES).  The truth is that yes, this (and most of his films made in the latter portion of his career) does not in any way come close to his previous masterpieces of Italian horror.  However, DRACULA 3D is not as bad as everyone says.  It's, in fact, much better than I was expecting and totally watchable while remaining a pretty poor excuse for an Argento film.  I'd like to take this opportunity to address many of the criticisms of the film which I've heard over the years and, now that I've seen it, give my take on the matter.  

The first elephant in the room is the CGI which is definitely atrocious; however in my eye really good CGI looks almost as bad as terrible CGI.  None of it ever looks substantial or real.  Also, for horror fans who adore low budget flicks like THE CREEPING TERROR, BEGINNING OF THE END, THE GIANT CLAW, THE BRAIN THAT WOULDN'T DIE, and any number of such horror movies, isn't it common to overlook such lacking effects to enjoy the film for what it gets right?  I, for one, would much prefer to rewatch ARGENTO'S DRACULA than have to suffer through a minute of VAN HELSING or, indeed, AVATAR; both of these latter films I thought were terrible and (a worse sin) boring.   Another criticism I've heard is that the film is waaaaaaaaaaaaay too long.  I would agree that over an hour and forty-five minutes may not have been needed but I really didn't feel like it dragged much at any point.  The acting and line readings are (I think deliberately) overly dramatic and taking things uber-seriously -- but hey, this is a Dracula film - - aren't they ALL like that?  The dialogue is spoken very subdued and emphatically, I assume, because this is a period film and that's the way Dario wanted it to be played.  While the SPFX may be lacking, the look of the film is often gorgeous with Claudio Cosentino's set design beautifully photographed by Luciano Tovoli. 

The whole film, in fact, is a quite respectable (if ordinary) retelling of the Dracula tale . . . until things suddenly get really silly around the 1 hour 25 minute mark . . . . about the time when Dracula turns into a giant CGI praying mantis.  Buy hey, where the hell else are you gonna see a giant CGI vampire/praying mantis?!??!  Absolutely stupid but I love it!  I've heard criticism also that it's silly for Dracula to turn into a giant insect since he usually transforms into something the same size as he is i.e. where'd he get all that extra mass?  Well, I never heard anyone complain about Dracula turning into a bat; where'd all his extra mass GO?!?!  The story is basically the same Dracula story we've seen a million times with little variations here and there.

The acting ranges from pretty bad to really good; of course, Rutger Hauer as Abraham Van Helsing heads the "really good" list.  Sure, we'd all like to see more of Hauer (as he only first appears 2/3rds of the way through the film) but he fulfills the same role as Harvey Keitel in PULP FICTION (yeah, I just made a comparison between that film and this) in that Van Helsing shows up after all the vampiric shenanigans to "clean up" the mess.  I also enjoyed several nice, new touches to the Dracula/vampire genre that Argento includes the town officials being secretly "in on it" as they have an "agreement" with Count Dracula.  A failure of the script is that the agreement, whatever it is, is never explained (for instance, what do the town officials get out of it to let Dracula occasionally snack on villagers).  Unfortunately, the recent Dracula activity causes the officials to call a meeting to discuss their "vampire problem" and if the pact is worth it.  Count Dracula intrudes on the meeting (as a CGI swarm of flies) and massacres the back-stabbing officials in a scene that reminds me of a (less-effective and less-scary) version of the boardroom massacre scene in Kevin Smith's DOGMA.  Another nice innovation occurs earlier in the film when a bitten Jonathan Harker is accosted by sunlight coming in through a window; the light is accompanied by an "atomic" sound effect which sounds like the climax of KISS ME DEADLY.  It seems quite right that sunlight to a vampire would sound like/appear to him as some kind of radioactive atomic-powered fire from Hell coming to get him.  Count Dracula himself is played by Thomas Kretschmann (the MCU's Baron von Strucker from their Captain America and Avengers movies) and he is quite adequate is unspectacular; he does what is called for in the role but brings no spark of personality to the Count.  Asia Argento is also perfectly fine in the role of Lucy and Miriam Giovanelli is nicely petulant as the singular of Dracula's brides.  

My ultimate verdict is that DRACULA 3D is not a good movie by any means but it is a perfectly watchable B-movie retelling of the Bram Stoker tale with an enjoyably-silly final 20 minutes and a Dracula who's a really messy eater!  Wipe yer damn mouth, sloppy!!!

LEE-A-THON MOVIE OF THE DAY NO. 21

IN SEARCH OF DRACULA!  

This early 70's documentary film is a wonderful examination of the fact and folklore of the vampire legend made at the time the book of the same name was a best seller.  Christopher Lee gets to portray the historical Vlad Tepes as well as moodily narrate the film.  AND he also appears in his full "Hammer Dracula" gear with newly shot scenes.  AND and . . . he also gets to end the film with the old Bela Lugosi "There Are Such Things" speech.  The first time I stumbled across this film, was on a sunny Sunday afternoon in the early 80's.  It was on some cable channel like USA Network, I believe, and catching this previously unknown Dracula documentary with Christopher Lee in it was a treasure to this monster fan.  When the film was announced as "coming up next", I quickly leapt for the record button on my top-loader VCR and preserved it for many multiples of future viewing.  Wonderful!

HAPPY BIRTHDAY BELA LUGOSI

BELA IN A PUBLICITY SHOT FROM "THE BLACK CAT"

DAPPER YOUNG BELA IN A (BAT)FUR COAT

PERSONAL APPEARANCE POSTER

MOODY PORTRAIT FROM "MARK OF THE VAMPIRE"

LUGOSI IN RIPLEY'S BELIEVE IT OR NOT!

CAN LUGOSI BE OFFERING ACTRESS MARJORIE WEAVER A DRACULA FIZZ?  IN NYC, 1940

BELA SCARES PHOTOGRAPHER ON HIS TRIP TO ENGLAND

ON THE SET OF "THE BLACK SLEEP" WITH BASIL RATHBONE & LON CHANEY JR.

TWO BEAUTIFUL DRACULA POSTERS BY MARTIN ANSIN 

UNIVERSAL MONSTERS EVEN MORE OK!

EXQUISITE PORTRAITS OF THE CLASSIC UNIVERSAL MONSTERS BY ARTIST NICO DELORT.  They were just too beautiful not to share with you here.

UNIVERSAL MONSTERS OK!

I KNOW IT'S CHRISTOPHER LEE MONTH HERE IN THE COUNTDOWN TO HALLOWEEN, BUT LET US NOT FORGET THOSE CLASSIC UNIVERSAL MONSTERS...

LEE-A-THON MOVIE OF THE DAY NO. 18

COUNT DRACULA!  

Jesse Franco's 1970 supposedly-faithful screen adaptation of Bram Stoker's novel (it bloomin' well isn't) with Christopher Lee mustachioed and looking more like Stoker's physical description of the vampiric Count.  But at least wacky Klaus Kinski's along for the fun!

LEE-A-THON MOVIE OF THE DAY NO. 14

THE SATANIC RITES OF DRACULA!  

Hammer's final venture in the Dracula series with Christopher Lee is also miles better than SCARS OF DRACULA.  Lee is back wearing the cape and Cushing's back wielding the stake and Michael Coles is back wearing the badge while Joanna Lumley subs for Stephanie Beacham as Van Helsing's granddaughter.  Sure, there are multitudinous lapses in logic but the D.D. Denham angle is intriguing and the film's a solid Hammer Horror.  

LEE-A-THON MOVIE OF THE DAY NO. 13

DRACULA A.D. 1972!  

Much maligned update of Hammer's Dracula to the present day.  Other than the horrendous rock band, this is a completely solid, terrific Dracula film and is probably my second favourite of the Lee Dracula movies after HORROR OF DRACULA.  There, I said it.  The update to the present breathed new life into the tired, wheezy Hammer Dracula film as evidenced by the execrable SCARS OF DRACULA.  And Cushing's back as Van Helsing!  Not to mention the terrific Christopher Neame as Johnny Alucard, the wondrous Caroline Munro, the terrific Michael Coles as the copper and the pulchritudinous Stephanie Beacham as Cushing's granddaughter.  For my review of the film which appeared on my 2007 Countdown to Halloween click here.    

LEE-A-THON MOVIE OF THE DAY NO. 12

SCARS OF DRACULA!  

Oh dear oh dear.  This is my nominee for the worst of the Hammer Dracula series.  The old formula is looking awful tired and wan.  Even the presence of Patrick Troughton doesn't help this one.  Poor Christopher Lee. . .I can see why he became tired of making these movies judging by the "quality" of this retread.

DRACULA COMMANDS YOUR PRESENCE

EDWARD GOREY'S ARTWORK FOR THE BROADWAY PRODUCTION OF DRACULA

LEE-A-THON MOVIE OF THE DAY NO. 11

TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA!  

Dracula week continues with yet another outing for Christopher Lee in the cape.  This time it's the old tale of the bored and rich old men looking for new thrills . . . and they would be provided by Ralph Bates as Drac's acolyte.