5/10
Not as silly as it seems.... we'll not quite.
1 May 2022
Warning: Spoilers
If you quite liked Tod Browning's Dracula, you'll probably quite like this. If you loved Dracula and don't like to see your favourite movie classic adulterated then this will probably annoy you.

Although made only three years after the original Dracula, this feels much more modern - almost 1940s. Browning's flair for creating atmosphere and suspense have been honed and with the benefit of MGM's higher production values, this is a much more sophisticated movie than Dracula.

Why am I comparing two different films? Because this one doesn't try to disguise the fact that it's a Dracula film - even down to having Bela Lugosi playing the Count. But MGM couldn't simply make a copy of something made by those upstarts at Universal, they had to make something just as good and then almost belittle the whole brand by making their 'better Dracula' something silly and simply part of their own proper film. They needn't have bothered since Universal themselves managed to trash their own brand a few years later all by themselves.

It's a little bit sad to hear Bela Lugosi's final - and indeed only lines in the film as the has-been actor deluded that he is a great thespian wondering whether he could make a career out of playing the vampire. It's as though MGM are showing that they can denigrate and swat away Universal's former mega star just like one of Renfield's flies.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed