"I don t drink...wine."- The Dracula Thread

1272830323336

Comments

  • Posts: 15,159
    Pacing? Too difficult to show on screen? Preference to sticking with adult characters? What are your theories?

    Pacing is one of them. It would work better in a TV series. But I think it also has to do with what's implied: a woman being a sexual predator of children. Many of the more violent episodes of the novel, where Dracula is at his most cruel, are often either omitted or glossed over: when he feeds a child to his brides, when he has the mother of said child devoured by wolves, etc.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited October 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Yes, it's the same reason that the brides and the baby scene is usually dropped - the films have often emphasised the allure of the darkly Romantic elements, but these would be jarringly undercut by showing the depravity of attacks on children. So it's glossed over or omitted altogether.
  • Posts: 15,159
    Venutius wrote: »
    Yes, it's the same reason that the brides and the baby scene is usually dropped - the films have often emphasised the allure of the darkly Romantic elements, but these would be jarringly undercut by showing the depravity of attacks on children. So it's glossed over or omitted altogether.

    And it's a shame I think. It kind of neuters a part of the menace of the vampire. I guess they prefer to show Dracula as a seductive figure rather than a predator, which is imo a huge mistake. So yes, next adaptation, make it faithful and bring back the child lunch, the murdered mother and the Bloofer Lady! I mean Stoker wrote horror that had gore before gore existed.
  • You're right, there is usually a sanitizing of the darker parts and a glamorizing of the vampires themselves, and that does strip the story of some of its horror. Coppola's Dracula did a pretty good job of retaining these elements. We see Lucy returning to her crypt with a child at least.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited October 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Yes, I remember being surprised that Coppola had even alluded to the Bloofer Lady, tbh, let alone shown Lucy returning to the crypt with the child.
  • Posts: 15,159
    You're right, there is usually a sanitizing of the darker parts and a glamorizing of the vampires themselves, and that does strip the story of some of its horror. Coppola's Dracula did a pretty good job of retaining these elements. We see Lucy returning to her crypt with a child at least.

    Yeah, but Coppola sanitised Dracula himself, making him a romantic antihero. Him keeping the other elements from the novel made the editorial decisions of his film all the more jarring. The tone was all around the place.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    Yes, it was. Not a favourite of mine and I remember being really disappointed by the inclusion of the non-Stoker reincarnated lover element yet again. Not a fan of Gary Oldman, didn't like Hopkins' take on Van Helsing and Keanu and Winona's English accents were so bizarre they brought me out of the film completely at times. That long wig really suited Winona, though... ;)
  • Posts: 15,159
    Venutius wrote: »
    Yes, it was. Not a favourite of mine and I remember being really disappointed by the inclusion of the non-Stoker reincarnated lover element yet again. Not a fan of Gary Oldman, didn't like Hopkins' take on Van Helsing and Keanu and Winona's English accents were so bizarre they brought me out of the film completely at times. That long wig really suited Winona, though... ;)

    There's so many wrong things about this movie. It was something like Barbara Cartland's Dracula.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited October 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Y'know, I've never heard it put like that before - but I doubt I'll be able to unhear it in future! :))
  • Posts: 15,159
    Venutius wrote: »
    Y'know, I've never heard it put like that before - but I doubt I'll be able to unhear it in future! :))

    I hated it. Thought it was the worst adaptation of Dracula, until, well, other adaptations were made. Among them the 2006 BBC adaptation, then the 2019 one, maybe the worst ever.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited October 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Yeah, I watched the 2006 adaptation and really disliked it. That made me wary, so when I heard about the 2019 version I looked for spoilers, hated the sound of it and decided to boycott it! I've still not seen it. :D
  • Posts: 15,159
    Venutius wrote: »
    Yeah, I watched the 2006 adaptation and really disliked it. That made me wary, so when I heard about the 2019 version I looked for spoilers, hated the sound of it and decided to boycott it! I've still not seen it. :D

    I could not go beyond the first episode. There are so many wrong things with it.
  • Posts: 15,159
    I think I might have shared it before, but Overly Sarcastic Productions made an interesting video about the novel:
  • Posts: 15,159
    Something the 1977 BBC version got right: Dracula is all clad in black. It's growing on me. But when they get it wrong, gosh they get it wrong.

    Question: apart from Jesus Franco's version, which adaptation give Dracula his novel's appearance, with moustache and all?
  • Posts: 16,182
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Something the 1977 BBC version got right: Dracula is all clad in black. It's growing on me. But when they get it wrong, gosh they get it wrong.

    Question: apart from Jesus Franco's version, which adaptation give Dracula his novel's appearance, with moustache and all?

    I think the Franco version so far is the only adaptation to specifically attempt to represent Dracula as described in the novel. All that's missing are the nails and hair in the palms.

    John Carradine apparently wanted to play Dracula as written, hence the mustache and gray/white hair, but he still sported the Hamilton Deane stage play costuming.
    Aside from being clad in black without a single speck of colour anywhere, and his cloak during the wall climbing section, Stoker doesn't seem to give many details on Dracula's clothes.

    I do like Louis Jourdan's costuming. He wears the cloak sparingly.
    I've always been fascinated by the various costuming of Dracula in the movies. I tend to picture Stoker's Dracula wearing the all black attire Christopher Lee wore in the1958 DRACULA. No red lining in the cape until his second outing.

    I also love that Lugosi's cape had a toupe/gray lining in the 1931 film and rose/gold in ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN.

    Dracula1MPC.jpg
    1931 cape.


    bela-1-1.jpg
    ABBOTT & COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN cape.
  • Posts: 15,159
    I tend to imagine Dracula dressed like a boyar, albeit all in black. Funny how in Franco's film they got the look right (albrit deaged Lee looks rather too Latino for my taste), but the clothes wrong, while the 1977 version have the clothes right, but the look wrong. Oh if we could mix both films!
  • Posts: 16,182
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I tend to imagine Dracula dressed like a boyar, albeit all in black. Funny how in Franco's film they got the look right (albrit deaged Lee looks rather too Latino for my taste), but the clothes wrong, while the 1977 version have the clothes right, but the look wrong. Oh if we could mix both films!

    Yes. Somehow I have a hard time envisioning Louis Jourdan with the white hair and drooping mustache.
    The de-aged Dracula in the book also sports a goatee like Carradine in BILLY THE KID VS DRACULA.. Franco seemed to have let that little detail slip.
    For me one of the most the most frustrating elements in the Coppola version is Dracula's costuming. As I understand Eiko Ishioka hadn't been too familiar with Dracula and was given free licence by Coppola to create whatever costuming she liked for Gary Oldman.
    I really would've preferred to see him in all black.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I loved Oldman s outfits. Especially the red one.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited October 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Gerald Savory wrote a flimsy novelisation of the BBC's 1977 Dracula that included Stoker's scene where Van Helsing hypnotised Mina to find out where Dracula was after he'd left London. Shame that was cut from the actual script.
  • Posts: 15,159
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I tend to imagine Dracula dressed like a boyar, albeit all in black. Funny how in Franco's film they got the look right (albrit deaged Lee looks rather too Latino for my taste), but the clothes wrong, while the 1977 version have the clothes right, but the look wrong. Oh if we could mix both films!

    Yes. Somehow I have a hard time envisioning Louis Jourdan with the white hair and drooping mustache.
    The de-aged Dracula in the book also sports a goatee like Carradine in BILLY THE KID VS DRACULA.. Franco seemed to have let that little detail slip.
    For me one of the most the most frustrating elements in the Coppola version is Dracula's costuming. As I understand Eiko Ishioka hadn't been too familiar with Dracula and was given free licence by Coppola to create whatever costuming she liked for Gary Oldman.
    I really would've preferred to see him in all black.

    Oh yes, Christopher Lee playing Dracula (when deaged) with a pointed beard a bit like the one he had in The Devil Rides Out would have been great. I hate pretty much every decision Coppola took for his pseudo Drac.
  • Posts: 15,159
    Okay I just had a nightmare. There's Werewolf By Night on Disney+, apparently. What if Marvel adapts Tomb of Dracula and make it in the Marvelverse? That would just be awful. Now don't get me wrong, the comics had its moments. But in the same universe as superheroes? That would be awful.
  • Posts: 16,182
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Okay I just had a nightmare. There's Werewolf By Night on Disney+, apparently. What if Marvel adapts Tomb of Dracula and make it in the Marvelverse? That would just be awful. Now don't get me wrong, the comics had its moments. But in the same universe as superheroes? That would be awful.

    Pity Jack Palance isn't around to play Dracula as Gene Colan based Dracula's likeness for Marvel on Palance.
    I wouldn't mind a Marvel Dracula providing he looked like he did in the comics back then. I've always liked Marvel's version of Dracula.

    7dcd4f11fa979315137c9591c7256e75_1024x1024.jpg?v=1641248366


  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    He was in the Blade movies.
    ?u=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.liveauctiongroup.net%2Fi%2F18485%2F20788324_4.jpg%3Fv%3D8D1B5F9A3AA1EF0&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=e467c600f25dfbbff0ab345dd63458bdf0f1bb0aa051de7069146d337f66e9e8&ipo=images
  • Posts: 15,159
    He was in the Blade movies.
    ?u=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.liveauctiongroup.net%2Fi%2F18485%2F20788324_4.jpg%3Fv%3D8D1B5F9A3AA1EF0&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=e467c600f25dfbbff0ab345dd63458bdf0f1bb0aa051de7069146d337f66e9e8&ipo=images

    True but back then there was no truly established Marvel Cinematic Universe.
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Okay I just had a nightmare. There's Werewolf By Night on Disney+, apparently. What if Marvel adapts Tomb of Dracula and make it in the Marvelverse? That would just be awful. Now don't get me wrong, the comics had its moments. But in the same universe as superheroes? That would be awful.

    Pity Jack Palance isn't around to play Dracula as Gene Colan based Dracula's likeness for Marvel on Palance.
    I wouldn't mind a Marvel Dracula providing he looked like he did in the comics back then. I've always liked Marvel's version of Dracula.

    7dcd4f11fa979315137c9591c7256e75_1024x1024.jpg?v=1641248366


    Dracula works better in his own "horror" universe, no need to mix him with superheroes. If they did an "enclosed" Tomb of Dracula, then I'd be cool with it, albeit I think it's a pity nobody ever tries to make a faithful adaptation anymore.
  • edited November 2022 Posts: 6,004
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Slowly rewatching the 1977 BBC Dracula... it's suitably creepy, the brides being both sexual and repellent.
    The bit at the end of the library scene where Dracula gives the baby to the brides was apparently cut from the US tv broadcast - is it on the dvd?

    Don't know, but it's on the version I'm watching on YouTube.

    Talking of children, anybody noticed that the whole Bloofer Lady subplot is often glossed over, if not entirely omitted in the adaptations? I wonder why is that, although I have a few theories.

    Well, she appears in Horror of Dracula and in the 1979 version with Franck Langella. The first time, it's a close call, the second time... Well, poor baby.

    BTW, after Dracula, Père et Fils, there was another french parody of Dracula, featuring the group of comedians/singers known as Les Charlots :

    media.jpg

    Never saw it, don't intend to. After all, it was near the end of their cinematographic career, and their popularity had declined by that time.
  • Posts: 15,159
    In general the Bloofer Lady is pretty much glossed over. And in HoD it's barely there, only one child is involved.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,228
    8AX2plY.jpg
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Looks fantastic.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    'Police are baffled'! :D
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Venutius wrote: »
    'Police are baffled'! :D

    Incompetence or corruption? Probably both.
Sign In or Register to comment.