Dracula is not without its flaws, but consider the context of it being the very first ‘talking’ horror movie. Most of the actors are clearly having trouble with the transition from the silent film era, as is director Tod Browning. Although Browning had directed “talkies” prior to Dracula, he wouldn’t really figure them out until he directed Iron Man later that year and then Freaks in 1932. Try sinking your teeth (heh) into a shining example of an actor becoming the role they play to the point of owning it and setting a new standard. Bela Lugosi does exactly that in Dracula, still managing to be menacing nearly a century later. Critics pointing at Lugosi’s slow, theatrical performance are missing the point. Why would a centuries-old nobleman from the Carpathian Mountains ever adapt to the 20th century? Count Dracula’s appeal lies in his not changing with the times. This makes him appear unique in the face of the modern man. Bland Brits like John Harker could never hope to be as interesting as Dracula; it is why Harker’s fiancée Mina and friend Lucy are still talking about the Count (and not John) hours after meeting him. Let today’s generation take away Lugosi’s career-defining—and ultimately career-ruining—performance from Dracula if nothing else. One also cannot forget Dwight Frye’s performance as the doomed Renfield, a character imitated in film nearly as much as the Count himself. Dracula is a film that any fan of horror movies ought to see at least once.
No comments:
Post a Comment