Tue 9 Feb 2016
A Movie Review by Jonathan Lewis: DRACULA (1979).
Posted by Steve under Horror movies , Reviews[2] Comments
DRACULA. Universal Pictures, 1979. Frank Langella (Count Dracula), Laurence Olivier (Professor Abraham Van Helsing), Donald Pleasence, Kate Nelligan, Trevor Eve, Jan Francis. Screenplay: W. D. Richter, based on a play by Hamilton Deane & John L. Balderston, based in turn on the novel by Bram Stoker. Music by John Williams. Director: John Badham.
Although it’s been quite a while since I read Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1897), there are quite a few aspects of the text that I remember quite well. Or at least I think I do. And not just plot points or vividly realized scenes such as when Dracula crawls down a wall. I’m talking about the work’s atmosphere, its sense of impending doom and sheer weirdness. Because let’s face it:
Personally, I don’t think Stoker wrote the best vampire story ever told and I’ll leave it to you to decide which one you might think is the best. But I’ll readily admit that Stoker was remarkably effective in vividly describing a decidedly off-kilter world, one in which the notion of an undead Carpathian ruler haunting Victorian London doesn’t seem so far-fetched. Now, that’s an accomplishment and a testament to why Dracula is still read and appreciated to this very day.
As far as film adaptations of Stoker’s novel go, I’m definitely of the opinion that the original Bela Lugosi version (1931) is the one I like the best (some people believe that the concurrent Spanish version is even better). To me, there’s something about Lugosi as Dracula that’s just so classic, so darn iconic that it’s difficult for me to fully imagine other actors stepping into the famed vampire’s shoes (or cape), though the late, great Christopher Lee comes pretty close.
I remember watching Francis Ford Coppola’s 1992 version in the theater and didn’t come away super impressed. There were some great moments, to be sure, but it just seemed so lavish, so colorful that somehow I didn’t see it as a fully authentic realization of Stoker’s vision. Keanu Reeves, who I don’t dislike as an actor and who I thought was great in Speed (1994), didn’t seem to me to be an effective choice for the role of Jonathan Harker. And I don’t think I’m the only one.
It was with this background that I finally got around to watching the 1979 film version, one that transports the entirety of the proceedings to England and is closest to the spirit, if not the story, of Stoker’s novel.
Directed by John Badham, this one features Frank Langella as Dracula and Laurence Olivier as vampire hunter Abraham Van Helsing. Langella, it seems to me, is a fairly effective Dracula, particularly because the story played up the romantic and seductive aspect of the Dracula and Lucy relationship.
Olivier, with a faux Dutch/Flemish accent, is an extraordinarily effective Van Helsing and really transforms the movie into a serene, melancholy operatic experience, one aided by John Williams’ hauntingly beautiful score. Olivier’s Van Helsing is a forlorn, world-weary warrior, someone who takes no pleasure in what he must do to stop Dracula.
This version, which never garnered the same degree of critical attention as the original or Coppola’s version, is definitely worth watching for those who haven’t seen it. Also, for those who may have seen it decades ago and not again since then, it’s worth taking the time to rediscover how extraordinarily well this film holds up. It helps that, in this late 1970s version, Dracula crawls down a wall not once but twice. Chillingly sublime weirdness at its very best.
February 10th, 2016 at 2:42 am
As far as the original novel goes, it is a reasonable question to ask whether it is the best written, but the fact remains that when you think ‘vampire’ you think ‘Dracula’. It remained in print and popular for more than thirty years until the movie version came along, which shows its power.
I’m fond of the original Lugosi version, but it does creak terribly, thanks to Tod Browning’s flaccid direction (the Spanish version whooshes along in comparison, making one wish that George Melford had directed the American movie). The original Hammer version is superb, and I believe that it’s the best of the movie versions. The best version of the book, in terms of reflecting the original, is the BBC version from the 1970s, with Louis Jourdan turning in a chilling performance as the Lord of the Undead. The Gary Oldman movie is Coppola’s Dracula, with anything from Stoker coming very much second (or third, or fourth….)
The Langella Dracula is a movie that I really enjoy,although it’s another movie where Stoker’s Dracula is referenced rather than reflected. It was intended as a version of the stage play that had been revived on the American stage.It looks great, it sounds great, and some of the performances are great, but the script is a terrible mess and really hasn’t stood up to the passage of time.
February 10th, 2016 at 3:46 pm
Bradford and I agree largely, though I would argue Dracula is only in the title of the best Dracula movie, BRIDES OF DRACULA.
As for that BBC adaptation with Louis Jourdan and Frank Finaly it is superb, the claustrophobic nature of the sets and low budget actually work for the film and the scene of Jourdan climbing down the wall vertically more effective than any of the CGI versions. Jourdan is wonderfully chilling in the role even managing to subtly change appearance from one scene to the next as Dracula does in the book, sometimes bloated when having fed and gaunt when not.
It is also perhaps the last Dracula to portray him as a monster of overarching ego and cruelty and not a romantic fallen angel.
The Langella version is, like the Lugosi, and most Dracula’s save for the Hammer version, based on the John Balderston play and not the novel. The play moves most of the action to England and stays there.
Many parts of the film are splendid, including Langella’s robust sexual Dracula with roots in both Chris Lee’s force of nature and Lugosi’s seducer (Luosi is far and away the most seductive of the actors to play the role and it is only a shame Browning did not trust that aspect of the character as the Spanish language director did). There is a dream like quality to Dracula Lugosi captures better than anyone. In that I think Langella mirrors him, though to be fair only Chris Lee is truly believable as the historic Dracula, Vlad Drakul as well. Jourdan manages to fall closer to the Langella and Lugosi model but with hints of the Lee.
And Kate Nelligan is a wonderful, sexy, strong, and believable Mina. Her performance is almost as full blooded as Langella’s.
But then there is Olivier, Olivier with that damn accent he was so bad at and so proud of, overacting to the point of absurdity, taking a broad character to begin with and producing giggles when they aren’t wanted. It is likely the worst performance of his career including THE BETSEY and SHOES OF THE FISHERMAN, which give it plenty of competition for that title.
I did not want to see Cuddles Sakall playing Van Helsing.
He is so achingly bad in the underground scenes I nearly walked out of the theater.
Whatever else you may say of Coppola’s version, which is the only film version to actually film the novel save for making Dracula too human and sympathetic, Hopkins performance as Van Helsing is full blooded, but energetic and never crosses the line into camp or parody. Olivier in this one proves great stage acting doesn’t always equal great screen acting. He comes close to ruining the film as far as I am concerned.
Langella played this part on stage, and though expanded from that greatly this is taken from his Broadway run in the play. He hits many of the same notes he did with Sherlock Holmes save Dracula is all ego and id and Holmes all intellect trying to suppress those things. Langella plays perhaps the most intelligent Dracula, one who knows his blood lust and desire will be the destruction of him but who is too arrogant and self obsessed to act on it, the others never seem to have that touch of self awareness, not even Oldman as Dracula redeemed.
But as Bradford says the film is a mess, the script disjointed where it departs from the play, and the energy Langella and Nelligan bring to it, Williams score, and John Badham’s visuals are all undercut by that and Olivier’s God-awful performance as a comic opera middle European clown (he did the same thing in BOYS FROM BRAZIL, another film I thought undercut by his overplaying and that terrible Cuddles Sakall accent. Where is Peter Cushing when you need him?