Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Horror Quote Of The Moment


Welcome to Under The Morgue.

We have sections for each decade of film, from the 1910s onward, as well as sections for 10+ major franchises, close to 50 'smaller' franchises (containing five entries or less), creative writing, independent filmmaking, photography, music, Non-Horror films and TV shows, forum games, and boredom busters, and to top it all off there's an IM shoutbox at the bottom of the page for random chat. From the tame and 'kid sister friendly' to the psychological and mindbending to cheesy splatter flicks to hardcore torture-oriented horror, there's something here for everyone, so why not dive in?

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Horror of Dracula (1957)
Topic Started: Aug 18 2015, 03:36 PM (243 Views)
GL84
Member Avatar
Killer's Therapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Posted Image

Arriving in London, a series of strange deaths and mysterious events surrounding a family forces a paranormal expert to investigate, and eventually discovers that the cause is the mysterious stranger who has just arrived from Transylvania who is intent on carrying out a vampiric reign of terror in the city.

What did everyone think of this one?
Do illiterate people get the full effect of alphabet soup?

Some people are like slinkies: not good for anything, but you can't help but laugh when one falls down the stairs.

My review blog: http://donshorrormovieblog.blogspot.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
GL84
Member Avatar
Killer's Therapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
This is easily one of the better vampire films of all time and clearly Hammer Studios' finest hour. One of the better elements here is the much-improved pacing as normally with these films it's a slow beginning, duller middle, and some semblance of action at the end. Here, this one is quite different from other Hammer films as we have a surprisingly interesting beginning, a slow middle, with a pretty rousing ending, with only the middle part being similar to the others. This is due to the realization of the vampire's actions on the village as well as the household which is built rather well in small doses to ensure nothing really seems out of the ordinary until it's finally past the breaking point and signs of her attacks all along become present, which are really impressive in their execution and cohesiveness to the story. Concerning itself with the Gothic atmosphere throughout makes for a much more impressive play here which is where it's all quite fun with the assault in the graveyard during the burial process, the maddening chase in the horse-drawn carriage and the subsequent attack in the basement all echoing those tropes to the fullest as well as playing off the storyline details quite effectively. The ending is the best, including a showdown with Van Helsing and Dracula that includes Dracula's demise. The way of going about it is cleverly done and executed, resulting in one of the best death scenes in the series. Having Dracula meltdown into a pile of ashes in front of the sun shining into the room is incredibly original, and the effects used to make it happen are really effective. It's a pretty graphic way of dying to show and effectively comes off as intended as it's a little shocking. The film's best part, unquestionably, is the presence of Christopher Lee, who has a perfect role here as that of a mysterious figure who is involved with some shady dealings. He's great in this role, being evil personified that adds much to the suspense the film has, and his air of menace is so perfect that he is the perfect person for the role. Along with the few deaths we get here being pretty graphic for the time, they make for a great effort with the only thing that really holds this down is that the film has far more talking than action in it. The middle, strangely, is the place with the most talking, as we get a pretty good opening and a nice conclusion. Otherwise, this is one of Hammer's greatest films and is the perfect film for both vampire and Hammer fans.
Do illiterate people get the full effect of alphabet soup?

Some people are like slinkies: not good for anything, but you can't help but laugh when one falls down the stairs.

My review blog: http://donshorrormovieblog.blogspot.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Monster Mary
Member Avatar
Doomsayer
[ * ]
Horror of Dracula is easily one of my all time favourite horror movies! It's a perfect example of Hammer at its best with Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing in the lead roles. It may seem tame and slow to horror fans of today but it was considered risqué for its time. My favourite part is when Peter Cushing runs across that table! Love it.




"I became insane with long intervals of horrible sanity."

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
GL84
Member Avatar
Killer's Therapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I still hold it up as my favorite Hammer horror ever so I do agree on a lot of that.
Do illiterate people get the full effect of alphabet soup?

Some people are like slinkies: not good for anything, but you can't help but laugh when one falls down the stairs.

My review blog: http://donshorrormovieblog.blogspot.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Theli
Member Avatar
Random Redneck
[ * ]
I do really like this movie, but I am probably in the minority that would say it's one if Hammer's weaker Dracula/vampire instalments. I'm actually a bigger fan of the later parts of the series, starting with Lee's return in Prince of Darkness, but I also really enjoy the Karnstein trilogy and Vampire Circus, which often seem to be overlooked for Lee Dracula films. The plot changes from the novel and earlier adaptations is staggering, and left me a little cold. Which is probably part of the reason I prefer later Hammer vampire films, with the exception of Vampire Lovers none were based on no els I'd read.

Though with that said I did like certain aspects, Cushing as the (now) quintessential vampire slayer, instead of the more laid back professor Van Helsing was interesting. I also think that role laid the foreground for future vampire slayer type characters in film.

A solid movie overall, for sure, but not my favourite Dracula adaptation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
GL84
Member Avatar
Killer's Therapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I've never read the book so I wouldn't be able to judge it against the source material (which you're new so you don't know but it's a practice I wholly disdain anyway and rather judge the movie based on itself isolated from everything else in existence) but I do agree with a lot of this. I'm also equally more fond on later-era Hammer than their early period (Vampire Lovers, Twins of Evil, Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell and Blood of the Mummy's Tomb I find much better entries than most of what came before in their respective franchises) even though I still highly enjoy this one.
Do illiterate people get the full effect of alphabet soup?

Some people are like slinkies: not good for anything, but you can't help but laugh when one falls down the stairs.

My review blog: http://donshorrormovieblog.blogspot.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Monster Mary
Member Avatar
Doomsayer
[ * ]
I was lucky enough to see Horror of Dracula on the big screen not that long ago in Toronto. It was a double bill of HOD and Lost Boys. It was the new version with the cut scenes included. (Lee in the bedroom seducing Mina and and the extended version of Dracula's last scene). It's amazing how many things you notice in a theatre instead of the TV. For instance there is a bullet shell from a WW2 tank in the background of one of the shots. I recognized it because I have the same one in my entry way at home! Ha.




"I became insane with long intervals of horrible sanity."

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Theli
Member Avatar
Random Redneck
[ * ]
GL84
Sep 9 2015, 04:29 PM
I've never read the book so I wouldn't be able to judge it against the source material (which you're new so you don't know but it's a practice I wholly disdain anyway and rather judge the movie based on itself isolated from everything else in existence) but I do agree with a lot of this. I'm also equally more fond on later-era Hammer than their early period (Vampire Lovers, Twins of Evil, Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell and Blood of the Mummy's Tomb I find much better entries than most of what came before in their respective franchises) even though I still highly enjoy this one.
I agree with that to an extent, and to be honest the Dracula novel isn't actually all that amazing, I prefer many of it's film adaptations than the novel itself (which is rare). But when you have a long history of the story being adapted, it's hard not to compare it to others, even on a subconscious level. If not in the plot, than the way it's executed. It felt short and urgent, not as atmospheric as later instalments in Hammer's vampire films, or prior Dracula adaptations which I prefer. Not even as a comparison per se, but simply to illustrate what I like in horror. I just prefer that in a film, I like a slow burn, I like heavy dripping atmosphere. I don't mind the odd shock scare, or gore, but that's not why I love horror films. Not that Horror of Dracula is over the top in either aspect, don't get me wrong, I'm just giving an example of my preference and why I prefer certain other films of the era, and other Dracula adaptations. With that said it is better to appreciate any art on it's own merits, but one of those merits can be how it was adapted from its source material, not necessarily whether it was a "good" or "bad" adaptation, but how it was handled, the creative difference, the execution, the philosophy. I actually like all the different versions of Dracula, like I said I'm not all that keen on the novel, other than at it's basest level. The story is great, the execution is not. It's not the only aspect nor the most important of a film, but it is something worth considering in the equation.

Like I said though, I do still enjoy this flick, and it sounds like I need to track down this extended version Mary is referring to as well. Lost Boys and Horror of Dracula is a pretty killer billing too, would have loved to see that in theatres.
Edited by Theli, Sep 13 2015, 03:31 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
GL84
Member Avatar
Killer's Therapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
True, that makes sense (and it's an argument I've had on other forums throughout the years as well) but that's still missing out on my original point: I've never read the original novel so even if I were to compare this with the book how am I going to do that when the source material is a complete unknown? I don't even know what the damn thing looks like on the cover, or even read a passage from it at all. I'm completely in the dark about the novel, so what use is that to me in regards to rating the film against the book?
Do illiterate people get the full effect of alphabet soup?

Some people are like slinkies: not good for anything, but you can't help but laugh when one falls down the stairs.

My review blog: http://donshorrormovieblog.blogspot.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Theli
Member Avatar
Random Redneck
[ * ]
GL84
Sep 14 2015, 04:15 PM
True, that makes sense (and it's an argument I've had on other forums throughout the years as well) but that's still missing out on my original point: I've never read the original novel so even if I were to compare this with the book how am I going to do that when the source material is a complete unknown? I don't even know what the damn thing looks like on the cover, or even read a passage from it at all. I'm completely in the dark about the novel, so what use is that to me in regards to rating the film against the book?
I'm not arguing anything at all, just pointing out my opinion. I never said you had to judge it based on the novel, or that you should even read the novel to judge it. We all have different paradigms and criteria we can and do use to judge a film. Your prior viewing history, knowledge of the director, genre or series, your knowledge of art and/or film, the source material etc. It doesn't make one criteria more important than another, necessarily. Just different ways to view and judge the film. Some of it you may do consciously and some subconsciously, some not at all. Nonetheless it doesn't diminish anyone's point of view when it comes to horror because they decide to regard a certain aspect you choose not to, or cannot.

My two cents.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
GL84
Member Avatar
Killer's Therapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Agreed, I guess. I find nothing of value in judging a movie with anything other than what appears before my eyes once I pop the movie into my player and select PLAY MOVIE on the screen with other little tidbits like the source material for the original or wherever it lies in a series, franchise or otherwise as merely interesting points about it to know for later on. To me, it's all about what I see in front of me, nothing more.
Do illiterate people get the full effect of alphabet soup?

Some people are like slinkies: not good for anything, but you can't help but laugh when one falls down the stairs.

My review blog: http://donshorrormovieblog.blogspot.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baby Firefly
Member Avatar
The Devil Himself
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Starting this now. (goo) I feel pretty bad that I haven't seen the Hammer Dracula films before now (I plan on watching at least four in the next week).
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baby Firefly
Member Avatar
The Devil Himself
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Finished this a little while ago, and while it was definitely enjoyable and moved at a faster pace than I was expecting it to, I can't say it was the best film I've seen lately or even close, really. It's easily one of the best Dracula films I've seen though. That's for damn sure, haha.

The performances here weren't anything that had me insanely impressed but pretty much everyone did a good job, I thought. I loved Peter and Christopher (probably goes without saying) in this but I still don't think they gave mindblowing performances here. Christopher's Dracula definitely had a great menace about him that some other Draculas didn't really have. I liked Jonathan Harker more in this than the Harker in other films for some reason. Lucy wasn't anything super special but she was a VERY effective vampire. I really liked the first female vampire as well even though she didn't have as much to do as she should have. Mina and Arthur were decent enough. And Gerda ftw<3.

There are a few really strong setpieces here. I loved the ending, some of the stakings were great, and none of the vampires were all that cheesy, which was a relief. The locations and costumes were mostly impressive too.

I don't know. Even with all of those really good things, it felt like something (but I'm not quite sure what) was missing and some parts of this did drag a *little* bit. I was never bored though, so there's that.

6.5/10 quality, 7/10 entertainment.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
GL84
Member Avatar
Killer's Therapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
At least it's favorable, the way it should be with that one. Definitely one of my favorites as well.
Do illiterate people get the full effect of alphabet soup?

Some people are like slinkies: not good for anything, but you can't help but laugh when one falls down the stairs.

My review blog: http://donshorrormovieblog.blogspot.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · 1950s · Next Topic »
Add Reply