Dracula Movies

So I read Bram Stoker's Dracula (1897) and then watched a bunch of movies based on the book.

Most of the movies drop or minimize the literary elements, which leaves just the plot. The characters and geography are often remixed a bit, which takes some getting used to. The best movies are the ones with the best visual and musical effects, a progressive suspense level, and at least some reference, no matter how slight, to something literary.

There are way more movies than I'll ever be able to watch, but here's my comparison so far, in order of release date (all available from Netflix):

Dracula (1931)

IMDB Rating: 7.6. Starring Bela Lugosi, this one is quite good, with the iconic Dracula and many memorable lines, especially "I am ... dah-RAC-ulah". It has a few drawbacks though: The actors are performing in silent movie style with exaggerated expressions and gestures. Renfield is over the top crazy, and Jonathan Harker is annoyingly stupid. Otherwise the lighting is interesting and it's well made, suspenseful, and compact. You don't need to read the book first.

Dracula's Daughter (1936)

IMDB Rating: 6.4. This one has an interesting twist. It picks up with Van Helsing staking Dracula, getting caught by the police, and charged with murder! None of the plot comes from the book, but they do discuss the science vs. superstition theme quite a bit. There are a few unrealistic sequences, but, given the premise, the story is mostly logical, well acted and produced, mixes in some light comedy, and ends with a big rescue scene.

Son of Dracula (1943)

IMDB Rating: 6.1. A scheming heiress tries to gain immortality. The plot has nothing to do with the book except for a page from Harker's diary and ample use of lore--with the addition of destruction by fire and sunlight. The script was given some forethought. Of crosses it says, "It would take too long to explain why they fear it, but they do." Overall it's mysterious but slow until the final 20 minutes, which are suspenseful and exciting.

Horror of Dracula (1958)

IMDB Rating: 7.5. This is the first of several Hammer productions starring Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. It starts out really good, but gets a bit slow at times. It could be more suspenseful, too, but the music's good and the ending is exciting. The geography is remixed. I think they're in Germany or Austria. The characters are mostly appealing. And you can recognize tidbits from the book, though you don't need to read it first to follow the plot.

The Return of Dracula (1958)

IMDB Rating: 5.3. This is a surprisingly good B&W horror movie where Dracula impersonates a distant relative visiting a trusting family in 1950's America. It has almost nothing to do with the book, but it's quite scary, in an eerily familiar setting, with an excellent score, and very good acting. The suspense builds progressively to a climax and I noticed a few anti-McCarthy remarks as the authorities were investigating the mysterious guest. (The IMDB rating looks too low to me, but it has few votes, probably because it's back & white)

Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968)

IMDB Rating: 6.3. Starring Christopher Lee...The sets, costumes, and cast are well done and good looking, but Lee's acting is oddly hokey and the plot is weak and confusing. If Dracula were a TV series, this could be an average episode. At least Lee's appearance and costume, including red eyes, are pretty good. He's tall, thin, and menacing. And there are lots of really neat scenes on rooftops, in the wilderness, stone pubs, and several nightmarish views of Dracula driving a horse-drawn hearse, whip in hand, cape in the wind.

Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970)

IMDB Rating: 6.2. I think this Hammer production, yet again starring Christopher Lee, is one of the best Dracula movies. It doesn't have much to do with the book, but it mostly sticks to the lore, the sets and scenery are visually rich, the colors are bright and clear, the picture quality is excellent, the cast is good looking, and the music is perfect. The story is kind of predictable, though, but the atmosphere remains suspenseful. The only drawback, really, is the final scene where things suddenly turn random and illogical (even given the premise), but it's still an enjoyable movie overall.

Count Dracula (1970)

IMDB Rating: 5.7. This Spanish production stars Chistopher Lee and Klaus Kinsky, but it's one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen. The camera zooms in and out annoyingly. There are long sequences of people just staring. (That's common in some movies. Does anybody ever get anything from that?) Scenes jump around randomly and Van Helsing has a contemptuous demeanor that is ridiculous and pointless. This movie couldn't possibly make any sense without reading the book. It's got its fans, though. IMDB is full of positive comments--I don't know why.

Dracula vs. Frankenstein (1971)

IMDB Rating: 2.8. It should be obvious from the title that this has nothing to do with the book. While it has its moments, it's pretty cheesy, somewhat gory, and has the worse, cartoonish Dracula you can image. Dr. Frankenstein is pretty creepy in a wheelchair and Lon Chaney is pretty good as his brutish, simple-minded assistant.

Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972)

IMDB Rating: 5.5. This is another Hammer production starring Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. It's very good, suspenseful, and logical (given the premise), though only faintly based on the book. It takes place in modern London and involves Dracula's reincarnation by a band of thrill-seeking teenagers, one of whom is Van Helsing's great-great-granddaughter.

Blood for Dracula (1974)

IMDB Rating: 6.0. AKA Andy Warhol's Dracula...The music, scenery, and locations are very nice, and the acting is interesting because it's so weird. If vampires were real, this is probably how they'd be--without supernatural powers, vulnerable yet deadly, trying to live their lives, kind of like carnivorous animals that need to kill to survive. It has nothing to do with Bram Stoker's Dracula, but it's unusual and worth watching.

Dracula (1979)

IMDB Rating: 6.1. Starring Frank Langella, this one was boring when I saw it years ago and it's still boring today. The music and scenery, however, are quite good. Unfortunately they spend too much time in a weird zoo-like lunatic asylum, it's slow with no suspense, and the ending is ridiculous. You can understand it better if you read the book first, but it's still boring.

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)

IMDB Rating: 7.3. This is both the best and the worst Dracula movie. It's the best because it's well acted and produced, suspenseful, and mostly true to the characters, places, and plot. It's also the worst, though, because of 2 disastrous departures they take from Stoker's classic: In Dracula's backstory, he turns himself into a vampire and then there's an absurd love affair between him and Mina! It's more fun if you read the book first because you'll recognize quotes and scenes directly from the book. By the way, this Dracula's appearance realistically resembles Vlad III, Prince of Wallachia (1431-1476), the real Dracula from history.

Dracula: The Vampire & the Voivode (2008)

This is an interesting but kind of dull biographical documentary on Bram Stoker and Vlad III, Prince of Wallachia. Voivode is, roughly, Romanian for Count. If you're American, you may have trouble understanding some of the Irish and British accents, but it's full of information and trivia. All serious fans of Bram Stoker and Dracula should see this.

Reference:
Bram Stoker. Dracula [Kindle Edition]. 1897.