Post by Eλευθερί on Oct 16, 2020 9:43:57 GMT
There are aspects of this film that I really liked, such as the score, the setting of Castle Dracula, some of the design and costumes, the period car (including in the chase scene), and the final confrontation between Dracula and Van Helsing and Harker. Kate Nelligan was great as Lucy, and Donald Pleasence as Dr. Seward is very possibly one of my favorite performances in a Dracula film.
But rewatching this film after many years, I see a number of things that detract from the overall experience. The bats, as in most (all?) Dracula films look phony, and the wolves don't look threatening. The ship being tossed by the turbulent waves and then crashing on the rocks was painfully obviously a model, even from how the waves looked. Laurence Olivier's accent was a mess. And some of the Dracula's costumes (and 70's hairdo) weren't believable at all.
The worst thing, though, about the version of the film I just rewatched is that the colors are horrible. I remember being impressed by how the film looked when I originally saw it. There were outdoors scenes showing the blue-grey overcast of the English coast that fit the haunting mood perfectly. None of that is visible in the version I just rewatched. I see that the director insisted that all of the home-release versions of the films since the early 1990s have been desaturated because he had always wanted the film to actually be in black-and-white (the studio made him shoot in color). That has ruined what otherwise had been a beautiful film in terms of color and lighting.
8.5/10 partly out of nostalgia
But rewatching this film after many years, I see a number of things that detract from the overall experience. The bats, as in most (all?) Dracula films look phony, and the wolves don't look threatening. The ship being tossed by the turbulent waves and then crashing on the rocks was painfully obviously a model, even from how the waves looked. Laurence Olivier's accent was a mess. And some of the Dracula's costumes (and 70's hairdo) weren't believable at all.
The worst thing, though, about the version of the film I just rewatched is that the colors are horrible. I remember being impressed by how the film looked when I originally saw it. There were outdoors scenes showing the blue-grey overcast of the English coast that fit the haunting mood perfectly. None of that is visible in the version I just rewatched. I see that the director insisted that all of the home-release versions of the films since the early 1990s have been desaturated because he had always wanted the film to actually be in black-and-white (the studio made him shoot in color). That has ruined what otherwise had been a beautiful film in terms of color and lighting.
8.5/10 partly out of nostalgia
