THE DANMAN CAN

While undoubtedly one of the most influential horror films ever made, I've never been able to fully connect with  Tod Browning 's  Dracula  (1931). There is much to love, but I've always found it a bit plodding. With its stiff performances, lack of score, and slow pace, I don't think it would be a quarter of the film it is without  Bela Lugosi . Every moment he is on screen is electric; every moment he is not, it's painfully obvious (though  Dwight Frye  is a delightfully unhinged Renfield). Compare this with  James Whale 's  Frankenstein  ( review ), released later the same year—that film is much more dynamic and dramatic. Browning's film set the blueprint for the many (many, many) adaptations of the story and portrayals of the character that have come since, there's no denying that. But, as far as early adaptations of  Bram Stoker 's  Dracula   (1897) go, I'll take  F.W. Murnau 's  Nosferatu  (1922) ( review ) ...

George Melford ’s Drácula (1931) utilized the same sets as  Tod Browning ’s production ( review ), shooting with a Spanish cast at night after the American crew would wrap each day, and was released a few weeks following the more well-known US classic. While the performances can be just as stiff as Browning’s film, there is a certain flair that only a Spanish cast can bring (though  Carlos Villarías , while engaging and quite good, is certainly no  Bela Lugosi ).  Overall the cinematography is less dramatic, but there are a few differing, atmospheric shots that are superior in Melford’s version. There’s also a sexual suggestiveness (courtesy of  Lupita Tovar ) in the Spanish production not present in the American version. One area where the Spanish version suffers is being 30 minutes longer—the longest of all the classic  Universal Monsters  movies and longer than it needs to be to tell this story (in this era of moviemaking). All in all, while ...

While undoubtedly one of the most influential horror films ever made, I've never been able to fully connect with  Tod Browning 's Dracula  (1931). There is much to love, but I've always found it a bit plodding. With its stiff performances, lack of score, and slow pace, I don't think it would be a quarter of the film it is without  Bela Lugosi . Every moment he is on screen is electric; every moment he is not, it's painfully obvious (though  Dwight Frye  is a delightfully unhinged Renfield). Compare this with  James Whale 's  Frankenstein  ( review ), released later the same year—that film is much more dynamic and dramatic. Browning's film set the blueprint for the many (many, many) adaptations of the story and portrayals of the character that have come since, there's no denying that. But, as far as early adaptations of Bram Stoker 's Dracula (1897) go, I'll take  F.W. Murnau 's  Nosferatu  (1922) ( review ) over D31  any day. ...

The final addition to the classic  Universal Monsters ,  Creature From The Black Lagoon (1954) (followed by two sequels which I have yet to see) is more of '50s monster movie, typical of the time, than the Universal Monsters movies that preceded it, but it's immensely enjoyable regardless. CFTBL features lots of thrilling underwater cinematography, a bombastic, menacing score,  Julie Adams  being drop dead gorgeous in every frame, and a classic, iconic (sadly, uncredited)  Milicent Patrick  creature design. Happy 70th anniversary, Creature ! (Classic) Universal Monsters Films Ranked

Like its predecessor ( review ), a true classic (and in many ways its equal). There's no way that The Bride Of Frankenstein (1935) would have turned out as good as it did if  James Whale  hadn't returned to direct and  Boris Karloff  and  Colin Clive  hadn't returned to star. BOF  is one of the quintessential  Universal Monsters  movies. BOF  is a textbook example of how to do a sequel right—expand upon the characters (the Monster learns to speak, etc.), add new ones ( Ernest Thesiger  as Doctor Pretorius and  Elsa Lanchester  as the Bride) that are as interesting as the existing ones, and up the stakes. Revisiting moments and themes from a first film in a franchise, in a sequel, is always a tricky balancing act—it's been done so many times since that it feels rote by now, but here, in one of the earliest examples of that (maybe even the first?), it's exquisite.  Jack Pierce  does sterling makeup work and proli...