Horror Movie Reviews
More Details...Price: $14.98 |
Title: Dan Curtis' Dracula (2002) |
|
Review of Dan Curtis' Dracula
No Review at this Current Time
[ Back to Homepage | Back to Horror Movie Reviews Index ]
HellHorror.com not responsible for reviews/comments and they may be removed at any time.
Submit Comment
Login / Join/Register for a free account
Comments for Dan Curtis' Dracula
- Posted on 2008-03-15
An Eerie, Scary, Well Done, Dracula
It is Jack Palance done at his usual best. Very eerie and has great atmosphere. Very scary, so be sure you don't see it before you retire for bed. It was presented on American TV years ago and it stands up well. This Dracula has some empathy as he is trapped in an undead world and longs for his love that he had when he was alive. Because of this, he pursues a woman who looked like her before his demise killing anyone in his way.
This version shows how he became Dracula. In life, he was so cruel as a Count impaling his victims and showing no mercy, that he became the undead defeating death itself.
The ending is a classic. Of all of the Draculas I have seen over my lifetime, this,in my opinion,is the best.
The DVD, itself, was in excellent shape and the delivery time was even faster than was promised. A great one to have in one's collection. Jack Palance was the consummate actor. This movie is a must for horror and vampire movie fans.
Score: 5
- Posted on 2007-10-04
Bill Curtis' Dracula
A very well done retelling of the Dracula story.
Jack Palance is very evil and chilling as the Count.
Score: 4
- Posted on 2006-08-18
Solid production
This 1974 version of Dracula, starring good old Jack Palance, is a nice solid production. Palance gives a somber, but at the same time also a ferocious portrayal of the legendary count and warrior prince.
This movie has a nice gothic feel to it, and most of the actors are decent. That said, I don't think that younger people will enjoy this film, since it doesn't contain a lot of action and special effects. Remember that it was made in the 70's. But if you are looking for a vampire movie with some nice atmosphere and one of the best Dracula interpretations ever, then this is for you.
Score: 4 - Posted on 2005-11-23
An excellent film version of the Bram Stoker classic.
Although this is neither the best, nor the most faithful film verison of Bram Stoker's novel (that honor goes to "Count Dracula" with Louis Jordan), it scores well on several levels.
Jack Palance is perfectly cast as Dracula, truly frightening at times, yet also a somewhat sympathetic and tragic figure. The film makes passing reference to his (very) long career as warrior and leader and the crushing loss of his wife, which has clearly haunted him through the centuries. These references effectively echo actual events in the life of 15th Century Wallachian prince Vlad Tepes ("Vlad the Impaler"), Stoker's inspiration for the fictional vampire Count, which few Dracula films do. Palance also adds a degree of sexuality to the role that few actors have achieved, particularly in his "love" scenes with Fiona Lewis.
Like most film adaptations, this one is not entirely faithful to Stoker's novel. The character of Renfield is missing, for example, and Jonathan Harker is reduced to a hapless victim, who disappears for most of the film, reappearing near the end as yet another vampire, who is quickly dispatched. This is one of several similarities to the 1958 Hammer film "Horror of Dracula," which also includes a similar death scene for the Count. Palance's interpretation is also closer to that of Christopher Lee's in the Hammer film than any other film portrayal and it stands in sharp contrast to Bela Lugosi's seminal performance in Universal's 1931 "Dracula."
The film also drops many of the traditional movie Dracula set pieces. For example, the Count never turns into a bat, a misty cloud, or a wolf (although he does employ wolves as his familiars). The usually reliable cross and garlic aren't very effective as vampire deterrents.
All of that said, this is one of the better Dracula films. It is atmospheric, well written, paced and filmed, and captures the essence of the good Count - both the terror he spread and his own tragedy.
AW
Score: 4 - Posted on 2005-09-04
Jack Palance is miscast, but Richard Matheson's script is interesting
This 1974 television movie version of "Dracula" is an attempt to adapt Bram Stoker's original novel. Director Dan Curtis had some bona fides in the realm of vampires as the producer of the television soap "Dark Shadows" and the prime time drama "The Night Stalker." More importantly, the script was written by Richard Matheson, who just in terms of his television resume was the renowned writer of not only classic episodes of "The Twilight Zone" but also the scripts for the television movies "Duel" and "The Night Stalker." The problem here is the decision to cast Jack Palance as Dracula. He is not as bad as John Carradine, but he is heading in that direction, not because Palance is a bad actor but because he is just flat out wrong for this role, especially since there is a sense of presenting the Count as a tragic figure, which should manifest itself in more ways than looking sad.
The fidelity to Stoker's novel is the main strength of the first part of the film where Jonathan Harker (Murray Brown) goes to meet the Count in Transylvania, and Matheson earns bonus points for linking the vampire to Vlad the Impaler. However, because the movie is made for television there are some extensive cuts. Reducing the band of vampire hunters who join with Dr. Van Helsing (Nigel Davenport) to just Arthur Holmwood (Simon Ward) is understandable, but the decision to jettison everything at the lunatic asylum hurts (although I supposed once you lose Renfield you really cut your link to Universal's 1931 "Dracula"). What we get in its place are the flashbacks that try to create sympathy for Dracula mixed in with what happens in England where Jonathan's fiancée, Mina Murray (Penelope Horner) visits Whitby to be with her friend Lucy Westenra r (Fiona Lewis), who starts sleepwalking and evidencing a loss of blood. Holmwood calls in Dr. Van Helsing to solve the case, and it is he who tells them about the nosferatu. However, Lucy is doomed and that leads to the final mad dash to beat the Count back to his castle in Transylvania. In terms of finishing off Dracula, this one comes up with one of the better endings.
Palance is miscast, actually being closer to the portrayal of Dracula by Christopher Lee, saying little but trying to look vicious. If this were a Hammer film, fine, but that is not what the script indicates. Meanwhile, Davenport is simply making bad choices in the role of Van Helsing, so that you never feel the Doctor is smart enough to take down the Count. You can decide for yourself which one of these two you would most like to get rid of, but I will maintain that a different actor as Dracula, one who would bring to life the charming and dangerous Count of the novel, could have made this one of the best Dracula adaptations ever. Everybody else in the cast is okay, although seeing Pamela Brown as Mrs. Westenra is bittersweet; the actress who made her mark as Jennet Jourdemayne in Christopher Fry's "The Lady's Not for Burning" died the year after making this film.
"Dracula" was the last of a series of classic horror stories that Curtis remade for television, going back to 1968's "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde," and then versions of "Frankenstein" and "The Picture of Dorian Grey" in 1973, and "Turn of the Screw" and this film in 1974. However, the main reason I round up on this one in the end is simply because of Matheson's script. You just need to try and look past the casting to see what he was trying to do in adapting Stoker's novel. Then you can decide where this adaptation stands in relationship to "Nosferatu," the Lugosi "Dracula," "The Horror of Dracula" from Hammer, "Count Dracula" by Jess Franco with Christopher Lee, the BBC adaptation of "Count Dracula" with Louis Jordan, the Frank Langella "Dracula," the Werner Herzog remake of "Nosferatu the Vampyre, " Francis Ford Coppola's opulent "Bram Stoker"s Dracula" with Gary Oldman, and, for something interestingly different, Guy Maddin's ballet adaptation "Dracula: Pages from a Virgin's Diary." Just do not be surprised if this one comes out dead (or undead) in the middle.
Score: 4