Dracula (1974) Dir: Dan Curtis

Instagram post:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DRpQhofjGrd/?igsh=ZzA1YXAzYmh1eDBu

If there's one type of media I always have time for, it's cinematic adaptations of Bram Stoker's legendary 'Dracula' text. I adore the book, and have always been tempted by the many films that it has spawned. On this occasion, I chose to watch this 1974 adaptation, directed by Dan Curtis. It is not one of the more acclaimed versions of the epic vampire tale, but it still intrigued me, with its unique casting and supposedly more faithful narrative.

I had a few issues with the cinematography, chiefly the copious amount of dramatic zooms, which lost any impact, and ended up feeling extremely goofy instead. I was also not particularly keen on the lighting - it was all too bright. Furthermore, the bright colours were far too garish for the 'Dracula' aesthetic. The film felt tonally all over the place, from a visual standpoint.

The story was one of the more faithful adaptations to Bram Stoker's novel that I've seen, certainly more so than the Francis Ford Coppola version, or even the Hammer adaptations. The alterations that were made, this was one of the earliest versions in which 'Dracula' has romantic urges, were entertaining enough, and this evolution of the narrative was pretty concise, if a little rushed, at points. It wasn't the best version ot the story I've engaged with, but it also wasn't the worst.

Jack Palance was a renowned actor, but his portrayal of 'Dracula' really was not for me. His facial expressions were bizarre, his reactions to the classic vampire vices were weak, and he really could not kiss to save his life - it was comical. Conversely, I really enjoyed Nigel Davenport's beady-eyed portrayal of Van Helsing, particularly during the third act, in which his character's steely disposition really came to the fore.

Those two aside, it was the female characters, played by Fiona Lewis and Penelope Horner, who were the most notable to me. Both exhibited plenty of the classic, Victorian-era, lady-in-distress sensibilities, that help in making the threat of Dracula feel so real. There were also some less convincing performances, from the pair of Simon Ward and Murray Brown, who didn't really feel like the characters they were portraying, especially Ward, who I didn't care for at all.

Overall, whilst this film did certainly carry merit, it was still one of the weaker 'Dracula' films I've seen. It was lacking a truly charismatic and terrifying villain, instead featuring a bizarre and unconvincing depiction of the world's most famous vampire. Ultimately, the film was missing the grandeur, characterisation, and suspense, which has made some of the more beloved adaptations so popular.