Showing posts with label Dracula. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dracula. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 26, 2020

It's World Dracula Day!


1897 is an important year 'round these parts. Not only was it the setting for Dark Shadows' popular and creative peak, it was the year Bram Stoker's Dracula first reached readers. It wasn't the first vampire novel, but it has stood the test of time and proven itself the most important of its kind. Every vampire story since has had to define itself against Stoker's novel ... no matter the author's intentions.

Dracula was released on this day in 1897, which has since been recognized as World Dracula Day. Even though I know there are objectively better books out there (such as Mary Shelley's Frankenstein) it's been my favorite for as long as I can remember. As a character, Dracula has proven to be endlessly malleable, warping into various identities over the last 120+ years. Dracula has become the Jerry Cornelius of bloodsuckers since falling into public domain, taking on various names and faces as he's spread virally across media. Dracula has fought Billy the Kid, crossed wits with The X-Men, and adopted pseudonyms like Johnny AlucardVladislav the PokerJerry Dandrige and yes ... Barnabas Collins. There will be Dracula stories long after we're all gone.

To celebrate, all of the vampire-related listings at Unlovely Frankenstein are on sale today for 25% off. Featured are my prints inspired by Vampira, the 1931 Dracula feature and its 1936 sequel Dracula's Daughter, Fright Night, House of Dark Shadows and more. You can find the sales listings at https://www.etsy.com/shop/UnlovelyFrankenstein?section_id=1

(Note: Episode 761 of Dark Shadows aired on this date in 1969. Set during durng the 1897 arc, the episode had Barnabas Collins engaging in some decidedly un-Dracula-like adventures, particularly the rescue of Nora and Jamison from a fire.)

Saturday, January 4, 2020

Mark Gatiss stars in vampire prequel story, Dracula’s Guests


Greetings from the distant past! I'm writing this from the year 2020, 10:15 a.m. Jan. 3 EST. I fear nobody will ever read this letter, given the shitstorm the world is rapidly becoming. #WorldWarIII was actually trending on Twitter this morning, perhaps becoming the first international conflict begun on a social media platform. Donald Trump is so awful he makes me want to believe there is a god, because the thought of that amoral cretin spending eternity in a hellscape designed by Hieronymus Bosch warms the cockles of my cold little heart. Seriously, fuck that guy right in the ear.

I'm having to write this in advance because the announcement was embargoed until 4 p.m. GMT on Jan. 4. There hasn't been a lot of news lately on the Big Finish front about Dark Shadows, but here's something to tide you over until the series fires up later this year: Dracula's Guests, a prequel starring Mark Gatiss as the count. Here's the press release:
Hot on the heels of his spectacular BBC Studios/Netflix production, Mark Gatiss returns to the world of Bram Stoker’s vampire in a full cast audio production from Big Finish.

A prequel to the events of the original novel, Dracula’s Guests is adapted by Jonathan Barnes and forms the opening chapter in a trilogy of terrifying Dracula audio adventures.

Dracula's Guests will be released in February 2020 and is available now at the special pre-order price of $26.15 as a three-disc collector’s edition CD or  $16.99 as a download.

Transylvania, 1888. Sitting in his castle like a spider in its web, Count Dracula is setting his plans in motion. Soon he will travel to England, there to cut a bloody swathe through polite society and pit himself against a dedicated crew of vampire-slayers. Yet before then there is much to be done. A certain artist must be brought to him and a certain portrait painted. An old tale must be told, drawn from the darkest recesses of Transylvanian history. And in faraway London an honest police detective must be corrupted and set to work in the service of the Count. The vampire king is making preparations. And his survival will be assured – no matter the cost.

Dracula’s Guests stars Mark Gatiss as Count Dracula, David Bamber (Jeremiah Hart), Ian Hallard (RM Renfield) and Hannah Arterton (Sabine).

Actor Mark Gatiss said: “As a life-long horror fan, vampires – and Dracula in particular – were always my favourite of them all. Stoker very mysteriously never bothered to write a sequel, but I thought it would be quite an interesting thing to come back to. He's always coming back, isn't he? It's the point of Dracula.”

Writer Jonathan Barnes agreed: “There are so many loose strands, so many unfinished elements, so many things that are left unexplained in the original book, it seems almost to encourage us as writers to explore the world further. From that we've built up quite an elaborate story.”

Producer and director Scott Handcock added: “It was a thrill to bring Dracula back to life with our adaptation of the original novel in 2016, and an even bigger thrill when Mark Gatiss approached me a few months later asking whether we might be able to tell further tales of the Count. We’ve got some familiar faces returning, plus some fantastic new characters too, and of course, right at the heart, the ominous presence of Dracula himself, once more conjured into existence by Mark!”

Dracula's Guests will be released in February 2020 and is available now at the special pre-order price of £19.99 as a three-disc collector’s edition CD or £16.99 as a download.

Save money with the Dracula trilogy bundle (including the adaptation of the novel Dracula, and the sequel release due in September 2020, Dracula’s War) for just £53 as a collector’s edition CD box set or £45 as a download. 

Thursday, February 15, 2018

Amazon Prime ♥ Dan Curtis



McDonald's announced today that it will no longer be offering cheeseburgers in Happy Meals.

That's not to say that they won't still be available, mind you. If your kid has to have a goddamn cheeseburger, McDonald's is still a business and will kindly sell you one. But it won't be an item included in its posted menus.

I mention this to make a point: It's a weird, unfamiliar world in which we live. For example, MPI Home Video is now streaming a bunch of movies written and/or produced by DARK SHADOWS' creative architect Dan Curtis on Amazon Prime. These were movies that have rarely seen the light of day during the last 30 years, but are now available at your fingertips at any hour of the day, probably best viewed in the wee hours of the morning with a stiff drink in your hand. The available catalog include adaptions of many of the books that "inspired" storylines on DARK SHADOWS, ranging from his collaborations with Jack Palance (THE STRANGE CASE OF DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE, DRACULA) to the cult classic TRILOGY OF TERROR.

Curtis was an incredibly prolific producer, so this list falls far short of capturing his entire catalog. But, save for the three theatrical releases he helmed, it represents most the horror-related movies Curtis was involved with. You'll also see a handful of DARK SHADOWS alumni appear in some of these flicks, including an uncredited Kathryn Leigh Scott as one of the ghosts in THE TURN OF THE SCREW and a misspelled John "Karlin" Karlen in TRILOGY OF TERROR. The list also includes the 1986 Biblical story ST. JOHN IN EXILE with Dean Jones of THE LOVE BUG (which is easily the most WTF?! sentence I'll write all day) and all 1,225 episodes of DARK SHADOWS.

Below you'll find a list of the Curtis' productions now streaming on Amazon Prime, as well as a link to help you upon your quest. A special "thanks" to @frid_barnabas for the tip. He's a fellow DARK SHADOWS fan and you should totally follow him on Twitter.

TRILOGY OF TERROR: link

DAN CURTIS' DRACULA : link

FRANKENSTEIN : link

THE STRANGE CASE OF DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE : link

THE PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY: link

THE TURN OF THE SCREW: link

ST. JOHN IN EXILE: link

DARK SHADOWS: link

Monday, May 1, 2017

Walpurgisnacht: The Other Halloween



The Collinsport Historical Society loves our witches. Whether they're using a bastardized forms of black magic that have more to do with voodoo than witchcraft (Angelique, I'm looking at you) or casting "binding spells" on the Pussy Grabber in Chief, we like to stay on the good sides of these people, be they real or imaginary.

Currently taking place is this year's Walpurgisnacht, which kicked into gear last night and wraps later this evening. It's probably not a coincidence that Walpurgisnacht (or Walpurgis Night,  Hexennacht or "Witches Night") also marks the halfway mark on the calendar to Halloween. Like Halloween, Walpurgis traces its history to ancient pagan customs, and is a night reserved for witches and their cohorts to stir up trouble before Spring returns and spoils everybody's fun. Witches congregated on  the highest peak in the Harz Mountains, prompting the locals to burn bonfires, douse themselves in holy water and decorate their homes in the Hammer Horror Chic. These traditions have been around for centuries in one form or another, though the first written reference to Walpurgisnacht didn't make its appearance until the 19th century.

Bram Stoker's novel "Dracula" also begins in earnest on May 1. Jonathan Harker's first journal entry is dated May 3, but begins by chronicling his arrival in Vienna two days earlier. Tod Browning's 1931 feature film (possibly a revision from the Hamilton Deane and John L. Balderston stage play) toys with the timeline a bit, showing Renfield arriving in Transylvania on Walpurgis Night.

In the spirit of that, below are a few links to some of our MONSTER SERIAL features from recent years, spotlighting movies that feature witches, vampires or other pagan shenanigans. Click on the images to travel directly to those posts.



Monday, September 28, 2015

TCM is preparing a double dose of DRACULA for Halloween


Turner Classic Movies is giving you two chances to see the original 1931 DRACULA on the big screen in October. Even better, each screening is being packaged with 1931 Spanish-language version of the film, creating a monster-sized double feature.

I've been pretty vocal about my love of the Tod Browning/Bela Lugosi feature. But, if you haven't seen the Spanish-language version — shot after hours using the same sets as Browning's film — you're missing out. It's actually a better film than the Lugosi version, save for one critical casting decision: Carlos Villarías as the Count. As my grandmother used to say, "He'd have to stand on a step ladder just to kiss Bela Lugosi's ass."

The first screening is set for Sunday, Oct. 25, with an encore taking place Wednesday, Oct. 28. The package runs a little more than three hours and is rated PG-13 for some reason. Find a screening in your area by visiting Fandango's event page HERE.

Via: Fandango

Friday, August 21, 2015

Monster Serial: DRACULA vs FRANKENSTEIN


By HERB GILLMAN

DRACULA vs FRANKENSTEIN.

Words to thrill the inner five year-old in all of us.  And for the five year-old, I think it delivers.
Do the two giants meet?  Yes.  Do they fight?  Yes.  Extended grappling.  Decapitation of Frankenstein, as I seem to recall.

And here is a fine point of order.

With the intense emotional regression living in director Al Adamson’s vision, he is not “the creature,” or “the monster,” or “Frankenstein’s monster.”

This film is made by and for all those who simply call the creature, Frankenstein, and they know a Frankenstein when they see one, goddammit, so don’t tell me it’s “Frankenstein’s Monster!” It’s Frankenstein.

If you approach the film from that perspective, you’ll be fine.


Dr. (okay, now we’re getting correct) Frankenstein’s descendent, Dr. Duryea, labors in a lab under a Venice Beach spook show.  He’s brought back the Creature.  He’s making deals with Dracula to do science stuff while a comet passes over.  He’s using injections to turn a non-speaking Lon Chaney, Jr. into a murdering mutant, killin’ gals under the boardwalk. I’ve seen it several times and the details of it go in one eye and out the other.

A showgirl goes in search of her missing sister (a victim of Duryea’s), only to find companionship in adventure and social release with a middle-aged, bead-wearing “observer,” who oversees a commune of white, suburban, immaculately bathed hippies.  He’s great ... like Ron Burgundy’s uncle.  He can talk about his feelings, make a woman feel whole, but still has a mellow sense of authority that rolls off him like the scent of bourbon Borkum Riff over a Moscow Mule.  When he needs to Help Investigate, Mike Howard is on the scene, yinging and yanging his way through the shit, man. Through the shit.

And arguably, there is a lot of it here.

The two of them are the foci for occasional revisitation for the film as it comes up with stuff to happen between when it starts and when it ends.

That’s pretty much what it feels like.


By all fair measure, it is a Bad Movie.  On a Ron and June Ormond level.  It doesn’t have the blood and bosoms of an HG Lewis movie nor the ascetic indulgence of an Ed Wood opus, but it still works.  Yes, bad movies can work, and it’s actually making me uncomfortable to use the phrase “bad movie.”

Because I don’t believe in the “good” bad movie.

It’s either bad because it doesn’t entertain me, or it’s good because it does.
 
Look at the films of Ed Wood. They are tight, bizarre tales of strange urgency and poetic fervor. They almost feel like Medieval morality plays with strange masques and choruses pronouncing odd cant and shamanic portents.

No, I’m not kidding.

Cinema, prior to video games, was our newest art form and a medium younger than many of the artists still exploring it.  Certain (not all) movies don’t conform to the rules and conventions we’ve agreed upon as acceptable filmmaking.  That doesn’t make them bad.


Bad means, well, bad.  You wanna talk “bad”?  Let’s talk UNDERWORLD or CHARLIE’S ANGELS: FULL THROTTLE or BALLS OF FURY.  These are films that made me angry over the time I’d wasted on them.  They are “bad” as in, “I would never watch them again.”

I’d originally begun this review as a comedy review for Herb (the Creature from the Black Lagoon) Gillman to review in first-person.  I couldn’t get it off the ground, although for fun, I include the beginning below ...

As I told my patient, Steve Sondheim over something we drank out of a skull at Trader Vic’s, in a quote he downright pilfered from me, “Art isn’t easy.”

Truer words, my friend.  Truer words.

Hello, my name is Dr. Herb Gillman.  Most people around Cocoa Beach know me as the “so gentle it’s mental” dentist, but a few peer a little deeper, and still recognize me as the eponymous “Creature” of Universal’s notorious mockumentaries.  Guilty as charged… but only of being one of the last of my kind.  That’s it.  I had been goaded into appearing in three “Creature from the Black Lagoon” documentaries before catching wise to Universal’s exploitation of me.


Universal liked to obscure the truth.  Why?  I don’t know.  Director Al Adamson and I were both well into our cups at the Riverside premier of SATAN’S SADISTS a year earlier.  The subject came up.  We agreed to change things for the better.

Sometimes a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it.

Sometimes it falls and it sounds like a majestic tree-thing that has fallen in a tragic, arboreal manner.
Sometimes it sounds like the mighty oak is hitting my sister, Carol Channing.

All are good, noble sounds.

We made none of them.

Instead, we made DRACULA VERSUS FRANKENSTEIN.

I liked that beginning a lot.  I think it was going to be an attempt at an exposé gone horribly awry.  Maybe Herb was going to be the choreographer of the deliciously wretched, Vegastastic, Ann-Margaret-by-way-of-Big-Lots opening musical number, performed (not sure about sung) by Regina Carroll, the director’s wife.

But, dammit.  I enjoyed watching the strange, haphazard, wooden movie.  It’s just thrilled with the illusion of its absent panache, and there is a perverse enthusiasm in that.  I remember the days when having a video camera (or a computer) was considered tantamount to having a platinum plated Trapper Keeper. (Or a Kenner Millennium Falcon in its first year of production.)  The idea of being able to make a movie at all was a fantasy as distant as a milkshake date with the indescribably sublime Lisa Welchel.  I can feel the giddiness that Al Adamson, roughhewn though he may be, was out to make a Monster Movie, by gum, and his friend Forrest J. Ackerman would be on hand as technical advisor to see that things went right.  The enthusiasm is palpable.


The ridiculousness of the film is piled higher than a sandwich from Canter’s.  You want a money-eating littler person, it’s there.  You want hilarious and nonsensical circular logic in the movie’s attempts at deep dialogue?  Say no more; they will.  Russ Tamblyn?  Yes. We have Tamblyn.  Lon Chaney never speaks, but cradles a puppy in a bizarre homage to OF MICE AND MEN.  (Yes, Chaney in that boozy state is sad, but he was still working and getting a check.  There are worse fates for an actor.  And he looks far less miserable than I know he was during his Mummy stint.)  Heck, we even see the actual electric props from FRANKENSTEIN and a zillion other Universal classics… in full color and going strong!

This essay is one of dozens featured in our new
book, "Taste the Blood of Monster Serial."
I watched the film for a second time with a friend, and we found it imminently quotable and enjoyable.  In all of this, I am not saying to throw critical standards out the window.  Nor am I saying that we merely take ghoulish delight in bad films the way that some treat three-car pileups.  No.  I’m just suggesting that the phrase “so bad it’s good” go the way of “some of my best friends are…” in the lexicon.  It’s an interesting mental exercise.  Take the phrase out, but defend a movie you used to just slather with that bit of rhetoric.  I think you’ll find very quickly why you actually like it.  And it’s not just because it’s “bad.”  Maybe it’s shamelessly overwrought.  Maybe it’s drunk on its own theatricality… which is better than having no theatricality at all.  Or maybe it’s just fun.  Fun is not anathema in cinema.  Even serious films have a jolt of it.  Imagine saying that a film was “so joyless that it was fun”?  Hard to pull off.  Possible, Henry Jaglom, but rare.

Let’s hear it for Al Adamson and fun.

Compare that to the sinking feeling you probably get today as one lugubrious trailer unspools after another at your multiplex.  Zach Snyder could use a little Al Adamson.  Or maybe more than a little.



author-picHERB GILLMAN is the alter-ego of Patrick McCray, a comic book author residing in Knoxville, Tenn., where he's been a drama coach and general nuisance since 1997. He has a MFA in Directing and worked at Revolutionary Comics and on the early days of BABYLON 5, and is a frequent contributor to The Collinsport Historical Society. You can find him at The Collins Foundation.

Saturday, August 15, 2015

BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA getting a 4K restoration

I'm an admirer of Francis Ford Coppola's BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA, a movie that never got its due on home video. The 1992 film was released at a weird time for multi-media: when DVD took hold of the market a few years later, BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA was neither old enough nor new enough to get the kind of prestige release it arguably deserved. Fans of the film had to settle for the blink-or-you-missed-it Laserdisc release, or the bare bones Superbit edition.

I'm not going to waste a lot of space here defending the movie, but I think it's a flawed masterpiece (you can read my ramblings on the film HERE). Needless to say, I'm looking forward to a 4K restoration recently announced by Sony.


BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA will be released Oct. 6 as both a Blu-ray combo pack, and as something called the "Limited Edition Supreme Cinema Series" which features Blu-ray/digital HD versions of the film. The Supreme Cinema version includes a "high-end" transparent case and a 24-page booklet with rare photos, behind-the-scenes info and a new introduction from Coppola.

Both releases  include:
  • 4K Restoration
  • Dolby Atmos soundtrack (Dolby TrueHD 7.1 compatible)
  • Reflections in Blood: Francis Ford Coppola and Bram Stoker’s Dracula
  • Practical Magicians: A Collaboration Between Father and Son
  • Rare 1993 commentary with Francis Ford Coppola, Roman Coppola and Greg Cannom
  • Deleted scenes
  • Audio commentary & film introduction by Francis Ford Coppola
  • 4 "legacy featurettes" 
The Supreme Cinema edition retails for $38.99, but is currently available for pre-order for $27.99. Expect that price to fluctuate between now and the October release date.

Via: Amazon.

Friday, July 24, 2015

Monster Serial: DRACULA (1979)


By WALLACE McBRIDE

I like a good horror movie. I even like them when they’re not so good, and make no mistake: John Badham’s 1979 adaptation of Bram Stoker’s DRACULA is not a good movie.

Every generation gets the DRACULA it deserves, for better or worse. Created during the sexually staid Victorian era, the character is resurrected every few years to represent the sexual hangups of the day. Despite its efforts to create a realistic period piece, the 1979 movie is, in every way, a product of its time. And I don’t just mean actor Frank Langella’s disco pompadour.

Hot off the heels of SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER, Badham was a hot property for about 15 minutes at the end of the 1970s. Given his choice of movies, the director opted to film a contemporary revival of the “Dracula” stage play by Hamilton Deane and John L. Balderston. The movie carried over its leading man but abandoned the Edward Gorey production design, opting for a "realistic" tone that tried to jettison anything resembling artistic commentary.


As Hermann Rorschach would have told you, it’s almost impossible to create anything without making some kind of statement, intentional or otherwise. Langella’s Dracula represents the sexual hangover that was beginning to seep into America’s consciousness at the start of the 1980s. While Bela Lugosi’s Dracula symbolized the threat of the foreign mystique (and whatever unspeakable diseases “they” might carry) there’s no effort to make Langella seem anything more than American. He adopts no accent, speaks Romanian in one scene for no other reason than to impress a lady, and generally dresses like he’s on the way to Studio 54. Langella’s character just wants to get laid, regardless of the consequences.

Pitted against Dracula’s raw sexuality are a collection of father figures, as well as Jonathan Harker, who is as impotent a figure here as in the novel. The characters and their relationships are shuffled around in this movie to stress this battle of generational ideals. Here, Van Helsing is Mina’s father, with Mina being the first of Dracula’s victims. Lucy is the daughter of Dr. Seward and the MacGuffin that drives the rest of the film, with Harker cast as cuckold.


As characters, the women of this movie are almost beside the point. They’re something to be fought over and are never to be trusted. The film seems oblivious to this attitude, and even ends on a shockingly bleak, stupid and misogynistic moment where we’re supposed to believe Dracula has survived based on nothing more than a wry smile from Lucy.

There’s really no reason to get into much detail about the story because it doesn’t venture far from the beaten path in regard to the novel's major plot points. It makes does make a few interesting changes, though, and these changes ultimately subvert Stoker's original subtext. In the novel, Van Helsing leads Lucy’s suitors to destroy her, with her fiancee driving the stake through her heart on their wedding night. It’s pretty clear what the scene in the novel is about, but changing these characters from potential lovers to parents creates a much different effect. Rather than a perverse mockery of a wedding, we get a scene symbolic of parents trying to save a child from a dangerous lifestyle. Sure, the scene ends with the parents killing her, but at least she’s not acting like a slut anymore. Or something.

Men rarely fall under Dracula’s sway, and it’s telling that most of the movie’s action involves saving women from their own decisions. I hope you weren’t too attached to those feminist values because the dawn of the 1980s are breathing down your neck in this film. And it’s breath is kinda stank.


As for the actual production, it’s rather staid. If Francis Ford Coppola’s DRACULA (1992) went over the top, the 1979 film is cinematic somnambulism. For the DVD, Badham sapped much of the color from the original film to create a print that’s almost black and white. While it makes the movie look a little more timeless, there’s no way to color correct your way around the hairstyles and other vestiges of 1970s fashion on display. Retrofitting your movie to hide its age is about as effective as wearing a toupee to your class reunion: it just looks silly and doesn’t fool anybody.

DRACULA is a hodgepodge of great and terrible moments. Langella is terrific as Dracula, playing him as a sexual predator who knowingly uses his charm to get over on the world. It’s pretty funny that he never tries to hide its rampant douchebaggery from the men in the movie, even taunting them occasionally. Laurence Olivier, who had taken to making a lot of bullshit later in his career (THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL, CLASH OF THE TITANS, THE JAZZ SINGER) brings a lot of genuine emotion to the role and doesn’t phone it in. Even though Badham was committed to making “entertainment” (i.e. “junk food”) Olivier took his job seriously. The scene where he’s forced to kill his own daughter is heartbreaking, but it’s a shame the character’s sadness is mostly forgotten by the time the next scene rolls around.


The special effects run the gamut, with the smaller camera tricks being the most effective. Dracula escapes his captors in one scene by leaping through a window, emerging on the other side as a wolf. This is accomplished through careful editing, works like gangbusters and will make you hate CGI werewolves even more than you already do. The makeup effects are subtle and work more often than not, but also point to the movie’s habit of failing to clear the really tall hurdles. The makeup for Dracula’s death in the movie’s climax is awful and looks as though someone plastered Langella’s face with Elmer’s Glue and let it dry. His entire death is ridiculously contrived, with a dying Van Helsing impaling Dracula on a cargo hook and hanging him out to dry in the sunlight. It’s the worst vampire death scene until DRACULA 2000 came along.

And then there’s that sex scene. If you’ve never seen this movie, chances are you’ve still heard about the ridiculous sex scene between Langella and Kate Nelligan, which looks like a deleted scene from 2001: A Space Odyssey. If a Blue Oyster Cult laser light show wasn’t enough, Badham sprinkles in a few bats during the snogging to remind us we’re watching a vampire movie. It’s a show stopper in the worst possible way. Badham should be grateful to Tim Burton’s DARK SHADOWS, thanks to its bar-lowering terrible sex scene.


Speaking of Nelligan, I quite liked her in the otherwise thankless role of Lucy. She’s a lot scarier than Dracula and essentially plays two different characters. It’s a credit to her that you can easily tell these two personalities apart, and she should have been given a lot more to do if the film wasn’t intent on painting women as backstabbing whores.

The makers of this film seemed especially proud of their work, even though they were mostly just making a Hammer film with a lot less cleavage. They also seemed to think their interpretation of Dracula as a character was unique.

“I don’t play him as a hair-raising ghoul. He is a nobleman, an elegant man with a very difficult problem... a man with a unique and distinctive social problem: he has to have blood to live and he is immortal.” 

This essay is one of dozens featured in our new
book, "Taste the Blood of Monster Serial."
That’s a quote from Frank Langella, but it was the kind of sentiment that Jonathan Frid grew tired of explaining long before the 1960s came to an end. Langella’s version of Dracula is much closer in conception to guys like Ted Bundy, in that he’s acutely aware that he’s using his charm to get over on people. Barnabas Collins was a fractured, delusional man, which made him a lot easier to relate to. Langella is the high school quarterback who always gets the girl, so those of us who lack that kind of charisma will instinctively hate the guy. About the only character in the movie that will be relatable to younger audience members will be Jonathan Harker, who’s very function is to be useless.

I’ve seen this movie a few times over the years. As a child, it was marketed pretty heavily, with that image of Langella leering over a woman’s throat plastered all over every bookstore, theater and bus terminal on both sides of the Atlantic. It was a dud, though, taking in about $20 million (about 1/4 of ALIEN’s box office take that same year.) DRACULA found a second life on video, mostly because it was released on VHS/Betamax about the same time the format gained a toehold on the market. Until BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA more than a decade later, it was the only big budget Dracula

adaptation to be released by Hollywood during this era. It’s about time for the novel to be revisited, and I’m curious to see what kind of social problem the character will come to represent as he is resurrected in his third century of existence. My prediction: porn addiction.

Wallace McBride is the editor of THE COLLINSPORT HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

Friday, May 29, 2015

Monster Serial: LOVE AT FIRST BITE


By JESSICA DWYER

1979 saw a boom in vampire films being released.  The Werner Herzog  remake of the classic NOSFERATU, Frank Langella’s version of DRACULA, and the creepfest from Stephen King, SALEM’S LOT, were just some of the bats flying around the belfry of many horror fans.

Within this batch of cinematic blood suckers was yet another version of the Lord of the Undead, but this time Dracula was going modern ... whether he liked it or not.  LOVE AT FIRST BITE gloried in the disco days of the late 70’s while paying homage to the classic films that starred Bela Lugosi as the classic version of Dracula.  While they poked fun at Lugosi’s Count, it wasn’t with a very sharp stake…but with a sharp wit and a slew of modern problems.

LOVE AT FIRST BITE was written by Robert Kaufman, a man known for goofy comedies on the big screen as well as on television, having written for THE BOB NEWHART SHOW.  It starred some familiar faces at the time and is filled with cameos.  Throughout the movie, stars like Sherman Hemsley, Isabel Sanford, and even Michael Pataki, who played Dracula in DRACULA’S DOG and another bloodsucker in GRAVE OF THE VAMPIRE.


George Hamilton, ironically the man known for his tan, is Count Dracula.  But the make-up work on Hamilton is so good you can’t tell how much he loves the sun.  This is due to William Tuttle who actually worked on Bela Lugosi in the 1935 classic MARK OF THE VAMPIRE and who worked on some big films over his storied career, including the 1974 horror comedy classic Young Frankenstein (which helped set the path for LOVE AT FIRST BITE to be made.)

Richard Benjamin who had made a mark in sci-fi with the movie WESTWORLD and the TV series Quark would play the Count’s nemesis Jeffrey Rosenberg (who was secretly a Van Helsing). Arte Johnson, a classic comedian, would be Renfield.  The lovely Susan Saint James, known for her work on TV as in MCMILLAN & WIFE, would be Dracula’s love interest, the very new world Cindy Sondheim.

The film begins in Transylvania, with Dracula, lonely and still in his castle, pining away for Cindy Sondheim as he looks through his fashion magazines.  He sees within her the soul of many a previous lost love, including Mina Harker.  A knock on the door heralds the arrival of the government.  They are taking the castle and Dracula is basically being evicted.  Even in Transylvania, the modern age doesn’t need or fear a vampire.


Dracula and Renfield pack up and leave, but not before telling the local mob that Transylvania will miss him once he’s gone.  Because seriously, what is there in Transylvania besides Dracula?  So they fly to New York where Dracula has decided to pursue his dream of wooing Cindy.

Taking a suite at the Plaza Hotel (after a mix up of coffins which causes Dracula to have to walk through Harlem and meet some of the locals) they discover where Cindy will be.  Dracula’s not really loving modern New York and it doesn’t seem to love him.  But then he sees Cindy at a local disco where she is every night.  The Lord of the Undead proceeds to sweep her off her feet (literally, in one of the best numbers EVER ... at least in my opinion) and he spends the night with her, giving her the first bite of three that will turn her into a vampire.

The next morning Cindy is telling her ex-boyfriend and current therapist Jeffrey about the experience.  The “hickey” she has disturbs him.   Meeting Vladimir, he and Jeffrey have a “who’s got the biggest hypnotic powers” showdown, causing Cindy to leave disgusted with both of them.  Eventually, after trying to set fire to the Count’s coffin and then trying to shoot him with silver bullets (that’s for werewolves not vampires), Rosenberg is committed, but joins forces with the police who finally start believing him.


Dracula has won Cindy, who decides she’ll go with him after a daring rescue of Cindy from an elevator she’s stuck in during a black out.  They dash to the airport with Rosenberg and the Lieutenant hot on their heels, but they miss their plane.  Dracula’s coffin is going to Jamaica and there’s nothing left to do but fly as a bat to escape.

Cindy realizes that she must finally choose what she wants in this world, something she’s never truly done.  Rosenberg calls out to her that he thinks he loves her, and Dracula — who has always loved her — waits her decision.  When he sees her hesitation he backs away, bowing and admitting that there is no room left for one such as him, or even for romance in the world.  But then something happens which rarely does ... Dracula gets the girl and Cindy becomes one of the undead, as Rosenberg and Lieutenant Ferguson arrive to stake the cape Dracula leaves behind.   Fluttering down from the sky is a check from Cindy for Rosenberg to pay for all her psychiatry sessions, and proving she’s actually become responsible for her life (or undeath.)


Rosenberg keeps the cape which Lieutenant Ferguson immediately asks to borrow because the two men determine it’s all about the cape (which I can’t fault logically ... sometimes it is).

LOVE AT FIRST BITE on the surface is a great comedy, but it’s also a bittersweet look at the culture at the time (and even today it hits a little too close to home).  Vladimir looked around and saw that the modern world was slowly destroying romance and chivalry, and when he meets Cindy he finds a woman who’s lost who she was to the world around her and trying to be what they all want; a pretty face, a dutiful girlfriend, and trying to fix what really makes her who she is away.  He accepts her and loves her for exactly who she is.  And that’s why for once, Dracula gets the girl and keeps her.  He’s not the monster in this movie. In a way, the ‘70’s is the film’s real villain.

This essay is one of dozens featured in our new
book, "Taste the Blood of Monster Serial."
For many years LOVE AT FIRST BITE was one of the highest grossing independent films ever made, and went on to be a huge hit and cult favorite.  When it arrived on television though many people missed the original song in that glorious dance scene which was “I love the Night Life” by Alicia Bridges due to licensing.  The DVD release also had to have the song removed which is a shame.  It was replaced by “The Man That I Love.” *

George Hamilton wants to eventually make a sequel and has been talking about it for the last few years.  It would in fact take on the influence of the Twilight phenomena as it applies to Dracula and would also include Dracula’s son in the mix.  But sadly nothing yet has come of this.  We can only hope that Hamilton gets his wish and we get to see him back in the cape, because if LOVE AT FIRST BITE taught us anything ... it’s all about the cape.

(* Editor’s Note: During production of this series, Shout! Factory released LOVE AT FIRST BITE on Blu-ray. The new edition also restores the Alicia Bridges song to the film’s dance scene.)

JESSICA DWYER is the host of Fangirl Radio and editor/writer of the website Fangirl Magazine.  She has written for various sites over the years and is a staff writer for HorrorHound Magazine for which her work has been nominated for the Rondo Hatton Awards.  Her short fiction has been published by Post Mortem Press.  She is currently working on producing and writing various projects for film and television as well as an upcoming book.

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Happy Birthday, Dracula!



Bram Stoker's "Dracula" began to appear in London bookstores for the first time on this day in 1897. When asked about the title of my favorite book, I'll usually say "Dracula." When I say something else, I'm lying.

My favorite edition of this book is Leonard Wolf's "The Annotated Dracula," published in 1975. It's chock full of maps, recipes, trivia and details about the author's research, and is a compelling read. It's a bit dated (the fall of Communism has opened up avenues of research into western Europe that weren't available in 1975) but is still a valuable resource. "The Annotated Dracula" has been out of print for decades, but inexpensive (used) copies are easy to find on Amazon. There's a paperback edition available for just a penny!

Thanks to the rather direct relationship between "Dracula" and DARK SHADOWS, we've had ample opportunity here at the CHS to discuss the King of the Vampires in his many forms. Below is a selection of links about the many adaptions/continuations of Stoker's original tale. Enjoy!

Monster Serial: DRACULA, 1931

VAMPIRES 101: Edward Gorey

Dan Curtis' DRACULA streaming on Hulu Plus

Vampires 101: No Stalgia is Good Stalgia

My Haunted Honeymoon

Vampires 101: Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)

Venture into the TOMB OF DRACULA

"Unnatural occurrences" plague DRACULA, 1929

Friday, April 24, 2015

Monster Serial: DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE

By FRANK JAY GRUBER

Of all the classic monster archetypes, the one most dependent on the forms of belief is the vampire. Belief or disbelief in the creature’s existence is often pivotal to the plot, there is a realignment of each victim’s faith and allegiance after each new seductive attack, and the fiend suffers from its vulnerability to the religious iconography of the crucifix when backed up by strong conviction.  While, for example, the Frankenstein monster or the Black Lagoon’s creature just attack victims and are defeated in straightforward fashion, vampire movies usually deal with the interplay of credence and conviction. Nowhere is this more in evidence than in 1968’s DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE, the third film in the Hammer series starring Christopher Lee.

The story begins with a flashback sequence set during the notorious count’s previous reign of terror in 1966’s Dracula - Prince of Darkness, which ended with the undead being’s plunge into the icy waters outside his castle. A young altar boy rides up to his village church one morning and discovers blood covering the bell pull as he attempts to sound the call for mass. The priest then visits the belfry and discovers a murdered young woman hanging upside down within the mouth of the bell, her life fluids draining and dripping down the rope. “Dear God!” he exclaims, “When shall we be free of his evil?”

In the narrative’s present day, one year later, the same priest says mass before his altar boy in an otherwise empty church, then quickly adjourns to the nearest inn to start drinking. The behavior of the landlord and villagers in the room indicate the priest’s morning visit and the early start to his imbibing are by no means unusual. Times are hard for the local parish. The events last year left their place of worship desecrated and the villagers are reluctant to enter. The deserted church sits metaphorically and literally in the shadow of Dracula’s mountaintop castle and the evil it represents.

The solid and curly mutton-chopped actor Rupert Davies arrives. He plays a travelling monsignor, the priest’s denominational superior, who quickly assesses the situation and chastises the man for his inaction. Now that Dracula is vanquished, why hasn’t the priest exorcised and spiritually cleansed both the church and the castle? The answer, we can plainly see, is that the man is paralyzed with terror of the supernatural evil. He is quaking in his cassock, shaking in his vestments. His frailty and fragility are character flaws which becomes integral as the tale unfolds.

“There is no evil in the house of God!” The monsignor insists sternly, before taking his cleric aside.

“You can’t imagine what it’s like,” the priest insists, pleading with his eyes.

Clearly there are different gradations of belief operational here. The older man’s clarity, moral strength and the forceful impregnability of his faith far outstrip the poor priest’s.

The monsignor orders his subordinate to meet him the next morning a half hour before dawn to begin what will be a daylong trek to the castle. Although it’s near enough to cast a shadow—and even though it’s accessible by horse and cart both in previous films and at the end of this movie—they must inexplicably journey all day through the fog-shrouded forest and climb the rocky mountain on foot to reach it. This is as much a symbolic journey as a physical one. The pilgrims must progress. The monsignor carries the church’s huge golden Gothic cross strapped to his back like a knapsack. The priest, out of shape from his year of depressed inactivity and drunkenness, can’t keep up with his superior even though the man appears 30 years older and as many pounds heavier. As sunset nears the cleric cannot go on. The monsignor takes pity on his weakness and continues up to the castle without him. As soon as he is out of sight, the priest pulls out a bottle and resumes his drinking.


Good use is made of echo as the monsignor stands at the castle door and begins chanting his Latin exorcism. Dark clouds roll in and lightning fills the sky. The priest, somewhere down the side of the precipice, is scared by the cosmic forces at work and starts to flee. He trips and tumbles down the mountainside, knocking himself out and cutting open his forehead. He lands atop an ice-covered stream, his impact cracking the surface and exposing the body of Christopher Lee’s Count Dracula. As the winds pick up and the monsignor attaches the giant golden crucifix to the castle door, far below the blood trickles from the priest’s forehead directly into the mouth of the hibernating vampire. Its lips start to move as it swallows.

Exorcism over, the monsignor descends and returns to the village. The count, meanwhile, has woken up and towers behind the priest as he regains consciousness. Oddly, the cleric first glimpses the vampire standing behind him by seeing its reflection in the water. This is an odd gaffe, since the undead cannot traditionally be seen in reflections.

Dracula discovers his castle has now been reverse-desecrated with a huge gleaming cross attached to the front door. He demands the priest, whose weak will he easily enslaves, tell him who perpetrated this atrocity. The vampire learns it was the monsignor and vows revenge.

 All of this, which transpires during the first 22 minutes of the film, is merely the setup. When the monsignor returns home to the township of Kleinenberg, the other main characters are introduced. His household consists of his dead brother’s wife Anna and his niece Maria (Veronica Carlson), a twentyish blonde with obvious endowments whose appearance virtually screams “Hammer Film vixen” from the moment we see her. It is through seeking to destroy her purity that the vampire will pursue his revenge on the monsignor.




Maria is in love with Paul, a young scholar played by Barry Andrews, who resembles The Who’s Roger Daltrey enough to make viewers uncomfortable. When we first see him he is dressed in his finest suit to have dinner at Maria’s and meet her mother for the first time (he doesn’t know that her uncle the monsignor has arrived back home yet). He foolishly allows himself be talked into playing a college boys’ bar game, where a tall glass of frothy ale is balanced on the handle of a broomstick so that the top of the glass touches the cafe’s dirty ceiling beam—because beer presumably tastes better with wood splinters and dust. The person clutching the handle must turn in circles and drink their own ale at the same time.  The inevitable happens and Paul spills the fragrant brew all over his suit. He has no time to change, so he ends up going to Maria’s birthday dinner this way.

Both this slapstick and the comic interactions with his irascible but paternal boss Max fall flat, but the beer dousing and resultant aroma do contribute to the young man’s uneasiness as he unexpectedly meets Maria’s prim and proper uncle for the first time and their worldviews collide. Paul is a second class pastry cook but a pragmatic scholar, and while the year the film takes place is never specified (although the date on the coffin Dracula steals is 1905), in the real world it is 1968—two years after Time magazine’s cover notoriously asked if God was dead. The youth is a fervent atheist, and Monsignor Ernst by nature and profession most assuredly is not. Paul is, however, a young man of noble and admirable character. We know this because in John Elder’s script he helpfully describes himself as “young, hard-working, good-looking (and) abstemious” in a conversation with his boss.
 
“What I don’t understand is what you hope to get out of those books of yours,” Max grouches amiably.

“What life’s about, something of The Truth,” Paul replies. He may not be on a magic bus, but we can call this Daltrey lookalike The Seeker.

The dinner party with the monsignor starts off pleasantly enough. The young man’s earnest manner impresses Ernst, who proclaims “Not enough people say what they really mean these days. Many people speak only to impress, not stopping to think if what they say is really true.”

When he is queried as to which church he goes to, Maria quickly tries to make excuses. She says he is very busy with his baking and studying. Paul, not carrying if people will try to put him d-d-down, will have none of it. He is forthright. The truth will set him free. “I don’t go to church, sir.”

He’s not trying to cause a b-b-big  s-s-sensation, but Ernst reacts with horror. “You’re not a Protestant, are you?”

No such luck. “I’m an atheist, sir,” says Paul.

“You mean you deny the existence of God?” The Monsignor is stunned.

“I don’t deny it. I just don’t believe it. It’s my own opinion, sir.” Paul replies, revealing both his heartfelt conviction and that he may not have taken a class in Logic just yet.

He offers to leave and the mother, Anna, understandably says that might be best. She doesn’t mention it, but we know this is Ernst’s first night back after a long trip hiking up and down mountains, exorcising the home of a vampire, etc. Putting a stake through an atheist may be his next instinctual act. Better he gets more rest and settles down.

Paul lives upstairs in Max’s cafe, where he also does his baking and beer balancing. He goes home from Maria’s and gets drunk. He’s completely frustrated, having simply spoken with honesty and still coming into conflict with not only the monsignor’s beliefs, but his very profession. Using the interconnected rooftops of Kleinenberg as a private highway, Maria visits him to make amends for her uncle’s reaction and see that he’s okay. Supposed hilarity ensues as she and the barmaid with a heart of gold (talk about archetypes!) help him into bed. “What have you done with my legs?” Wah wah.

The rooftops see a lot of traffic. Not only do characters use them to commute back and forth, but there is also a memorable chase and confrontation a reel or two later as the monsignor interrupts an attack by Dracula and pursues him. This is a very symbolic film, and the action operates on several planes, both physical and spiritual. All through the story the local residents of Kleinenberg have no idea anything supernatural is going on. The only people Dracula’s presence affects are those who work at the inn and those living at the monsignor’s house. As far as the rest of town is concerned, nothing out of the ordinary takes place. The great spiritual and demonic contest takes place beyond their awareness, at a different level. It might just as well be a normal Tuesday.

In brisk succession, Dracula and his corrupted priest arrive in town, the vampire bites and enslaves the kindly barmaid, and through her influence the priest rents a room at the inn and stashes the master’s coffin/bunk deep in the basement in a huge unused larder. Director Freddie Francis keeps things moving along at a rapid pace, and the action never slows down during the 92 minute film.

Although the barmaid is vampified and destroyed, Maria is only bitten once, in her own bed. The director manages a nice touch as she grabs the arm of her doll during the bite, but shoves it away a moment later before it ends—effectively pushing away her innocence. The monsignor later examines her neck and immediately realizes what is happening. He delves into his books to find out what must be done to thwart his undead foe. After interrupting the creature’s second attack he chases him across the rooftops and is waylaid by the priest. “You!” he exclaims, as the man strikes him down with a heavy object.

After crawling along the gables and awnings to get home, the monsignor has no strength left. Maria’s mother Anna helps him over the railing and back into the house, but it is clear he is dying. He entreats Anna to fetch Paul. She is amazed. Paul? The atheist? Yes, Paul. He obviously cares for Maria and may be her one best hope for protection.

Paul comes round at once. Unexpectedly and impulsively, he brings along the inn’s lodger—the enslaved priest who happens to be the enemy’s manservant. Monsignor Ernst tells Paul that Maria is being stalked by a vampire. Paul accepts this truth with a perfectly straight face. These books of the monsignor’s will tell him what to do, but he should swear in the name of the Lord that he will protect her. Paul cannot do this. His atheism again gets in the way. Instead, he says he will give his word. Ernst realizes that will have to be enough. Regardless of the disparity in their worldviews, the men are united in their love for Maria. The old man looks up, catches sight of the priest who attacked him standing in the room, and dies before he can utter a recrimination or warning.

Drafting the priest to help him by translating the Latin books aloud, Paul spreads garlic around doorframes and does the traditional things to ward off vampiric attack. It is not clear why the priest goes along with this at first, since he’s still under the power of Dracula. Surely he would not willingly aid in putting these talismans in place to ward him off. It is the first sign that the priest may be experiencing his own spiritual struggle. He knows helping perpetuate the evil is wrong, yet his will is so weak he cannot resist for long. This becomes apparent when he slugs Paul from behind and tries to remove the protective cross from Maria’s chest.

Only stunned, Paul wakes in time to stop him. He realizes the priest has been dancing with the devil in the pale moonlight, to employ a Jokerism. “What are you trying to do?...You, a priest!” He forces the weak willed man to take him to Dracula’s lair. Paul successfully plunges a large stake into the sleeping vampire’s chest, but it doesn’t kill him. “Pray! You must pray!” the priest exclaims. Belief, more than in any other film, is here essential to kill the monster. Paul still cannot do this. All he has effectively done is awoken his enemy. Dracula pulls out the stake and flees, dodging a shovelful of flaming coals from the bakery oven.


A nightgowned Maria seeks out Dracula on the rooftop. The priest takes her and the sleeping vampire by cart to his homeland. While the priest drives, the entranced Maria is in back literally fondling the coffin—another unusual but effective choice by the director. These touches combine to depict the moral corruption the creature’s power has. After it awakes they have to walk some distance through the woods and hills, and Maria’s bare feet are clearly cut up by the terrain, but they obviously ascend to the castle in considerably less time than it took the monsignor and the priest earlier in the film. The hours of night are shorter and no representational purpose will be achieved by drawing out the journey this time.

The vampire has Maria remove the giant golden crucifix from the castle door and hurl it over the stone railing. It lands upright far below between the rocks. Now its revenge is absolutely complete. Not only is the monsignor dead, but his beautiful niece is completely under its power and has restored its ability to enter the property. Dracula — and by extension evil — has triumphed.
This essay is one of dozens featured in our new
book, "Taste the Blood of Monster Serial."

Yet Paul is a man of his word. He vowed to protect Maria and has followed them from Kleinenberg. He shields Maria from the undead monster and Dracula grabs him. Together they tumble over the rampart, Paul grabbing a tree branch to save himself but his opponent falling squarely on the upper arm of the golden cross below. It pierces his back, protruding out of his chest. This may be the most memorable image of any Hammer Dracula film, as the impaled vampire struggles helplessly, blood dripping from his eyes.

The priest, in the same echo-enriched voice the monsignor used earlier to exorcise the castle, prays to the heavens in Latin and Dracula is destroyed. With yet another memorable visual flourish, director Francis shows us his cloak lying at the foot of the cross — a reverse evil image that might resonate with those who know what the centurions gambled over thousands of years ago. The cleric has found the strength to do what is right. Finally his faith has triumphed over his enslaved will. At last he has done what the monsignor asked him to do at the beginning of the film.

Paul witnesses all of this. Maria is free. As these two people bearing biblical names stand holding one another after evil has been vanquished, Paul can no longer doubt the spiritual reality of unseen powers. He now believes. This former atheist makes the sign of the cross and the film ends.

Peter Cushing, who often starred alongside Christopher Lee as Professor Van Helsing, found Hammer Films—for all their colorful gore and graphic evil—to be intensely moral. This resonated with his personal faith, and explained why he continued to make movies about monstrous events.

“It’s not His will that has caused disasters throughout the ages, but man’s disobedience and disregard. But he knows the human race will eventually learn what is right and what is wrong, suffering in the process,” Cushing said in the pages of Famous Monsters magazine. “Faith will sustain us during that journey...if we will let it.”

This is the key to his portrayal of Van Helsing, and indeed supplies the underlying message behind most Hammer horror tales. The filmmakers seem to suggest an ultimate good which shall emerge triumphant over evil — provided the protagonists display certitude and resolution.

The vampire is more dependent on, and vulnerable to, belief than any other cinematic monster. As this film tells us, and so memorably depicts, its evil can hardly be defeated without it. 

Belief — and vigilance, lest evil return.

FRANK JAY GRUBER In addition to his freelance writing and editing gigs, Frank Jay Gruber teaches literature, composition and online course development at Bergen Community College in New Jersey. He sometimes covers New York and Philadelphia area events for TrekMovie.com, appears on convention panels and writes for genre websites like The Collinsport Historical Society. CNN interviewed him about Star Trek in his collectible-covered lair and consulted him about Dark Shadows after Jonathan Frid’s death in 2012. You can read his extremely infrequent musings at TheWearyProfessor.com and follow him on Twitter @FrankJayGruber.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...