Suck It, Day 29 - Hammer's Dracula
Peter Cushing + Christopher Lee = INSTANT AWESOME! Peter Cushing VS. Christopher Lee = INSTANT AWESOMER!
Dracula (1958)
Britain's Hammer Horror made nine films in all based on the novel, play, and general legend of Count Dracula. None of them bore much resemblance to the novel, but it's interesting to see how they played with the story, beginning with Dracula.
This version contains no Renfield, no Seward, and no Quincey. Jonathan Harker is engaged to Lucy, not Mina (who in this version is married to Holmwood, who also happens to be Lucy's brother). Harker does travel to the Count's castle (which is apparently not that far from where the Holmwoods live), but presents himself as a librarian to the Count, not a solicitor, and this is all a cover for his real purpose. He knows all along that Dracula (Christopher Lee) is a vampire and has in fact been dispatched by Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) to kill him and end his "reign of terror." He is killed early on, however, and Van Helsing must defeat Dracula himself, with the aid of Holmwood (who is played by someone you might know better as Alfred the butler from the 80s and 90s Batman movies).
If you're going to watch this, I'd suggest you forget anything you know about the novel, because it will only get in the way of a movie which, while not that faithful an adaptation, is rather a smashingly effective one. Peter Cushing is all kinds of cool as the famous vampire killer Van Helsing, and Christopher Lee is one of the more memorable and legendary actors to ever portray Dracula. He sells the terror alright, which should not be surprising, but what was a surprise was how well he sells the sexy side of Dracula. There's at least one moment - pictured above - where he's actually kind of hot (something I never thought I'd say about Christopher Lee, amazing actor though he is).
And after taking the elements of the novel and making them their own, they continued to explore what could be done with the Dracula legend with...
Brides of Dracula
This actually does not have much at all in common with the Dracula story. There is no Christopher Lee this time, and Dracula's name only comes up a couple of times. We're operating under the assumption that this tale is happening some time after the events of Dracula, and the Count himself is already dead (the movies would bring him back to life in later sequels, but as for now he is not the threat). Instead, we have a charming and seductive young baron, who has been chained up by his mother because of his "illness," and who gains the sympathy of her houseguest, a young schoolteacher named Marianne. And once again, we have an example of someone who thinks they're doing good, but they don't have all the facts and don't realize the damage they're actually doing.
So thanks to Marianne's sympathy and ignorance, Baron Meinster - who is a vampire - is unleashed on the unsuspecting European countryside. He turns several women in the village into vampires, and they are the "brides" of the title, but they actually get very little play. Certainly not enough to merit the movie being named for them.
I didn't like this as well as Dracula, but there were a couple of key things I found interesting. Van Helsing (once again played by the fantastic Peter Cushing) explains that vampirism started as an anti-Christian movement, which suits the idea that vampires are vulnerable to Christian symbols. Though Dracula is dead, there are still adherents to the "vampire movement" and their cult slowly spreads through the administering of the vampire's kiss.
Another thing I found interesting, particularly as I've seen a lot of vampire movies in preparation for all these posts, is the way in which Baron Meinster is killed. Van Helsing actually states that vampires can only be killed by a stake through the heart or by being burned in fire. We know right off that he's missing one way, though, as Dracula was killed with sunlight in the previous film. However, Meinster is killed in none of those ways, and I'm certain I've never seen a similar method for killing a vampire in any other vampire film I've ever seen. There is a fire (which kills the eponymous brides) and Van Helsing is chasing the baron. Van Helsing leaps onto the sails of a windmill, we think to simply ride it to the ground and continue the chase, but he is actually moving the sails to form a giant cross, the shadow of which falls on Baron Meinster, and THIS is what kills him. The cross has been used to repel a vampire, but the Christian symbols are typically used only as protection, not actual weapons. The closest I can recall to trappings of Christianity actually being used to kill a vampire is The Lost Boys, where the blonde one is killed in the bathtub filled with holy water and garlic.
Anyway, I thought it was cool and kind of different. We see so many stakings and sunlight meltings that it's refreshing when a vampire killer kind of thinks outside the box.
Both of these are great fun, but Dracula is, I think, the superior film of the two. Can't beat the Cushing/Lee combo.
Dracula (1958)
Britain's Hammer Horror made nine films in all based on the novel, play, and general legend of Count Dracula. None of them bore much resemblance to the novel, but it's interesting to see how they played with the story, beginning with Dracula.
This version contains no Renfield, no Seward, and no Quincey. Jonathan Harker is engaged to Lucy, not Mina (who in this version is married to Holmwood, who also happens to be Lucy's brother). Harker does travel to the Count's castle (which is apparently not that far from where the Holmwoods live), but presents himself as a librarian to the Count, not a solicitor, and this is all a cover for his real purpose. He knows all along that Dracula (Christopher Lee) is a vampire and has in fact been dispatched by Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) to kill him and end his "reign of terror." He is killed early on, however, and Van Helsing must defeat Dracula himself, with the aid of Holmwood (who is played by someone you might know better as Alfred the butler from the 80s and 90s Batman movies).
If you're going to watch this, I'd suggest you forget anything you know about the novel, because it will only get in the way of a movie which, while not that faithful an adaptation, is rather a smashingly effective one. Peter Cushing is all kinds of cool as the famous vampire killer Van Helsing, and Christopher Lee is one of the more memorable and legendary actors to ever portray Dracula. He sells the terror alright, which should not be surprising, but what was a surprise was how well he sells the sexy side of Dracula. There's at least one moment - pictured above - where he's actually kind of hot (something I never thought I'd say about Christopher Lee, amazing actor though he is).
And after taking the elements of the novel and making them their own, they continued to explore what could be done with the Dracula legend with...
Brides of Dracula
This actually does not have much at all in common with the Dracula story. There is no Christopher Lee this time, and Dracula's name only comes up a couple of times. We're operating under the assumption that this tale is happening some time after the events of Dracula, and the Count himself is already dead (the movies would bring him back to life in later sequels, but as for now he is not the threat). Instead, we have a charming and seductive young baron, who has been chained up by his mother because of his "illness," and who gains the sympathy of her houseguest, a young schoolteacher named Marianne. And once again, we have an example of someone who thinks they're doing good, but they don't have all the facts and don't realize the damage they're actually doing.
So thanks to Marianne's sympathy and ignorance, Baron Meinster - who is a vampire - is unleashed on the unsuspecting European countryside. He turns several women in the village into vampires, and they are the "brides" of the title, but they actually get very little play. Certainly not enough to merit the movie being named for them.
I didn't like this as well as Dracula, but there were a couple of key things I found interesting. Van Helsing (once again played by the fantastic Peter Cushing) explains that vampirism started as an anti-Christian movement, which suits the idea that vampires are vulnerable to Christian symbols. Though Dracula is dead, there are still adherents to the "vampire movement" and their cult slowly spreads through the administering of the vampire's kiss.
Another thing I found interesting, particularly as I've seen a lot of vampire movies in preparation for all these posts, is the way in which Baron Meinster is killed. Van Helsing actually states that vampires can only be killed by a stake through the heart or by being burned in fire. We know right off that he's missing one way, though, as Dracula was killed with sunlight in the previous film. However, Meinster is killed in none of those ways, and I'm certain I've never seen a similar method for killing a vampire in any other vampire film I've ever seen. There is a fire (which kills the eponymous brides) and Van Helsing is chasing the baron. Van Helsing leaps onto the sails of a windmill, we think to simply ride it to the ground and continue the chase, but he is actually moving the sails to form a giant cross, the shadow of which falls on Baron Meinster, and THIS is what kills him. The cross has been used to repel a vampire, but the Christian symbols are typically used only as protection, not actual weapons. The closest I can recall to trappings of Christianity actually being used to kill a vampire is The Lost Boys, where the blonde one is killed in the bathtub filled with holy water and garlic.
Anyway, I thought it was cool and kind of different. We see so many stakings and sunlight meltings that it's refreshing when a vampire killer kind of thinks outside the box.
Both of these are great fun, but Dracula is, I think, the superior film of the two. Can't beat the Cushing/Lee combo.