Dracula Year: 1979 Director: John Badham Written by: W.D. Richter Threat: Vampire Weapon of Choice: Stake Based on: Play by Hamilton Deane and John L. Balderston IMDb page:

Other movies in this series:
none

Rish's Reviews
Dracula remains, these twenty-five years later, Frank Langella's most famous role . . . well, except for Skeletor, that is. This 1979 Universal Studios version boasts an impressive cast, including Lawrence Olivier as Professor Van Helsing and Donald Pleasence as Doctor Seward. But nobody ever talks about this version. Why?
The story is the most familiar in Horror literature: When the enigmatic Count Dracula arrives from far away Transylvania, Londoners Jonathan Harker, Mina, Van Helsing, Lucy, Seward, and Renfield all get involved in one way or another. This is supposed to be the highly romantic one, right?
Kate Nelligan plays Lucy. I've always been a big fan of Renfield. He's played in this version by someone named Tony Haygarth. Trevor Eve as Harker isn't too likable, but at least he loves Lucy. Mina and Lucy appear to have switched characters from the book. Mina Murray/Harker has become Mina Van Helsing and Lucy Westerna is Lucy Seward. That seems to happen a lot, but I can't imagine why.
Badham directed Saturday Night Fever and Richter wrote the great 1978 Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Buckaroo Banzai, and the recent Stealth.
I have a thing or two to say about the film, but most of it is quite random. For example, Langella's wild mop of Barry Gibb-inspired hair feels out of place in, what 1897? And it featured an odd psychadelic lovemaking/bloodletting sequence. It was nice to see models and matte paintings and trick photography again, as opposed to the more modern (and less imaginative) CGI effects. The scene in which Van Helsing discovers his daughter Mina is a nosferatu is quite frightening and nicely-executed.
The film was fairly well made, but also fairly dull. I wrote in my notes: "why am I bored by this version?" It featured a romantic (there's that word again, "romantic." Why are things so romantic in the future, is there a problem with the heart's hematological pull?), but not-at-all memorable John Williams score.
And yes, romantic, but ineffective--Dracula is made as a lonely character, a deeply passionate man, but not evil. He has no fangs or a mouthful of gore. He's just a poor romantic soul. Dracula's female victims were slavering, red-eyed monsters, but Count Dracula himself (when he wasn't in killer bat or wolf form, that is) was a tragic, romantic, passionate, nonviolent, poetic, charming, calm, intelligent, peaceful character. I mean, he was like a character out of a Bible Drama ("Let my undead people go!"). I couldn't really understand what was going on until I watched the featurette afterward, where Frank Langella talked about the things he would not allow them to do with his character (or, I guess I should say, "his" character), such as give him fangs, have blood dripping from his mouth, or make him monstrous or ghoulish. He didn't see Dracula as evil or a predator, merely a swinging gentleman looking for eternal love. Damn Seward and Van Helsing, interrupting his Harlequin Romance by wrenching open his coffin and brandishing a pointed stick!
It also featured a lame ending in which Dracula gets away and Lucy cries/smiles at the knowledge that her love is safe. Actor Langella thought this was a Romance, not a horror film. Ultimately, it's not very satisfying because of it. I prefer an evil Dracula. I prefer a definitive ending--even if evil wins. I prefer the book.
This Dracula was rated R, but a soft R. Which reminds me, when I was a kid in the Eighties, and I wanted to see a movie that was rated R, I'd often try to get my parents' permission to rent it. My dad had a rule, though, if he deemed a movie a "hard R," then I absolutely wasn't allowed to see it. If he only deemed it to be a "soft R," however, then I simply wasn't allowed to see it.
That was supposed to be funny, but I realise I still have daddy issues. Sorry.
Best Scare: Seeing Dracula crawl, spider-like down a building toward his prey was actually quite disturbing.
I'd Recommend It To: Those interested in this particular version, and patient Dracula completists.
Film Reviewed: February 11, 2006
Posted: November 14, 2006

Total Skulls: 18 (unavailable at present)