Categories
Ric Review

Dracula ’79

Dracula ’79

In many cases, doing an adaptation of a classic story or play can subject one to all sorts of scrutiny, much moreso if the adaptation is done as a major motion picture in any given era which thus makes it the “definitive” version for that generation (and preempts any other major attempt for at least 10 years or so).  A classic case of a story with many multiple attempts to film it is of course Bram Stoker’s timeless tale of horror known as Dracula.  To this recent day, Francis Coppola’s 1991 version with Gary Oldman as Dracula remains the most artistically satisfying notwithstanding a couple of casting missteps but its technical merits remain second to none for any version of that story.  The prior (major) version to that one was this release from 1979 directed by John Badham, a guy whose career has taken an odd trajectory starting off in TV and then directing several hit movies (most notably Saturday Night Fever) before descending back into once again doing TV work where he remains to this day.  Cast in the role of Dracula himself was Frank Langella, at the time a little known stage actor who had quickly become very well known by starring in the Broadway stage revival of the Dracula play from the 1930s.  Langella knew he was in for a challenge taking his version of the character to the big screen what with the huge shadows of not only Bela Lugosi (who had also originally starred in the play) but also Christopher Lee who had played the character so many times in mostly Hammer films that he himself had lost count.  Lugosi and Lee based their performances greatly on the fact that Dracula was truly an unsymphathetic and irredeemable monster who sucked both the blood and the life out of innocents while both also were not afraid to ham it up quite a bit as well.  (Lugosi’s hamminess was as a result of his Eastern European stage roots while Lee would revel in the now notorious sight of blood dribbling down his chin while he bared his fangs).  Langella decided to do things different.  Knowing then that he was in his prime as a romantic leading man, Langella stipulated that at no time in the film would he “vamp out” and bare his fangs in a hissing and sinister manner, choosing instead to use his good looks to portray Dracula in the most purest romantic type that he could possibly achieve, as someone that truly “loved” his victims in liberating them and setting them free from the shackles of this cruel world.  This turned out to be a portrayal that was very popular with women but some other changes that were implemented from Stoker’s novel were prone to make people scratch their heads, mainly the role reversal of the characters of Mina (Dracula’s true love) and Lucy (Mina’s best friend and Dracula’s first victim) as the story now saw Mina become the first victim and Lucy become the romantic lead!  But the real whopper is having Lucy being the daughter of Dr. Seward (who was originally one of the suitors vying for Lucy’s affections) and then having Mina be the one and only genuine daughter of Professor Abraham Van Helsing himself (a changeup that I don’t believe has ever been done before or since)!  This means that when Mina (in Lucy’s original role) is bitten by Dracula, dies, and later becomes a vampire, Van Helsing is now introduced as a grieving father who has a full fledged motivation of revenge to destroy Dracula.  This twist might seem even more exciting considering who was actually cast as Van Helsing: Sir Laurence Olivier who remains always in consideration as being among the most iconic and greatest actors to ever live, with his presence here as an actor of his stature appearing in a monster / horror movie helping to open the floodgates for a lot of other acclaimed and prestigious performers feeling comfortable enough to “lower” themselves to also do their own share of scary movies.  However (according to Langella), Olivier made no secret that he was doing it for the money as a “paycheck role” and that coupled with the fact that he was dreadfully sick during production (leading many to be concerned that he would not be able to finish filming his role) is what probably led to him giving a sluggish, lethargic performance here, not helped much by the character’s requisite cheesy Dutch accent.  The exception in Olivier’s performance is in his first major confrontation with Langella’s Dracula, a powerful showdown where Olivier summons the resolve to face down Langella and send him scurrying for cover.  Also in the cast (and not to be overlooked either) is the legendary Donald Pleasence as Seward, the head of the local insane asylum where Dracula’s arrival has gotten all of the patients up in arms in an unheard of tizzy.  And that’s where Badham’s style of telling the story is somewhat fascinating as he completely eliminates the opening sequence depicting Harker (or Renfield) traveling alone in Transylvania to Castle Dracula and encountering The Count in person and becoming one of the first victims.  Instead, here the movie begins with Dracula arriving in England to move into his new home and Harker (who has closed the deal with Dracula strictly through correspondence) being a pale, wimpy figure for whom it is easy to see why Lucy (in Mina’s role) would be more attracted to the suave Langella as a result.  Renfield is a business rival of Harker’s who feels that Harker has undercut him to close the deal, but he still gets bit so that he can get turned into a bug eating madman slave who spends most of the movie in Pleasence / Seward’s loony bin.  As tired as Olivier appears in the movie, the passiveness in Pleasence’s performance is damn near baffling, trying to help the dying Mina by merely slapping her face and later when witnessing the impending threat to the very soul of his daughter Lucy, coming across as being almost apathetic while Van Helsing (who orders him around the whole time) and Harker actually seem much more concerned with her well being than he (her father) does.  Considering this trio of “heroes”, it’s rather easy to root for Langella’s Dracula here, since thankfully while he does not downplay the more sinister aspects of the character (indeed, at times it seems like he’s playing him in full Prince Of Darkness mode, albeit while still a Prince), his offers of eternal life to someone like Lucy Seward (Kate Nelligan) also gives her the incentive to become more sexually aggressive and vivacious, qualities that in this stuffy Victorian society are more than enough justification for her own father to lock her away in her own private cell in his nuthouse (as if he doesn’t already have enough to deal with since Renfield and all the other extremely agitated lunatics are in there too).  Meanwhile Van Helsing has tasked himself with hunting down and then staking his own vampire daughter Mina before turning his full attention to Dracula himself (although it would seem that all his vampire hunting knowledge was quickly gleaned by reading through some books over the course of a couple of days).  The film’s conceit that Lucy is actually better off with a Vampire King who would truly give her the love and attention she deserves and craves is shown in what can only be described as a surreal love scene between Langella and Nelligan (including the famous bit where Dracula cuts his chest and allows her to slurp the blood from the wound).  Another interesting thing (besides deleting the early Castle Dracula scenes) about this adaptation is that Badham allows for no mystery and very little exposition when it comes to explaining who and what Dracula really is (even Coppola felt the need for an elaborate prologue) as it’s almost presumed that the viewer will see the name of the movie during the opening credits and immediately know that Langella is playing the most famous of all vampires which is why most of the early kill scenes are presented almost matter of factly without any sense that we should be in awe (or frightened) of him or what it is that he’s doing.  Langella himself dispenses with much of the Lugosi style theatrics in the performance, playing Dracula almost with a sense of irony (“I never drink wine” is practically delivered as a throwaway line) as if knowing that the character is so familiar to so many that any unexpected twists in the characterization will have everyone’s rapt attention just to see what Langella will do next.  At the end of the day, notwithstanding how Coppola would later greatly overdo the romantic angle, this remains a fascinating, different and underrated version of the legendary story…

8/10

Click here to watch or buy this item at Amazon!

Share