The Curse of Dracula is a classic horror film released in 1958. It is widely regarded as one of the best interpretations of the Dracula character on the big screen. The film was directed by Terence Fisher and produced by the renowned Hammer Film Productions. The story follows the iconic vampire Count Dracula, played by Christopher Lee, as he terrorizes the inhabitants of a small English village. Dracula is portrayed as a complex and diabolical character who feeds on the blood of innocent victims to sustain his immortality. One of the highlights of this film is Christopher Lee's chilling portrayal of Dracula.
Many things I mentioned in a previous review of The Curse of Frankenstein can be applied the (Horror of) Dracula. Both films were early installments in the Hammer era of horror films, directed by Terrence Fisher, starred Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, and were vehicles which unearthed classic monsters in new vivid color. Additionally the Hammer film’s gothic style, modest budget, and limited set locations has lead to a distinguishable feel to these films. (Horror Of) Dracula was the second film to reanimate characters that had laid long buried. Though all of the Universal monsters have near equal legacy, Dracula has always been, or at least felt, like the largest flagship.
It has to be said, that while I love this film, the best Dracula film, with the best Dracula and best Van Helsing, it is a poor adaptation of Bram Stoker s novel. Christopher Lee, who played the gloomy monster in Curse of Frankenstein, plays an engaging Dracula, one that possesses a sobering disposition and one that could be mistaken as just another Romanian count if it were not for the whole sleeping in a coffin thing.
One of the highlights of this film is Christopher Lee's chilling portrayal of Dracula. He brings an air of elegance and menace to the character, making him simultaneously alluring and terrifying. Lee's piercing gaze, refined accent, and powerful presence make him a truly memorable Dracula.
Christopher Lee Blogathon: Dracula (1958)
As part of the Christopher Lee Blogathon hosted by Cinematic Catharsis (https://cinematiccatharsis.blogspot.com/) and Realweegiemidget Reviews (https://weegiemidget.wordpress.com/) I’m taking a look at my all time favourite horror film…
Jonathan Harker arrives at Castle Dracula to begin work in the library there. But he has another agenda. But when it goes wrong, it is left to Van Helsing to protect Harker’s family from a vengeful Dracula…
The 1970’s and early 1980’s in the UK were strange for TV. You had three channels and that’s it. However, what used to happen on late Friday or Saturday nights was that the BBC would often show horror double bills. You would get the black and white films of the 30s’ and 40s’ and also some in colour.
And more often than not, the colour ones were Hammer’s.
I was around 10 or 11 when horror came into my life. Because my parents would go out at the weekends (my father worked away during the week), often we’d (my brother and sister) would have a babysitter for a few hours and often, we’d be up late when these horror films came on.
As a child I was both damn terrified and also intrigued. I was drawing in to this world of vampires, monsters, ghosts and everything else these films had to offer. I slowly became obsessed with the genre. I wanted more, much more.
I can’t honestly recall what the films were that began my welcome descent into the horror genre, but without doubt the one that made the biggest impact was Hammer’s 1958 Dracula. I don’t know why it made such an impact, the only possible reason may be (though not sure) is that it was the first horror film I saw in colour.
At the time I think it was the music and colours that drew me in. I say that as it bloody terrified me! Not really sure how much of the film I actually watched at the time. Over the years, I have seen this film many times. I was fortunate to see it twice when a restored version was giving a limited cinema release a number of years ago. It looked stunning.
I have seen many, many horror films over the years. I’ve seen admittedly better horror films than Hammer’s Dracula. So why do I love it so much?
Visually it looks stunning. Hammer may not have had the biggest budgets, but thanks to their excellent production team you would never know that. The production design by Bernard Robinson is superb, both with Dracula’s castle but also the Holmwood’s home where a lot of the story happens. The director of photography, Jack Asher, shoots the film beautifully. He worked on a number of the early Hammer horror films, from The Curse Of Frankenstein until 1960’s The Two Faces Of Doctor Jekyll. As much as director Terence Fisher, Asher established the look of Hammer and those that followed, to a degree, continued in that tradition for a period.
James Bernard’s stunning music is both ominous (his Dracula theme especially) but also exciting as the film builds to its climax. But behind the scenes, the key is Terence Fisher. As said, along with Asher, Fisher established what would become the Hammer style, beginning with The Curse Of Frankenstein in 1957. They looked stunning visually, they were exciting at times and didn’t skimp on the horror or the blood. These were not simply remakes of the classic Univeral films, they were completely different and equally important to the horror genre.
One of Hammer’s great ideas was with its casting. While there is sometimes moments of humour in their films, such as the undertaker Marx played by Miles Malleson, the actors played it straight, totally committed to the material and the key to that was great casting.
Michael Gough and Melissa Stribling as Arthur and Mina are superb, as Arthur goes from sceptic to believer in what is going on, while Mina becomes a victim of Dracula’s. Carol Marsh as Lucy is good too, Dracula’s other victim in the film too, capturing her innocence before she succumbs and then her ‘evil’ once she is turned.
And then there is Peter Cushing. While his reputation as a horror legend is never in doubt, I do think that while his work in always brilliant, even with lesser material, he perhaps never got the full recognition he deserved because of his genre work. Here he brings the determination he had when playing Baron Frankenstein to the role of Van Helsing, but also. such as in the scene with the little girl, a kindness and human quality that Frankenstein lacked.
But while Cushing is the actual star of Dracula, he is top billed, it is Christopher Lee’s performance as Dracula that I think everyone remembers. That’s not really a surprise. He may only have sixteen lines of dialogue (no, really!) and very limited screentime (apparently seven minutes!) but he dominates the film, a huge presence even when we don’t seem him. From his first moment, seen at the top of a flight of stairs from where he comes to meet Harker, to his last, the stunning confrontation with Van Helsing, Lee makes Dracula a terrfying creation. Even in his early scenes, like his Harker greeting, even when being civil, there is a menace there behind those eyes. Even when seducing Mina, he’s more an animal with prey than a romantic seducer. Women can’t take their eyes of him and men just feel intimidated. While he would go on to play the Count for Hammer six more times after this and become increasingly frustrated at playing the role as a consequence, there is no question his charisma, even when limited on screen showed just how dominate and terrifying his Dracula can be.
It has to be said, that while I love this film, the best Dracula film, with the best Dracula and best Van Helsing, it is a poor adaptation of Bram Stoker’s novel. Jimmy Sangster’s script makes many changes to the novel, dropping characters and set pieces, changing motivations for characters and so on. I suspect the vast majority were budgetary reasons but what resulted was a stripped down, exciting horror film building to one of horror’s greatest final confrontations, between Van Helsing and Dracula, the ultimate battle between good and evil, with an appropriate worthy ending. I still think it is one of the best in horror films ever.
Ever since this film made an impression on me as a child, I have loved it. Hammer made many classics; The Curse Of The Werewolf, The Curse Of Frankenstein, The Brides Of Dracula, The Hounds Of The Baskervilles, The Devil Rides Out, Quatermass And The Pit, to name a few personal favourites, but for me, Dracula is their masterpiece.
And one of horror’s all time great films.
At the time I think it was the music and colours that drew me in. I say that as it bloody terrified me! Not really sure how much of the film I actually watched at the time. Over the years, I have seen this film many times. I was fortunate to see it twice when a restored version was giving a limited cinema release a number of years ago. It looked stunning.
The Curse of Dracula also boasts impressive production design and atmospheric cinematography. The film uses gothic settings, dimly lit interiors, and hauntingly beautiful landscapes to create an eerie and foreboding atmosphere. The use of vibrant colors and elaborate costumes add to the visual appeal of the film. The film's screenplay, written by Jimmy Sangster, captures the essence of Bram Stoker's original novel while also adding its own unique twists. The plot delves into themes of immortality, desire, and the battle between good and evil. The Curse of Dracula explores the psychological implications of vampirism and the moral dilemma faced by the characters who encounter the infamous count. The Curse of Dracula proved to be a commercial and critical success upon its release. It helped revive the popularity of horror films and solidified Hammer Film Productions as a prominent force in the genre. The film went on to inspire several sequels and has become a cult classic. In conclusion, The Curse of Dracula is a must-watch for all fans of the horror genre. Its captivating performances, atmospheric visuals, and gripping storyline make it a timeless classic. Christopher Lee's portrayal of Count Dracula remains one of the most iconic in film history and continues to haunt audiences to this day..
Reviews for "The Curse of Dracula 1958: Resurrecting the Vampire Genre"
1. John - 2/5 stars - I was really disappointed with "The Curse of Dracula". The storyline felt predictable and the acting was mediocre at best. The special effects were also quite outdated, which took away from the overall experience. I was expecting a thrilling and captivating vampire movie, but unfortunately, it fell short of my expectations.
2. Sarah - 1/5 stars - I found "The Curse of Dracula" to be incredibly dull and unoriginal. The plot lacked depth and failed to hold my attention throughout the film. The characters felt one-dimensional and I was unable to connect with any of them. The dialogue was also quite cheesy and the pacing was inconsistent. Overall, I would not recommend this movie to anyone seeking an engaging vampire film.
3. Mark - 2/5 stars - I had high hopes for "The Curse of Dracula" but was ultimately let down. The storyline felt unoriginal and didn't offer anything new to the vampire genre. The performances were lackluster and the chemistry between the characters felt forced. Additionally, the visual effects were outdated and did not enhance the overall viewing experience. I found myself bored and disinterested for a majority of the film.
4. Laura - 2/5 stars - "The Curse of Dracula" failed to deliver a compelling vampire tale. The plot felt predictable and lacked any real suspense or tension. The performances were average and didn't leave a lasting impression. The cinematography was uninspiring and the sets felt overly theatrical. Overall, this film failed to leave a lasting impact and I wouldn't recommend it to fans of the vampire genre.