7. Dracula (1958), dir. Terence Fisher

[strange_complex]

I synchro-watched this with lady_lugosi1313 yesterday afternoon, as we were in need of some comfort-viewing. I've reviewed it a bunch of times before (previous reviews all linked from here: LJ / DW), so won't say too much about it here. We mainly spent the time squeeing over its many wonderful features - the pineapple, Lee's swishy cloak, the resolution of the Cushing finger and the expansive feel of the sets. And occasionally discussing the continuity questions it raises, like how come it is May when Harker arrives at Dracula's castle, but 1st December when Dracula's hearse goes through the customs post at Ingstadt.

lady_lugosi1313 did raise the interesting question of whether the Bride means it on any level when she talks about what an evil man Dracula is, and how he is keeping her a prisoner in the castle. That is, is it all wholly a ruse to get Jonathan Harker to come close enough to her for her to bite him? Or is it to some degree a true reflection of how she feels about having become a victim of Dracula herself at some time in the past and been condemned to vampirism because of it, which the vampire possession now affecting her can easily mobilise precisely because it is true? I suspect that probably is part of what is meant, in the same way as we later see Lucy calling Tania to play with her and greeting Arthur with a request for a kiss - both things she would have wanted to do in her human life, but now hideously twisted to a demonic purpose.

Also, I'm not sure I'd picked up the full implications of the 'we' in this little exchange between Arthur and Van Helsing before:

ARTHUR: There's so much in Jonathan's diary I don't understand. Can Dracula really be as old as it says here?

VAN HELSING: We believe it's possible.

I do know that he goes on to say "I've carried out research with some of the greatest authorities in Europe and yet we've only just scratched the surface" only a few lines later, but there he distinguishes more carefully between himself acting as an individual ("I") and the combination of that self and the authorities he has worked with ("we"). Meanwhile, the earlier "we believe" doesn't quite work to mean "Jonathan and I believe" by this point either, given that both characters in the scene know that Jonathan is dead, so he'd be more naturally spoken of in the past tense. Obviously I am vastly over-reading dialogue which only ever aspired to be fit for purpose here, but anyway to me it speaks of a team of active vampire hunters, of whom Jonathan Harker and Van Helsing are the two who happen to have been selected to go and deal with Dracula, but whose numbers are greater and who form a separate and distinct group from the greatest authorities in Europe whom VH has also consulted in the course of their work. That's what I like to think, anyway.

Comments

[magister]

So it's a prequel to Buffy?

[strange_complex]

They could certainly take place in the same universe, with the band of vampire-hunters that Jonathan Harker and Van Helsing belong to being an earlier version of the Council. Hell, maybe Valerie Gaunt's character was a Slayer whom Dracula turned and took back as a trophy to his castle? That's why she's so ready to say he is evil, and why Jonathan Harker and Van Helsing have made such a huge effort to track him down and deal with him.

Of course, later on Dracula appears directly in the Buffyverse, perhaps drawn to the latest Slayer as the latest move in a centuries-old tit for tat revenge saga between him the the Council.

[magister]

The only problem is that Harker is such a wet blanket. But I'm happy to take Van Helsing as being a Watcher or in some other way attached to the council.

And whoever that is who turns up in Buffy vs Dracula, it's clearly some impersonator and not the real Dracula.

I like the idea of Valerie Gaunt being a Slayer who's been turned. Would this cause the next Slayer to be summoned or would Val have to be staked first? If the latter, then Harker staking her before Dracula takes on a different complexion. Rather than a foolish mistake on his part, it's a heroic sacrifice of his own life so the next Slayer can be called into being.

[strange_complex]

I mean, Wesley was also a wet blanket, so...

Very good theory about Harker's motivation for staking Valerie first, though. That is canon now, as far as I'm concerned.

[magister]

Wesley started out as a total drip, but becomes increasingly dangerous - not to mention unstable - through his time on Angel. Jonathan just seems mildly stoned.

[sovay]

Obviously I am vastly over-reading dialogue which only ever aspired to be fit for purpose here, but anyway to me it speaks of a team of active vampire hunters, of whom Jonathan Harker and Van Helsing are the two who happen to have been selected to go and deal with Dracula, but whose numbers are greater and who form a separate and distinct group from the greatest authorities in Europe whom VH has also consulted in the course of their work.

For what it's worth, I also took the line to speak to a larger community. Is the idea ever picked up in later films?

[strange_complex]

Alas, no, though a picture of Van Helsing himself as a solo freelance vampire hunter is gradually embellished over the five films which he and his various descendants appear in, and he is occasionally assisted by associates and family members along the way.

[amaebi]

I dislike vampires, yet your reviews and commentary always have me wanting to watch more vampire movies. Especially Hammer, of course. :D

[strange_complex]

I'm glad to know my enthusiasm is infectious! The Hammer ones are very gentle and genteel, really, so you might find them more pleasant than their more modern counterparts.

[amaebi]

I don't know that it's violence that I object to. After thinking about it for much of today, I think it may be Glamour.

I'm major Buffy fan, in any case.

[disgruntled_owl]

I always enjoy the resolution of the Cushing finger!

I never picked up on Van Helsing saying "we" before when referring to his beliefs about vampires; little openings like that are always fun to daydream and write about. The prospect of a network of vampire hunters is a delicious one, and reminds me of the line of Turkish Jannisaries pledged to fight Dracula in The Historian. I do typically picture Van Helsing as a loner, though, even if in spite of himself, with the "we" representing a long line of comrades he's lost in his quest to destroy the undead.

Thanks so much for adding in the links to your previous reviews! (They're always so good. I'm struggling to not try to read them all at once!)

[strange_complex]

I do typically picture Van Helsing as a loner, though

Yes, that's how he mainly comes across, and how he ends up in the bits of his life we see in the films. If there's a larger cabal around him, he's certainly the driving force within it, and if Jonathan Harker is anything to go by the others may well be rather wet and incompetent compared to VH.

Thanks for being so kind about my reviews. :-)

[lady_lugosi1313]

it was excellent distraction/comfort viewing :-)
I liked being able to pay more attention to the sets and costumes - in particular the picture frame of Harkers which Dracula is so interested in, the beautiful bureau Harker sits at to write in his room and how Lucys hair goes from being in plaits to loosened.
But one of the things that bugged me - when Van Helsing specifically refers to crucifixes being used against vampires but then only uses crosses.

[lady_lugosi1313]

and it also highlighted why I find Harker so drippy in some ways - he looks like he is wearing a repurposed school blazer - all his jacket needs is a school badge to complete the look.

[strange_complex]

He does indeed. Maybe it was meant to make him look scholarly / librariany, which is what he claims to be? It is striking actually how drippy / mannered both he and Michael Gough as Arthur seem 60+ years later, while the women playing Lucy and Mina are much less irritating and more captivating. Lee and Cushing remain in a different category, of course - but there's a definite gender split in the calibre of the ordinary human performances, I think.

[amaebi]

:D