Dracula has been haunting the big screen for decades, and along the way, audiences have
seen numerous interpretations of the character, some more effective than others.
In the mood for some bloodsucking cinema?
Since 1902's Voyage dans la Lune, filmmakers have been shooting people into space.
But as both characters and audiences of Dracula 3000 know, sometimes space bites.
The movie follows a group of space salvagers led by Captain Van Helsing.
The team encounters a derelict ship where they find the former captain, dead and clutching
a crucifix.
Van Helsing and friends soon learn why as they encounter Count Orlock, better known
as Nosferatu.
This is where all the running, screaming, and bleeding starts.
"So what the hell is a vampire?"
But while vampires and space are exciting on their own, Dracula 3000 leaves audiences
with one of the worst Alien ripoffs and the single worst Dracula movie.
Unlike other adaptations, Werner Herzog's Nosferatu the Vampyre was a direct adaptation
of the original and aesthetically breaks from most modern renditions.
Instead of perfectly slicked-back hair and a red cape, Klaus Kinski's Count Orlock dons
simple black garb, a bald scalp, pointed ears, dark under-eye circles, and rodent-like teeth.
Nosferatu the Vampyre is truly the stuff of nightmares, thanks to the director's singular
perspective and striking directorial eye.
3D cinema, like locusts, appears in cycles.
In 2012, Dracula 3D premiered amidst the most recent cycle of 3D, chewing its way through
the industry.
But while Dracula 3D's release followed successful 3D horror ventures like My Bloody Valentine
3D, cult director Dario Argento's effort seems hellbent on eroding any audience faith in
the technology.
Soap opera-style camera work, low-quality 3D, and even lower quality CGI result in a
rough viewing experience.
A handful of those present at the premiere noted that the film walks the line of "so
bad it's good."
Maybe someday audience perception will tip it from "bad" to "good", but for now Dracula
3D remains one of the worst Dracula films ever made.
Bela Lugosi's legacy lives on thanks in large part to his utterly devastating turn in the
1931 film Dracula.
Regarded by many as one of the best vampire films of all time, Tod Browning's adaptation
is almost single-handedly responsible for the vampire films audiences enjoy today.
Lugosi was so adept at the part thanks to his years of experience playing it onstage,
though Universal Studios almost didn't cast him.
Thanks to the hands of fate, audiences were introduced to his singular presence.
Though the cast outside of Lugosi is regarded as mediocre, the film boasts luscious cinematography
and is held together by the sheer power of the star's presence.
Wes Craven's pioneering and typically exquisite work as a writer, director and producer of
slasher films like Nightmare on Elm Street and Scream earned him the title "the Master
of Horror."
But Craven also hitched his name to a few flops, with Dracula 2000 being the most embarrassing
example.
Dracula 2000, like many films at the turn of the millennium, sought to pull a classic
character into the 21st century.
While vampires typically live forever, Dracula probably would have been better off dead.
Despite the absurd plot, complete with a time-traveling Van Helsing, critics were forgiving of this
corpse-like revival of Stoker's classic given Gerard Butler's pretty decent rendition of
Dracula.
Hollywood, determined to get maximum bang for its buck, sometimes reshot films in different
languages.
Such is the case with the Spanish version of the 1931 Dracula, which is just as good,
if not better, than its English counterpart.
Where Tod Browning's film relied heavily on its star power and cinematography, director
George Melford's style was more visually dynamic.
The crew also benefited from having the English language dailies to learn and build from.
Though it vanished for many years, a copy surfaced in the 1970s.
On October 25th, 2015, Spanish-language Drácula made its official debut as a part of a Turner
Classic Movies' "TCM Presents" series and redefined Dracula history forever.
"She's alive?"
"She's Nosferatu."
"She's Italian?"
The line between horror and comedy can be razor thin, leading many filmmakers into the
realm of parody.
While a bad horror film can be funny, bad parody is usually just bad.
Mel Brooks' Dracula: Dead and Loving It could've been the spiritual successor to Young Frankenstein.
Most of the cast were veterans of Hollywood comedy who should've been more than capable
of parodying Lugosi's 1931 version.
But the ingredients just didn't come together.
Thankfully, Mel Brooks' other films aren't going anywhere if you're looking for a good
laugh.
Other than Lugosi, the late Christopher Lee is easily one of the best Draculas of all
time.
Like many of the other Dracula films, Horror of Dracula largely adheres to Bram Stoker's
text.
But unlike many others, Horror of Dracula's story lives up to its stellar cast, thanks
to a well-crafted script from Jimmy Sangster.
Director Terence Fisher creates the requisite mood, and the capable cast flushes out the
material beautifully, especially Peter Cushing, who is arguably the best film Van Helsing
to date.
Horror of Dracula established many of the visual flourishes expected from a vampire
film: prominent fangs, glowing red eyes, and pre-made wooden stakes.
Through it all, Lee oozes charisma and terror in equal measure, which resulted in typecasting
for much of his career.
Unlike Lugosi, Lee eventually broke from Dracula and is remembered for his other illustrious
roles.
Dracula fans will be forgiven for missing this lesser-known production co-created by
WGBH Boston and BBC Wales.
But Masterpiece Theatre should be familiar to public television fans, having been responsible
for some incredible literary adaptations.
From a production perspective, Dracula's pristine period setting should make it an easy fit.
However, this Dracula takes a few creative liberties, such as omitting certain well-known
characters and introducing a more explicit disease subplot.
The changes, though novel, do more to alienate literary fans than give the story new life.
Overall the film struggles to find its voice, landing somewhere between typical Masterpiece
artistry and popcorn-flick throwaway.
All adaptations owe a great debt to the 1921 classic Nosferatu.
This premier Dracula film introduced the character and vampire mythology to a wider audience.
The great irony is that Nosferatu had to pretend it wasn't a Dracula film.
The story goes that studio co-founder Albin Grau commissioned screenwriter Henrik Galeen
to pen a production based on Bram Stoker's novel.
But when the Stoker estate refused to grant permission, the script was reworked to avoid
copyright infringement.
It didn't work, and the studio filed for bankruptcy soon after the film's release.
All copies of the film were to be destroyed by a court order, but thanks to international
distribution, Nosferatu survived.
So has its ability to linger, hauntingly, agelessly, like Dracula himself.
Check out one of our newest videos right here!
Plus, even more Looper videos about your favorite horror movies are coming soon.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel and hit the bell so you don't miss a single one.