No Media
This item doesn’t have any media yet
Edit
Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)
Movie
Dracula (1958)
Book
Dracula
TV Show
Dracula
Movie
Count Dracula (1977)
Universal Dracula Vampire Universal Horror Universal Monsters
Dracula (English) (1931)
1931 | Horror
85 mins United States
The vampire Count Dracula travels from Transylvania to England and preys upon a young woman named Mina, as her fiancé John Harker and vampire hunter Abraham Van Helsing try to save her.
Related Items:
Movie Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) Movie
Dracula (1958) Book
Dracula TV Show
Dracula Movie
Count Dracula (1977) | Produced by | Universal Pictures |
| Director | Tod Browning |
| Writer | Garrett Fort |
| Cast | Bela Lugosi, David Manners, Helen Chandler, Edward van Sloan, Dwight Frye, Herbert Bunston and Frances Dade |
Universal Dracula Vampire Universal Horror Universal Monsters
Main Image Courtesy: Universal Pictures.
Background Image Courtesy: Universal Pictures.
Images And Data Courtesy Of: Universal Pictures.
This content (including text, images, videos and other media) is published and used in accordance
with Fair Use.
Changelog >
Edited By
Dracula (English) (1931) Reviews & Ratings (24)
| 9-10 |  |
|
41.7% (10) |
| 7-8 |  |
|
33.3% (8) |
| 5-6 |  |
|
25.0% (6) |
| 3-4 |  |
|
0.0% (0) |
| 1-2 |  |
|
0.0% (0) |
Dracula (English) (1931) reviews from people you don't follow
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated
Jul 6, 2020
It goes without saying that the importance of Dracula cannot be understated. Releasing in 1931, it was Universal Studios first steps into the horror genre, not long after 'talkies' became a thing, and surely paved the way for he mountain of horror titles that have come along since.
Bela Lugosi is Dracula, and though there have been fine portrayals of the titular vampire since, his performance lay the ground work for how a lot of media realise vampires to this day. He cuts a striking figure, he's suave and sinister, and the thick European accent is paramount to how he made Dracula a classic.
I first saw Dracula when I was a kid, and having watched it again recently, it's still a striking experience. While there may not be anything inherently frightening or scary by today's standards, the old black and white style, paired with long moments of uncomfortable silence (Director Tod Browning has exclusively worked on silent films before this), make for a suitably eerie atmosphere.
It's obviously a film that shows it age, but still hasn't lost any of it's charm. The version I watched recently was a Blu Ray restoration, and it's clear how lovingly that restoration has been implemented. Watching a film from the 30s look so crystal clear is something special.
Bela Lugosi is Dracula, and though there have been fine portrayals of the titular vampire since, his performance lay the ground work for how a lot of media realise vampires to this day. He cuts a striking figure, he's suave and sinister, and the thick European accent is paramount to how he made Dracula a classic.
I first saw Dracula when I was a kid, and having watched it again recently, it's still a striking experience. While there may not be anything inherently frightening or scary by today's standards, the old black and white style, paired with long moments of uncomfortable silence (Director Tod Browning has exclusively worked on silent films before this), make for a suitably eerie atmosphere.
It's obviously a film that shows it age, but still hasn't lost any of it's charm. The version I watched recently was a Blu Ray restoration, and it's clear how lovingly that restoration has been implemented. Watching a film from the 30s look so crystal clear is something special.
Dianne Robbins (1738 KP) rated
Sep 7, 2018
Watch 1931's Dracula starring Bela Lugosi. Then the 1931 Spanish version of Dracula. The American version filmed during the day and the Spanish cast and crew used the exact same sets to film at the exact time, only at night, instead. It's quite a study in film to compare the two. From the cinematography, to the lighting, the sounds, costumes, acting, and more. The Spanish version is very sensual and passionate while the American one is, well, bloodless, but still good.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated
Mar 10, 2020
I am Dracula
Dracula- such a classic film, such a excellent film. It is so perfect, its a masterpeice. This film really started "the unviersal monsters franchise", this and "Frankenstien". Without those two films, we would have no "unverisal monsters", we would have no "monster/creature films", i mean we still would but their wouldnt be good/the same. So thanks to this film and frankenstein, we got "the universal monster franchise" and films about "monsters/creatures". Also if it wasnt for "Dracula" and "Nosferatu", we wouldnt have any movies about vampires. So once again thanks to "Dracula" and "Nosferatu" we have movies about vampires.
The plot: The dashing, mysterious Count Dracula (Bela Lugosi), after hypnotizing a British soldier, Renfield (Dwight Frye), into his mindless slave, travels to London and takes up residence in an old castle. Soon Dracula begins to wreak havoc, sucking the blood of young women and turning them into vampires. When he sets his sights on Mina (Helen Chandler), the daughter of a prominent doctor, vampire-hunter Van Helsing (Edward Van Sloan) is enlisted to put a stop to the count's never-ending bloodlust.
And of course, you cant forgot about the amazing and fantasic Bela Lugosi. When you think of Dracula, you think of him. He was so perfect as Dracula.
Like i said before this film is a masterpiece and my second favorite film of "the unverisal monster franchise".
The plot: The dashing, mysterious Count Dracula (Bela Lugosi), after hypnotizing a British soldier, Renfield (Dwight Frye), into his mindless slave, travels to London and takes up residence in an old castle. Soon Dracula begins to wreak havoc, sucking the blood of young women and turning them into vampires. When he sets his sights on Mina (Helen Chandler), the daughter of a prominent doctor, vampire-hunter Van Helsing (Edward Van Sloan) is enlisted to put a stop to the count's never-ending bloodlust.
And of course, you cant forgot about the amazing and fantasic Bela Lugosi. When you think of Dracula, you think of him. He was so perfect as Dracula.
Like i said before this film is a masterpiece and my second favorite film of "the unverisal monster franchise".
The first official screen version of Dracula has a reputation for being sluggish and stagey that is not entirely undeserved; we should bear in mind it was adapted from a play and released at a time when some cinemas were still not wired for sound (a silent version with intertitles was produced from the same footage). Nevertheless this is in many ways the version of the story that nearly all the others have been made in response to, whether they are riffing on it or reacting against it.
It's slow, and camp, and there are some interesting performance styles on display, but every now and then a moment slips through which is genuinely interesting, and which you can tell has inspired some of the movies that followed. Virtually no actual blood or visual horror, of course, but then it's not in and of itself actually scary. It is, however, the template and raw material from which most other Dracula movies (and many other vampire movies) have been drawn, and worth watching just for that reason.
It's slow, and camp, and there are some interesting performance styles on display, but every now and then a moment slips through which is genuinely interesting, and which you can tell has inspired some of the movies that followed. Virtually no actual blood or visual horror, of course, but then it's not in and of itself actually scary. It is, however, the template and raw material from which most other Dracula movies (and many other vampire movies) have been drawn, and worth watching just for that reason.
Dracula (English) (1931) reviews from people you don't follow
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated
Mar 7, 2019
1 list features Dracula (English) (1931)
