Universal Monsters #1

I’ll start by saying that I think Melford’s alternative Drácula (Enrique Tovar Ávalos is credited with co-director, so I’m venturing the guess he helped him with interpreter duties), shot during the evening into early morning while Browning’s own “Dracula” (1931) was filmed during the day, is exceptionally well made. But like many, many others, I just have so much anxiety and my heart, no matter much I tried, isn’t in a place right now to give completely toward any entertainment. I’m at work and this fucking C-Virus has just taken over everything. You can’t go very long without hearing someone talking about it or find yourself discussing it. It is inescapable. This is a global disaster that has a long-reaching effect that will eventually find its way into your life. I plan to watch John Carpenter’s “The Thing” (1982) very soon because it has such prescience to it. It is timely. Drácula (1931) deserves better treatment from me; it’s that good. And I certainly found several key scenes quite satisfying, more so, actually, than Browning’s version because Melford really did seem to catch the dailies and visualize more stimulating and expansive (and actually aesthetically captivating) shots. I was especially happy with what Melford did with the ending of the film as I never have liked how Browning’s “Dracula” ended…way, way too abrupt and clunky. You see “Dracula” on my top 5 because of Lugosi and the opening of the film (and I love Frye and Van Sloan, too) more than anything else. I think technically Melford’s version is superior. I never said that before but with Wednesday’s afternoon viewing, I just can’t deny the prowess of Melford’s work. And I particularly think Lupita Tovar (as Eva, the Mina of the film) as Conde Drácula’s obsession is very sexy and just more radiant while Norton’s Juan Harker isn’t thankfully bland as he could have been. And while he’s no Lugosi (who is?), I really enjoy the theatrical Carlos Villarías (he emotes with his eyes, face, and entire body, giving his all) as Conde Drácula, just living it up in the part. I couldn’t help but want to applaud Villarías’ efforts, putting everything into his performance. He’s helped by a game Eduardo Arozamena as Van Helsing and especially Pablo Álvarez Rubio as Renfield. I just loved how Melford shoots one scene when Renfield hides in the bushes or is listening behind a door. And kudos to Melford for actually showing the bent bars of Renfield’s cell and how Conde Drácula smashes the mirror cigarette box held by Van Helsing. The ending really shows Conde Drácula choking the life out of Renfield on the stairwell before hurling him off to his doom in an incredibly staged sequence. I love how Eva’s gown accentuates her figure and isn’t afraid to show her neckline, too. The confrontation between Conde Drácula and Van Helsing is shot differently, which I thought was smart…they are closer and Drácula tries to influence his rival to open a box and put the cross inside, but while the vampire has his cape covering his eyes, Van Helsing fakes him out, escaping certain death. While I will always love Lugosi and Van Sloan’s showdown (granted, I prefer how the Glass score heightens the drama of it, which is why I can’t even imagine watching “Dracula” without it now), I was extremely pleased as a Dracula fan to see how Melford changed his setup to differ from Browning. I am really considering watching “Drácula” again in October so I can break down my favorite scenes and give this version a more respectful write-up. I think the only reason I prefer the Browning version (and it’s very close now after this afternoon) is Lugosi, though. And you grow up with a film—with aspects of it that are imprinted on your brain forever—there is a love and affection that will always remain. I do think you can tell, though, that Melford’s heart was more into it than Browning’s.