A look at the history of the infamous vampire Dracula, and how the original 1931 film came to be.A look at the history of the infamous vampire Dracula, and how the original 1931 film came to be.A look at the history of the infamous vampire Dracula, and how the original 1931 film came to be.
Photos
John Balderston Jr.
- Self
- (as John Balderston)
Bela Lugosi Jr.
- Self
- (as Bela G. Lugosi)
Dwight David Frye
- Self
- (as Dwight D. Frye)
Lupita Tovar
- Self
- (as Lupita Tovar Kohner)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaIncluded as a special feature in the DVD boxset of Dracula The Legacy Collection, released in 2004.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Minty Comedic Arts: 10 Things You Didn't Know About Dracula 1931 (2023)
Featured review
OK Look at 1931 "Dracula," but Better to Read Books
This video documentary presented in home-video collections of "Dracula" (1931) is a decent and brief overview of the "Dracula" story from Bram Stoker's novel to stage and screen adaptations. Besides the 1931 classic, a lost 1921 Hungarian film, "Dracula's Death" (Drakula halála) (1921), "Nosferatu" (1922), the 1979 "Dracula" and the Spanish- language "Dracula" (1931), which was produced at nights while the more-famous English-language version was made during the days, are mentioned. There's also a brief re-creation of a scene for the lost 1931 silent version of the same script. The doc ends with lots of praise for Bela Lugosi, and there's a recitation of the lost fourth-wall- breaking epilogue to the film. There are the usual talking heads and lots of moving stills to present "The Road to Dracula." The movie's maker, David J. Skal, author of "Hollywood Gothic" and related books, also does a good share of the talking here.
Interestingly, another of those talking heads, Gary Don Rhodes agrees with Skal here on the supposedly superior and more artistic camera- work in the Spanish "Dracula" as opposed to the English one, and he says there are far more camera movements in the Spanish version. In his later book, "Tod Browning's Dracula," however, Rhodes claims, "the many critics who have claimed that the Melford version (my edit: i.e. the Spanish one) of 'Dracula' employs more moving camera are wrong. They are, without doubt, mathematically incorrect." Seems he changed his mind. Indeed, Rhodes is right in his book, and it's more interesting and informative than a short documentary of nodding heads could ever be to read Skal's "Hollywood Gothic" and the counterarguments to it in Rhodes's book.
Interestingly, another of those talking heads, Gary Don Rhodes agrees with Skal here on the supposedly superior and more artistic camera- work in the Spanish "Dracula" as opposed to the English one, and he says there are far more camera movements in the Spanish version. In his later book, "Tod Browning's Dracula," however, Rhodes claims, "the many critics who have claimed that the Melford version (my edit: i.e. the Spanish one) of 'Dracula' employs more moving camera are wrong. They are, without doubt, mathematically incorrect." Seems he changed his mind. Indeed, Rhodes is right in his book, and it's more interesting and informative than a short documentary of nodding heads could ever be to read Skal's "Hollywood Gothic" and the counterarguments to it in Rhodes's book.
helpful•00
- Cineanalyst
- Nov 28, 2017
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content