I always approach Hammer Horror with the best of intentions, but I'm not sure Hammer Horror does the same for me. Watching Dracula: Prince of Darkness
some fifty years on- it's pleasing to see the classic vampire mythos
played straight, but difficult to bridge the advances of pace and
production in the half-century of filmmaking since.
The late Christopher Lee remains as grand a draw as ever, but his characterization is uneven in this second outing, oscillating between the commanding icon of Dracula you might imagine in your mind, and a devastatingly camp parody.
Though widely disputed; Lee credited a poor script with his decision to play the role completely without speaking. Whether by design of penny pinching producers, or the creative vision of actor or writer, its a decision that elevates a performance at its very best when minimal and still. Of course, don't be fooled by trivia: Dracula is not silent throughout the movie!
The titular Prince of Darkness lowers himself when shooing a rival vampire from fresh meat. He uses the kind of vamping hiss that must've inspired Sho'nuff. When the villain finally meets his demise, he does so with flailing slapstick and over the top yelps. An undignified end to the arch-villain, redeemed only by the strength of its concept.
The Dracula sequel, set ten years after Christopher Lee's first outing, deserves to be seen in its full context, but could best be captured by a montage of its conceptually driven horror. Its greatest point of difference to earlier visions is the vivid colour of its picture and imagination.
The occult constraints of invitation and sunlight are familiar tropes to the vampire genre, but the power of running water is one of the less common tricks that lend some surprise to the tried and true formula found throughout. Indeed, much of Prince of Darkness and its basic structure will be familiar to anyone aware of the classics, or the many dozens of imitators that have paid homage. Personal thresholds will determine whether you buy in to one of the better examples of the power of the holy cross - mythology later films freqeuntly subvert, or discard.
The first forty-or-so minutes of recap and foreboding is the greatest barrier to entry. A tale of hapless travelers is most tedious, but those who endure will be rewarded with Dracula's resurrection scene. When lurching minion Klove clobbers beloved Australian actor Charles "Bud" Tingwell - the movie really begins! Simple transitions, and generous helpings of "kensington gore", work wonders in turning an open coffin filled with ash into a memorable movie moment!
The supporting cast lacks the inherent presence of a Peter Cushing, but Andrew Keir attacks the expository role of Father Sandor with conviction. Barbara Shelley brings an energetic menace to the film's second vampiric threat. Their roles aren't big enough to elevate an otherwise middle of the road picture, but compensate for a dull heroic lead, and give context to the threat of Dracula himself.
Dracula: Prince of Darkness sits early enough in the vampire canon to warrant at least one viewing, but its place in film history is challenged by the breadth of its weakest moments. It's a legend sustained by still shots of Dracula's bloodshot red eyes, and Christopher Lee's looming, rather than the full ninety minutes of human struggle.
The late Christopher Lee remains as grand a draw as ever, but his characterization is uneven in this second outing, oscillating between the commanding icon of Dracula you might imagine in your mind, and a devastatingly camp parody.
Though widely disputed; Lee credited a poor script with his decision to play the role completely without speaking. Whether by design of penny pinching producers, or the creative vision of actor or writer, its a decision that elevates a performance at its very best when minimal and still. Of course, don't be fooled by trivia: Dracula is not silent throughout the movie!
The titular Prince of Darkness lowers himself when shooing a rival vampire from fresh meat. He uses the kind of vamping hiss that must've inspired Sho'nuff. When the villain finally meets his demise, he does so with flailing slapstick and over the top yelps. An undignified end to the arch-villain, redeemed only by the strength of its concept.
The Dracula sequel, set ten years after Christopher Lee's first outing, deserves to be seen in its full context, but could best be captured by a montage of its conceptually driven horror. Its greatest point of difference to earlier visions is the vivid colour of its picture and imagination.
The occult constraints of invitation and sunlight are familiar tropes to the vampire genre, but the power of running water is one of the less common tricks that lend some surprise to the tried and true formula found throughout. Indeed, much of Prince of Darkness and its basic structure will be familiar to anyone aware of the classics, or the many dozens of imitators that have paid homage. Personal thresholds will determine whether you buy in to one of the better examples of the power of the holy cross - mythology later films freqeuntly subvert, or discard.
The first forty-or-so minutes of recap and foreboding is the greatest barrier to entry. A tale of hapless travelers is most tedious, but those who endure will be rewarded with Dracula's resurrection scene. When lurching minion Klove clobbers beloved Australian actor Charles "Bud" Tingwell - the movie really begins! Simple transitions, and generous helpings of "kensington gore", work wonders in turning an open coffin filled with ash into a memorable movie moment!
The supporting cast lacks the inherent presence of a Peter Cushing, but Andrew Keir attacks the expository role of Father Sandor with conviction. Barbara Shelley brings an energetic menace to the film's second vampiric threat. Their roles aren't big enough to elevate an otherwise middle of the road picture, but compensate for a dull heroic lead, and give context to the threat of Dracula himself.
Dracula: Prince of Darkness sits early enough in the vampire canon to warrant at least one viewing, but its place in film history is challenged by the breadth of its weakest moments. It's a legend sustained by still shots of Dracula's bloodshot red eyes, and Christopher Lee's looming, rather than the full ninety minutes of human struggle.
Originally Posted: https://letterboxd.com/dialmformicker/film/dracula-prince-of-darkness/
No comments:
Post a Comment