Author: Zevon Price

For Day 22 of my 31 Days of Vampire Movies feature, I thought I’d throw in a Dracula you may not have heard of, from the show-runner of one of the longest-running vampire soap operas of all time.

Dan Curtis’s Dracula was another Made for TV Movie, and starred Jack Palance, who most of you probably know as Curly the cowboy from City Slickers. Dan Curtis was the creator of the television show Dark Shadows, which gave the world Barnabas Collins as one of the original Sad Boy Vampires who started out as an evil monster hell-bent on revenge and gradually became a sort of anti-hero in his quest to be reunited with his lost love Josette.

There was a lot of murder, kidnapping, and other unsavory things in the meantime, but it was a soap opera, after all.

Curtis pretty much lifted the reincarnated lost-love plot line wholesale from Dark Shadows for his Dracula, swapping Barnabas for Dracula himself, and Josette for Lucy. This is the first time the lost love reincarnation plot was used in a Dracula movie, and it’s kind of strange that its from a pretty obscure movie and yet has become one of the defining tropes of vampire movies. Dracula is almost always searching for his dead love, reincarnated into the body of a modern (for whatever time the movie is supposed to take place) young woman.

Palance plays Dracula with a feral, savage energy that makes him more frightening than swoon-worthy. The settings are lush and immersive, if a bit spare, but the 70’s style hair and makeup clash terribly with the period costumes. The acting ranges from stiffly serviceable from the other actors to chilling when Palance is allowed to shine, and the movie is overall decent for the time and for what it had to work with. I recommend it to see Jack Palance’s take on Dracula. When so many others play him as a romantic antihero, Palance takes his lead from Christopher Lee’s version of the Count and makes him a savage, fearsome predator.

Definitely look for this one, to see a unique take on Dracula that ended up becoming one of the most insidious additions to the mythos ever created.

Day 21 in my 31 Days of Vampire Movies feature is going to be a little different, because I’m going to cheat a little. But never fear! You get two movies instead of just one!

   

 

 

 

Fright Night 1985 and Fright Night 2011 are both great vampire movies. The original is a fun coming of age movie about a teen who discovers his next door neighbor may be more than he’s letting on, and joins forces with two of his friends and TV horror host Peter Vincent to put a stop to his vampire killing spree. Chris Sarandon plays vampire Jerry Dandridge as the kind of guy your divorced mom would totally try to bang the second you left the house. He has a roguish charm that he can turn on and off on a dime, just a little bit sleazy but in a charming way, all the better to weasel his way into your life before he ends it.

The reboot follows the same basic premise, but moves the setting from the generic suburbs into the ‘burbs of Las Vegas, and updates Peter Vincent’s character from a late night TV horror host to a flashy Las Vegas stage magician a la Cris Angel. David Tennant takes over from the beloved and lovable Roddy McDowell, and does a fantastic job of making the character his own. Colin Farrell takes over the part of Jerry Dandridge from Chris Sarandon, and dials up the sleazy charm to 11. He leans into the dangerous bad boy image, complete with motorcycle and the white wife-beater T-shirt. This version of Jerry Dandridge swaggers in with a six-pack and a grin, and you just know he’s going to be a lady killer in every sense of the phrase.

Both movies are a good time, but there’s one thing I just can’t get past in the original Fright Night: Charlie is a little shit. For the time, he was written as a relatable every guy, an underdog hero who’s caught in that ephemeral space between kid and adult, trying to navigate life and girls and all that. But watching the movie, especially at the beginning, he’s an entitled asshole who browbeats his girlfriend into having sex when she’s not ready, and when she finally psychs herself up for it, when she clearly doesn’t want to, he drops her like the proverbial hot rock to spy on the neighbors without even thinking about what he’s doing to her psychologically and emotionally. She rightfully storms out on him, but apologizes the next day at school when she should have run him over with her car.

Amy in the original Fright Night deserves so much better, but I’ll cut that rant short.

Charlie in the reboot, played by the late Anton Yelchin, is a much more likable version of the character. He’s still in that awkward phase of teenager, not a kid anymore but still with a lot of growing up to do, and he’s endearing as he tries to fit in with this movie’s far more worldly version of Amy, who holds her own against Jerry. They make a much better pair, and you can see why Amy and Charlie are a couple and why they stay together. Plus, Charlie isn’t a sex pest in this movie, so that makes it a much better watch all the way around.

If I had to recommend one over the other, I’d choose the reboot, which is not something I say very often. This version of Charlie is far more likable, and David Tennant is always a good time when he’s hamming it up onscreen. But check them both out. You won’t be disappointed by either.

Day 20 of my 31 Days of Vampire Movies feature takes us back to the Disco Era, baby!

Love at First Bite begins with our Dracula, played by the tannest man who ever lived, George Hamilton, eschewing stodgy old Transylvania for the swinging nightlife of New York City in pursuit of his newest love, Cindy Sondheim. Shenanigans ensue as Dracula woos Cindy, a thoroughly modern woman who has all the baggage of a thoroughly modern woman: she wants a career, a family, and a purpose in life. She also has a neurotic psychiatrist who happens to be her on again/off again lover. He’s also the descendant of none other than Abraham Van Helsing.

This movie was a staple back in the 80s when Superstation TBS was one of the powerhouses of TV. It usually went back to back with either a Vincent Price movie or a Hammer flick, and it made a great day for baby Zevon. This was one of my favorite movies, even though the irony of having the one of the tannest men of all time play Dracula flew right past me.

But, sadly, I must now acknowledge the elephant in the room: this movie is a product of it’s time, and holy shit, it is racist as all hell. I loved this movie when I was a kid. I remember sitting in the floor and watching it on our big console TV, and loving it so much, especially the ending where Cindy got to fly off into the night with her vampire and be the Queen of the Night she was always meant to be, when so many ladies in vampire movies ended up staked and decapitated for some bullshit morality lesson. It was probably almost two decades before I watched the movie again, and wow. So much of the racism flew right over my head when I was a kid. I sat there, an adult, with my mouth hanging open in places, stunned that so much racist stuff made it into the movie. It was eye-opening, to say the least.

Are the funny parts funny? Hell, yes. When the movie plays up the vampire cliches and buffoonery of its main characters, its a riot. But that doesn’t excuse the rest of it, which serve no real purpose and could have been jettisoned without a problem. If you decide to watch this one, keep in mind it’s going to be hellaciously uncomfortable in places. I still like the movie, but I can’t in good conscience recommend it without giant caveats.

Day 18 of my 31 Days of Vampire Movies Features brings you one of the bluest movies ever made.

Underworld is the pinnacle of style over substance. This movie looks amazing. The dark, gritty color palette, painting the world in every beautiful shade of dark blue, transports you into a slick, seductive world of the undead, where the pallor of their skin gleams like moonlight and the faint tracings of pale blue veins under their skin betrays what they truly are. Blue slides off and hugs the curves of black leather and cold steel in a way that seems almost fetishistic. Even the blood has a cold blue edge to it, when vampire movies usually go so far in the other direction with red.

But that is the best thing about Underworld. The acting is okay, for the most part, but veers into over the top and camp more than it should. The plot, when you think about it for even a second, falls apart with utter ridiculousness. It’s a Romeo and Juliet story with vampires and werewolves, but the head vampires, centuries old and supposedly crafty and intelligent, make some of the most boneheaded moves I’ve ever seen. Any idiot could see through Craven’s (my God, telegraphing that character’s heel-turn, weren’t we Screenwriters?) duplicity, and the werewolves aren’t much better. The plot was just the framework for the aesthetics, which are top notch, I only wish the movie’s writing and character development were just as good.

Day 17 of my 31 Days of Vampire Movies takes us back to the 1990s this time, for a Made for TV Movie (do they even still do those?) from 1997 called House of Frankenstein.

Sadly no Funko Pop pic for this one, as it’s never had a DVD or Blu ray release

House of Frankenstein was the title of a horror movie from 1944, but neither have anything to do with the other. In this one, vampire Crispian Grimes (Dracula. Come on, its Dracula) has moved to Los Angeles and into the modern world as a high-powered business man. One of his ventures is a nightclub called, you guessed it, The House of Frankenstein. He’s also funding an expedition to the Arctic, in search of Frankenstein’s (the monster, not the doctor) resting place. He plans to display the Creature in his club for the patrons to gawk at. He’s a rich 90s douchebag, just roll with it. There’s a cop, a beautiful woman who gets turned into a werewolf by one of Grimes’ henchmen, shady real-estate dealings, fallen angels, crappy special effects, and a gratuitous use of The Smashing Pumpkins’ Bullet with Butterfly Wings that will make you laugh out loud when you see how on the nose it is.

As it’s a made for TV movie, it has never been released on either DVD or Blu ray, so finding a copy might be close to impossible, but I do recommend trying to run one down if you can. It’s awful, but in an entertaining way, and one of the better Made-For-TV-Movies out there, especially for the spooky season.

Today’s movie gives us a much different, more fantastical take on Dracula and vampires than most of the other movies on this list so far. It was one of the more recent movies that attempted a Monster Mash of Dracula, the Wolfman, and Frankenstein, and it is a glorious mess. I’m of course talking about Van Helsing.

This movie is like one of those novelty ice cream cones that has everything jammed into it regardless of whether or not it really goes together. It looks good in an Instagram photo, and seems like something you’d want to dive into, but three bites in your stomach is hurting and your teeth are hurting and there’s still so much more to get through and oh my God its just never going to end. Van Helsing is a Steven Sommers movie (you know, the guy who directed The Mummy movies with Brendan Fraser) and in Van Helsing, he’s like a little kid turned loose in a Toys ‘R’ Us and given all the candy he can eat. Every idea he has gets crammed in, no matter how ludicrous or over the top. The acting matches, with everyone swinging for the fences, except Hugh Jackman, who seems a little lost in the role and the ridiculousness. He gives it his best, but Richard Roxburgh takes his Dracula straight through camp and shoots the moon into bombastic ridiculousness. He is the best part of the movie.

I enjoy Van Helsing, but there is nothing to take seriously here. It’s pure fluff, but its a good movie to introduce the kiddos to horror and the Universal monsters. Maybe not the little kiddos, it might be a little too intense for them, but some of the older ones might dig the aesthetic and the gung-ho craziness of the plot.

We’re going back to the 80’s again with this hidden gem, diving deep into the neon-drenched sleaze with this tale of a vampire cab driver who, more often than not, takes his victims to their final destinations. I give you Central Park Drifter. Or Graveyard Shift, depending on your preference.

My skeleton friend Stuart Gore-don recommends this! Two dismembered thumbs way up!

Like a lot of foreign films, this one has more than one name. Central Park Drifter is the more USA-friendly title, playing on the dangerous, edgy, serial killer mien that was so popular at the time, while Graveyard Shift is the more artsy one. It’s an Italian production filmed in Canada that takes place in New York City.

It’s not really a Giallo film, although it apes certain aspects of it in style and gore. But honestly, its not a great movie. The script is pretty trite, and if you’re looking for deep meaning or characters to connect to, you’re not going to find it here. What you’re going to find is sex, blood, and melodrama. Most of the actors were primarily dancers, and while they do have the prerequisite hard bodies for a sexy 80s movie, that doesn’t really translate over into acting. And the film is dubbed, so there’s that.

If you like over the top gore and exploitation vampire movies, you might like this. It all depends on your tolerance for bad dubbing, gratuitous nudity, and pointless spectacle. The atmosphere is top-notch, though. It’s got the gritty, dirty, seediness of 80s yuppies down to an art-form. It’s worth a watch, but it’s not going to give you anything more than it says on the box. Check it out if you can find it.

Yesterday in my 31 Days of Vampire Movies feature, I brought you Dracula. Today, it seems only fitting that I bring you Renfield.

Dwight Frye played Renfield in the original Dracula, and he gave almost as memorable a performance as Bela Lugosi. His manic, unhinged energy was a diametric opposite to Lugosi’s cold, vicious performance, and set the standard for all evil henchmen hereafter.

Renfield, starring Nicholas Hoult, is a straight up horror comedy, and while it wallows in the sheer ridiculousness of its concept, its still a fun time. It doesn’t pretend to be anything other than it is, and the gore, while mostly CGI, is still entertaining. Interestingly enough, where Renfield nearly stole the show in the original 1931 Dracula, here, Dracula nearly steals it back. Nicholas Cage doesn’t go the full Nicholas Cage, but he’s let off the leash enough to be memorable and entertaining. You can tell he’s having a great time, and it’s infectious as he plays Dracula as more of a shitty boss than a true, terrifying creature of Hell. It’s relatable, in a way. We’ve all worked for a boss like this at some point, and felt him sucking the life out of us. Hoult plays Renfield as a relatable doormat who’s looking for his purpose in life and a way out of the sucking black void Dracula has trapped him in. Awkwafina makes a great foil to him. She’s brash and takes no bullshit from the crime syndicate ruling New Orleans in the movie’s subplot.

As I said, its a dumb, loud, fun movie, and if that’s what you’re looking for, you’re going to find it here. It’s not really scary, but it might be a little too gory for some. But still, if you don’t mind CGI blood being sprayed like a firehouse and nameless, faceless henchmen being ripped apart by a bug-eating weirdo, this right here is your movie.

Day 31 of Vampire Movies takes us back to the beginning. Not the very beginning, that’s Nosferatu, but this is the movie that cemented vampires as the cultural powerhouses they continue to be after a century of movies. I’m of course talking about Dracula, and the often imitated but never outclassed Bela Lugosi.

Lugosi’s performance as Dracula is so iconic that many of the stereotypes we take for granted about vampires came from him. The cape, the widow’s peak, the at times near-incomprehensible accent (Lugosi learned English later in life, and did his first Broadway performance by learning his lines phonetically) all came from him. He’s actually about as different from the Count in Bram Stoker’s book as I am from Charlize Theron. His portrayal is so iconic that most people don’t even realize that Lugosi didn’t even have fangs in the movie. That was brought into the mainstream by none other than Christopher Lee in the Hammer production The Horror of Dracula. (See Day 1 for my recap of that movie. Also, several Mexican and Turkish productions of Dracula had given him fangs before the Hammer film, but the Hammer film was the one that brought it mainstream attention in Western media. Credit where credit is due on all fronts.)

For what its worth, the movie itself, while groundbreaking at the time for its level of sensuality and themes, its a fairly stilted movie at times. The rest of the cast, with the exception of Edward van Sloane as Van Helsing, simply isn’t up to Lugosi’s level of magnetism. The comedy bits are a bit hokey as well, but its still a movie to be appreciated by fans of horror and vampires. Check this one out when you can, if only to enjoy Lugosi’s thoroughly entertaining turn as the infamous Count.