'Dracula' 1931 Review: A beautiful classic

It's coming up on Halloween and I think this might be the first October where I was just completely oblivious to which month it actually was and how fast the Halloween holiday was coming up. I used to spend as much of the October month watching various horror and thriller films and television shows to get into that atmosphere of Halloween, having been someone that always loved that aesthetic but never really did anything on the holiday night or day itself. We're now almost ten days into the month and I just had that epiphany, quickly scrambling to find a film to check out tonight that wasn't too long to begin that old tradition of mine that I'd nearly forgotten about with all the chaos of the recent days distracting me.

I felt like watching something old, very old. Something that could be coming up on its 100th anniversary soon sort of old. Black and white horror. Before the use of colour. Before the more modern use of horror was found with jump scares and low light. I wanted something more theatrical in its approach. The directing still creative but simple, the acting something that screams theatre performance rather than something more modern and Oscar-worthy. And it dawned upon me that there's a whole list of fun Universal monster films that I could watch. The ones that really started it all, pretty much. Starting with 1931's Dracula. Also the film that gave the character of Dracula a face to remember, coming from the great Bela Lugosi.

Dracula

Cinema of the early 1930s was still something incredibly young. Something that was still jumping off its feet. I mentioned that the more theatrical style of such films of that era, and it comes from the fact that theatre just was more popular at the time. There was an established standard of how to perform as an actor, and many actors of the era already had theatrical backgrounds to them. Filmmaking gear was also relatively limited at the time, and this meant very fixed cinematography that'd rarely see movement. Though these monster films knew that they had to find new ways to tell stories, to find ways to connect to the audience and pay homage to the books that would've once placed great discomfort into their readers going into the night.

Immediately the story throws us into the fears of a group that roam the night in search of blood. Feasting upon the unfortunate, taking forms of bats and wolves. This is done through the arrival of a horse and carriage just around sunset. Taking a foreigner into the wild lands and through a village, to which he is warned of the dangers at night. The foreigner of course shrugging it off and claiming that he's meeting a Count Dracula later on. This is met with great fear and rejection from the locals, given Count Dracula himself is the one that they fear. I really liked this opening, it jumps straight into things, and immediately throws in the fears of locals through their superstitions, as far as refusing to go outside even before the sun has fully set. Everyone insisting that the foreigner joins them and seeks shelter.

With such a short runtime the story really picks up out of nowhere, and I think that's something we've really lost going into present day cinema, where the time is stretched out and everything needs a long establishing narrative. This display of superstition also increases the fear of the threat, and with how much bigger the world would've felt back then in the early 1930s, one can only imagine the impact it would've had. Where small towns and villages likely would've had their own superstitions that stemmed from close communities and unknown horizons that were rarely travelled. Particularly with the nature that would've lurked within the darkness of the night nearby, in the forests and over the mountains. Watching something like this back then certainly would've been a bit of a scare!

I found the visuals incredibly beautiful. And something I noticed was the characteristics of the lenses used. They performed a more swirly bokeh that was still quite visible in the backgrounds even with the black and white and generally darker tones. This would've been unintentional back then given how common of an outcome it was with those lenses, but today it would've been a direct consideration to make things more otherworldly, less connected to a grounded reality. I guess the impact remains the same nonetheless. The use of that film stock definitely adds to the atmosphere too. Black and white out of no colour stock yet, grainy and gritty, amplifying the harsh surroundings of Dracula's castle which is covered in debris, dust, and all kinds of critters. This also added to dynamic range, where the shadows end up being incredibly dark.

The story being something a bit more a thing of its time, but not in any negative manner: a solicitor called up to his client's castle regarding papers on real estate. His intent being to move from Transylvania to England. What's interesting about the story though is how it portrays Count Dracula, initially as a rather respectful individual. Only for Dracula to pursue a series of manipulations through the use of drugs and hypnotics. Enforcing the lawyer to his will for his travels to England with his three wives. Slowly hunting upon the locals as they come to the realisation of what is happening. I quite liked the simplicity of the story in this regard. It's more how the acts unfold in a slow, theatrical manner. Also amplified by a lack of music throughout the film, often with just total silence. Nothing between scenes, nothing over dialogue or moments of suspense.