Dan Curtis' Dracula [Blu-ray]

I've been waiting years to add this movie to my collection. It's a must watch from Dark Shadows creator, Dan Curtis. There are some great extra features as well. The problem was the quality of the video. I realize it was a made for tv movie, but why was the video fine in some areas and lousy in others? With all the digital remastering these days, it looks like the issues could have been fixed. Was still an enjoyable video to watch, but a few times I was distracted by some bad video.

This is a solid telling of Dracula, and very close to the book (unlike most Dracula movies).

I can’t wait to watch came in great condition and on time

The cinematic genre of Dracula will celebrate it's 100th anniversary in 2022. Indeed we've come a long way since the silent movie classic "Nosferatu" which was first filmed in Germany in 1922. We later have Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula in the 1930's leading to my favorite Dracula Christopher Lee in the Hammer Horror Film years of the 1950's and 1960's. However, it was the imagination of Dan Curtis who brought Dark Shadows featuring Barnabas Collins into our homes every afternoon via daytime television. Dan Curtis totally reinvented the image of film vampires making them sympathetic characters you rooted for yet at the same time despised as blood thirsty fiends. This TV version of Dracula adds yet another chapter to the vampire genre which deserves its own separate spotlight in classic horror film recognition. Many believe Jack Palance came as close as any actor to date in surpassing the sensual, yet horrifying depiction of Dracula once portrayed by the late legendary great Christopher Lee. Dan Curtis decided to film "Bram Stoker's Dracula" also known as" Dan Curtis Dracula" in two locations. He picked Yugoslavia, where there were eerie old castles and secluded land to film on. Yet Curtis still found time and space on the remaining reels to conclude the story lusciously filmed in the atmospheric setting of old England. The initial broadcast was scheduled for October 1973 but was pre-empted for a special news address by President Nixon on the resignation of his VP Spiro Agnew. Instead the movie was rescheduled and broadcast in February 1974. The movie was very successful according to the special features section provided on the DVD purchase. Supposedly ,Jack Palance was offered the role of Dracula several more times after his gala performance here. However, he adamantly turned down all those future acting parts, out of fear he might be stereotyped going forward , regarding any further acting roles he might seek. After all, It was his second horror collaboration with Curtis dating back to the made for TV movie " The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" gorgeously filmed in 1968. I just wish he could have made more entertaining films with Dan Curtis after triumphantly making this one. They worked so well together, making memorable films which I think others would agree to this day, more than withstand the cinematic test of time.

*CONTAINS SPOILERS*I admit I was bit skeptical of the plot quality when I first read the film summary. I feared that Dracula would only be written as romantic and sympathetic, without putting any of the necessary emphasis on the fact that he is an EVIL character. Still, I decided to give it a shot and, boy, am I glad I did.The movie was in no way the sexy, angst riddled vampire chick flick I'd thought it would be. Instead of being a squeal fest for teenage girls, the story was very somber and dark, though not lacking in action.In this movie, Dracula reason for going to England is to take for his own, a young woman (Lucy), that looks exactly like his beloved, dead wife from the fifteenth century . I thought this worked surprisingly well with the original story as well as giving a more likely explanation for Dracula's departure from Transylvania.Throughout the story, there are quite a few throwbacks to Stoker's original novel, as well as historical references to Vlad Tepes (the historical "Dracula"), that I have never seen used in any other Dracula movies. All of which helps to add the touch of uniqueness that most Dracula films lack.What I particularly loved was the interpretation of the specific characters, all of which were probably some of the best portrayals I've ever seen.Dr. Van Helsing is much more believable as a normal, down to earth, English doctor who happens to see the preternatural truth behind the seemingly unexplained, sudden illness of Lucy Westenra (Dracula's first victim).In this version, Mina is written as being a more intelligent and stiffer spined woman than I think most other versions give her the courtesy of. The girl portrayed is definitely no "damsel in distress", though she is something of a secondary character rather than a main protagonist.Dracula is portrayed as an embittered, violent, often animalistic creature, and is, in my opinion very close to Stokers original novel, personality wise.The Dracula shown here is unusual in that his past existence as a human being, is tied in (however small) with the main plot. Adding a touch of realistic humanity to him I've never seen managed in any other version, as well as showing a tinge of the tragedy of immortality in Dracula's loneliness and grief over his dead wife, whom he can never re- join in eternal rest. These parts are not over played though and are merely undertones in the story.This Dracula is menacing in his blunt and straightforward way of confronting those who displease him. His savagery casts an ever present sense of menace throughout the film, giving it wonderful atmosphere and a true cinematic delight.The only thing that I thought was poorly done were sets for the scenes within Castle Dracula. The architecture that was created was WAY too modern to portray an artifice supposedly constructed in the fifteenth century. This is merely a technicality though and should in no way discourage you from buying the film. It is a true gem in its fresh take on the story of Dracula and a wonderful movie to have on hand for a rainy evening.

It's interesting to trace the modern concept of Dracula on film by seeing the previous movies that have helped create it.And the Dan Curtis version is definitely a core link in the chain that culminates in the Coppola adaptation.The Dan Curtis version is notable I think for a couple reasons, firstly because by more faithfully adapting the novel it comes across as oddly original. And secondly, it introduces the love across time and romantic elements for the first time to Dracula's film legacy.You see more pages from the Bram Stoker novel shown in this version than any other Dracula movie I think, still adapted but more faithful to the source than any other can claim.So if you like tracing Dracula's film roots be sure to add this to your watch list, along with the Frank Langella version which offers a unique and original adaptation that most interesting.

L liked this, its old style horror, no gory parts ,its dracula with a difference, it shows him with feelings, he comes to england to find his lost love (a girl looks like his old love, he believes shes reincarnated ), good film

Could not use as it was from America won't play on my dvd any suggestions would be helpful if I need to get something to connect to my dvd

Jack palance DRACULA who would have dreamed it absolutely great loved it, very good film from the start to the end

I got this dvd for a friend so gave it a ok rating. Highly recommended to a friend. Good packaging and i feel good delievery time. I feel this is a fair price for what I paid for, for this dvd.

spot on thankyou A*****