Entry four in my would-be chapter for my book Vampires' Most Wanted:
4. The Movie
.
The story of Dracula’s arrival on the silver screen is as
involved as the novel itself due in large part to an uncertainty of adapting it
to the screen; and the vast amount of adaptations floating around. In this
tale, however, timing was everything for there was an even greater nemesis
approaching that would ultimately impact the entire world.
There were at this
point two incarnations of Bram Stoker’s Dracula (well, three if you count the
unfortunate Morrell piece). The Hamilton Deane play was a slightly different
version from the book. The Liveright production was a different version of the
Deane play. Florence Stoker had managed to iron out rights over both
productions, and a few in between (including that other movie to be discussed later), but she realized that should a
film version be produced it would very likely rely heavily on the plays, not on
her husband’s novel, leaving her rights further back in the dust. She had spent
the past several years fighting for her rightful piece of the Dracula pie and
was not about to let Hollywood take a taste without paying for it.
Universal
studios was an early contender for the film rights, but was dragging its feet
perhaps due partly to the amount of people involved. Along with Stoker there
was Deane, Balderston and Liveright and it seemed that one was always
threatening to sue the others, or Universal itself if an agreement was signed
without their name on it. There was also the hesitation on the part of Carl
Leammle, Sr. the man who started the movie studio. Horror just wasn’t his thing
even though it had proven lucrative for him in the past. He had to be convinced by his son, Carl Leammle, Jr. to take on the project. At last, however, the
principle players, rather than see the chance for a film slip away, agreed to a
deal and the movie was green-lighted.
Conrad Veidt |
The first choice to play Dracula was Conrad
Veidt, a German actor whose heavy accent led him to return to Europe rather
than face making a go of it in talkies. It was a concern of many a silent film
star when sound came to the movies. The next choice was the “man of a thousand
faces” himself, Lon Chaney who would ultimately play a vampire in the lost
“London After Midnight,” but would lose his battle with throat cancer before
getting the chance to play Dracula (in the 1943 movie “Son of Dracula,” his
son, Lon Chaney, Jr., star of “The Wolfman,” would play the role his father had
to pass up).
Lon Chaney as the vampire from "Vampire at Midnight" |
Finally, with deal in hand, Universal hired
Louis Bromfield to write the screenplay. A Pulitzer-Prize winning novelist, he
was also a Broadway dramatist and was fascinated by the new style of the
talking picture. What he was given to work with were two vastly different
versions of the same story, each with strengths in their own right. Three stage
plays (including the Morrell play) and the book. He favored the novel’s
construct which would be easier filmed than it would have been staged. He also
favored the idea of massive sets for Dracula’s castle and Carfax Abbey and even
fancied a storyline that would meld the old, decrepit Count of the novel with
the youthful Count of the New York production. Dracula would revert back to the
old man during fits of hunger.
There was only one problem with putting
Bromfield’s vision to print: The Great Depression, which was affecting
everything nationwide including the magic of Tinseltown. It would dog every
aspect of production for “Dracula” and it’s a wonder what might have been had
the movie been awarded a budget larger than $355,000.
Tod Browning |
Slated to direct the
feature was Tod Browning, Lon Chaney’s director at Metro Goldwyn Mayer and a
man who shared Chaney’s curious fascination with the grotesque (one of his most
famous pictures would be the 1932 movie “Freaks” starring real side-show
performers solving a murder). In his book Hollywood Gothic David J. Skal terms
Browning “…a maddeningly difficult director to asses.” He had the talent, but
lacked the execution of it. Browning’s drinking was legendary among his
contemporaries in the industry and undoubtedly affected his work. For a man who
seemed to favor the controversial, his direction of "Dracula" at times seems
remarkably afraid to take chances. The movie is filled with long, static scenes
that would have been better served by being interspersed with reaction shots or
different angles. One shot runs nearly three minutes without a break or
reaction shot that would have made it that much stronger. Dracula’s entrance is
suitably spooky but his exit at the end of the film is anything less than
climactic as we see Van Helsing leaning over Dracula’s coffin, the audience
merely hearing the vampire’s groan as the Professor stakes him. The action
cuts to Jonathan Harker helping Mina come out of the trance she was in from Dracula.
Was it Browning’s
inability to get a handle on the movie that led to poor directing decisions, or
rather Universal breathing down his neck to save money? It’s possible it was a
bit of both. It was this cost cutting that turned Bromfield’s vision into
something the much more closely resembled the plays. While the trip to
Transylvania remained, the chasing of Dracula back to Transylvania was cut. Perhaps
in a desire to make Renfield’s connection to the Count easier to understand, it
was his character that journeyed to Castle Dracula where the Count put him
under his spell. Dracula’s sea voyage to England which was supposed to show the
vampire one by one wiping out the crew was reduced to stock footage of a ship
sailing on the churning sea and Renfield tending the vampire’s coffin in the
hold. Eventually, Dracula does come on deck, but we’re left with Lugosi gazing
off camera at what must have been meant to be the crew he was about to attack. Still,
this rendition did give us one of the creepiest scenes ever shot as the hold of
the wrecked ship is opened the next day and Dwight Frye’s mad Renfield smiles
ominously up at the camera.
The mad Renfield guards his master's resting place |
Dracula insinuates himself in the lives of Dr.
Seward, his daughter Mina, her fiancé John Harker and Mina’s friend Lucy in a
rather bland fashion and for no apparent reason. As in the plays, he becomes a
welcomed visitor to Seward’s sanitarium until they figure out that Lucy’s death
and Mina’s wasting condition can be tied to him. And Lucy as the "woman in white" was wasted as only one poorly lit scene alludes to her attacks on the young
girls.
And yet, the influence this, the first talking supernatural thriller in film history had on cinema in general and the vampire genre in particular can not be discounted. Principal photography on the film was finished $14,000 under budget, which must have made the Leammles’ hearts jump for joy, as did, no doubt, eventual response to the film. The premiere was scheduled for Feb. 13, 1931 at the Roxy Theatre in New York to take advantage of Friday the 13th. When it was realized that this was the day before Valentine’s Day, they opened it Feb. 12. While not an instant smash, (it was pulled from the Roxy after eight days, grossing $112,000) the film picked up speed as it traveled across the country, eventually becoming the studio’s top money making picture of the year and vindicating Carl Leammle, Jr.’s faith in the financial potential of the horror genre and creating a few monsters all its own.
No comments:
Post a Comment