Peur(s) du noir (2007)

NIGHT 10

       "You have to see your dream through to the end, if you want to be cured."

Peur(s) du noir (2007) [Fear(s) of the Dark] is a French, animated, horror anthology film.

This film contains four animated stories all written and directed by noted comic book and graphic designers and presented in high contrast black and white.

One thing I like about this film is the stories are all very solid stories, each playing with the concept and representing different takes on fear. Even if you don't like one short the others are varied enough that you're bound to find something you like in this film.

I'm not sure I understand the layout and framework of this film, to be truthful. The true framing story is just an old woman talking about her fears, which kind of ties into the short that follows? But then there's a second framing story that is simple, it's just a man unleashing each of his dogs on different victims (not seeming to care much). But the weird thing is that both of these frame stories not only continue throughout the film, they interrupt the other three stories in the film for little or no reason? Honestly there might be a reason to it, but the way it seemed to me was the "walking the dog" story didn't have enough actual content on it's own so they decided to spread it out through out the rest of the film?

I also think too much of this film instead of trying to be scary just ends up trying to be as weird as possible. Not that this is a bad thing, but having worked with animators quite a bit I know this is actually just because animators are the weirdest people you will ever meet and more often than not, their shorts seem to reflect that. I would have preferred to see at least one short try to be as terrifying as possible.

And like most anthology films, despite this film's unique take on the concept, it still ends up being really uneven. Some stories actually have a really good story, while others are just a small concept and others are so bat-shit weird that they'll leave you scratching your head.

I think the most interesting thing about this film is the concept. I loved the idea of this film when I heard about it, and I think they pulled off the concept very well. I really love how the film uses a variety of different animation mediums with each film. It's a unique take on the anthology horror film, it just seems to fall victim to the problems with animated shorts and anthology films at the same time.

The best thing about this film over all is the design work in it. Even if you watch this film on mute you'll be blown away by how good the designs are. This film contains some of the best design work I've seen in a film (animated or otherwise) in years! It's really a thing to marvel at. These guys are graphic artists and they certainly can prove it.

I also really liked the 3rd story (or is it 4th?) directed byh Lorenzo Mattotti, about the mysterious beast mauling people in the French countryside. This short was my favorite by far. It's wonderfully animated, it has a very interesting story and it is very cinematic too.

Fear(s) of the Dark (2007), is a very interesting film, it's a mixed bag but you're bound to find something you like in it. And the design work through out makes the whole experience worth it.

4/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




This review is part of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review a Canadian anthology horror film from the same year, Trick 'r Treat (2007).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

Tales from the Darkside: The Movie (1990)

NIGHT 8

       "Had to stop reading twice cause it got me so scared."

Tales from the Darkside: The Movie (1990), is an anthology horror film based on the popular Tales from the Darkside television series. Like the series, this film's stories are partially based off the works of famous authors, and even stars Deborah Harry, Christian Slater and William Hickey who all previously had appeared in episodes of the series.

This film is strongly connected to the Creepshow series of films. When the first Creepshow (1982) was a moderate success this led to the possibility of turning Creepshow into a series. The producers of the original film, Laurel Entertainment, decided to move ahead without Warner Brothers who owned aspects of Creepshow, and thus was born the popular series Tales from the Darkside. When the series was ended their was still demand so they began working on a film version and even included a story written by George A. Romero (and based off a Stephen King short story) that was written for Creepshow 2 (1987), but was cut for budgetary reasons. There happens to be an unofficial sequel to Creepshow 2 but Tom Savini has been quoted as saying that Tales from the Darkside: The Movie is "the real Creepshow 3."

The acting in this movie is really great, every story has a handful of some of the greatest actors working in the late 80s and this alone makes the film a lot stronger than the others I'm reviewing this season. When you're watching "Lot 249," you'll be blow away by all of the great actors in it.

I really like the stories chosen for this film. Much like Creepshow 2, the selection of three stories over five really helps give time for the film to develop the characters and give the viewer a chance to breathe in the world. My favorite story of the bunch is easily "Lot 249" adapted from a short story by Arthur Conan Doyle. This is easily one of the best mummy depictions I've ever seen on screen. This film also has a unique thing I'd never seen before and that is the story "Cat From Hell" is told as a framed story but it's also within the greater framed story of the film. Which if you think about it too long it may hurt your head, but regardless it's quite successful. Just pointing out my observation of how unique that is.

Sadly I didn't enjoy the third story, "Lover's Vow," as much as I did the others, which is really unfortunate because it's the final story of the film. It's really not a bad story at all, but it's a lot slower and really doesn't have a lot of "horror" in it. It takes forever to build to it's twist, then has the kind of twist that's not super satisfying in the end which just kind of leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

I also have one gripe about the framing story. I wish the framing story connected better with the actual stories, if you think about these stories as if the young boy was telling them you will quickly realize that there's no way a ten-year-old boy would comprehend the complex themes and social connections of the characters within the stories, maybe this is just me being too picky but this is the kind of stuff that really takes me out of the movie.

Despite the stories not fitting the framing story as I mentioned, I must say that this film has one of the best framing stories that I have come across yet in an anthology horror film. A suburban witch has a young paper boy locked up and he is telling her stories to try to distract her. I love how simple this idea is, it's essentially an update of the Hansel & Gretel story, nothing fancy at all and yet it's dark as hell. It adds another layer to this movie that really makes this film stand out from the rest!

This film reminds me of Creepshow 2, the way it has a lot less makeup and special effects than many films I've reviewed this season, but when Darkside does use them they are absolutely amazing!! My absolute favorite effect is the second to last kill in the second story "Cat from Hell." It's so gruesome and unnecessary but it adds a level of morbid to the story that really makes the story fit the others in the film. This film could be a prime example of why practical effects trump CG almost every time.

And lastly I love the direction in this film. I don't know how it's possible that this film has better direction than the Creepshow films, but it totally does. This was director John Harrison's first film he directed and he apparently really knew what he was doing. The film's direction is really creepy, and really adds the "scare" to each story. I love the way he uses light and color, particularly in the story "Cat from Hell" but also throughout.

Tales from the Darkside: The Movie (1987), in many ways it surpasses the other Creepshow films, and is a great anthology horror film in its own right.

4/5 Stars.



 Happy watching!




This review is part of my 2014 run of 13 Nights of Macabre Movies! Tune in tomorrow as I review a much different take on the horror anthology with Snoop Dogg's Hood of Horror (2006).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these fine links:

Mothra vs. Godzilla (1964)

       "He wants to turn that egg into the golden egg."

Mothra vs. Godzilla (1964) (モスラ対ゴジラ), also known as Godzilla vs. the Thing, is a Japanese kaiju film directed by Ishiro Honda. This film is a sequel to both Mothra (1961) and Godzilla vs. King Kong (1962) and is the first time Toho tried pitting one of its previously stand-alone kaiju against Godzilla, a trend that would continue quite a bit after this and often lead to some of the most popular fan-favorites of the kaiju films.

When a typhoon washes a giant egg ashore, the capitalist heads of Happy Corporation decide to turn it into a giant tourist attraction. A group of reporters investigating discover Mothra's twin fairies who beg them to help return the egg to it's home on Infant Island. But when the capitalists refuse, and Godzilla was also re-awakened by the typhoon Japan finds itself right in the middle of a giant monster battle.

[Note: this review is referencing the original Japanese version of the film.]

The moral tale in this film works really well, it may be a little heavy handed in the end but it's the key that ties the human protagonists story together with that of Mothra's story.

This film's story is basically a remake of the original Mothra (and to a lesser extent King Kong vs. Godzilla too) but what I liked about it is that each of these films isn't a direct remake and it really feels like Ishiro Honda (who directed all three) is experimenting with each one and trying something new, which in this case works out because he takes the plot of Mothra and the better protagonist story from King Kong vs. Godzilla and incorporates Godzilla into the story also and it is in my opinion the best of the trio. I also really liked the twist toward the end involving the egg. It's a clever way to catch even your big kaiju-fans on their toes and keep everyone interested in the film!

Despite being a little jarring at first, I actually thought the super-cartoonish portrayal of the capitalists actually works really well, and quickly helps you to root against these guys. I just don't understand why they get killed off so early? Maybe Honda just got tired with this particular storyline as it's the third time he's done it?


I also felt the endangered school children on the island at the end was a little over dramatic for my tastes but it really did help up the ante and provide more drama and suspense for the final battle of the film.

The special effects and use of models here are better than they've been in the last few films actually. It feels like Honda really took the time to shoot each of what works best on it's separate medium (models, costumes, live-action) and incorporate them as best as possible.

This is the first in the series they didn't even try to explain a lot of things (for example the origin of the first Mothra and Godzilla) this isn't necessarily a bad thing as the film works more or less on its own, and I feel like it was bound to happen with this being the fourth Godzilla film and probably the eight or so kaiju film Toho had made up until this point. I already thought the film rushes a bit in the beginning to set up everything but you're going to feel extra rushed if you haven't already had an intro to Godzilla or Mothra before this film.

I feel like this film is a prime example of a movie that could use a better structure. It seems like the film speeds up just to slow down in parts and we lose track of our human protagonists during giant monster battles that seem unfocused and there's large parts of the film that just go needlessly on for a bit too long.

Also maybe this was the result of a technical issue with scale or the models or something but the first battle with Mothra is WAY too close for some reason? There's a tone of super-close up shots during this battle that quickly cut to each other and make the otherwise very cool monster fight pretty hard to watch.

I really love the human protagonists in this film! They're probably the first ones since the original Gojira (1954) that actually made the human element of the film really worthwhile. They're a bit pure and idealized but their goodness plays into helping the kaiju in the story really well so it works for the film.

Also super note-worth is this is the first Godzilla film in a while where they actually took the time to show the destructive nature of Godzilla and how he affected people on the ground level on screen. Also this film cleverly incorporates his radioactivity into the story and ties nuclear testing on Infant Island into the theme and plot without over doing it very masterfully.

Mothra vs. Godzilla (1964) is a very enjoyable kaiju film, one of the good ones where the humans' story works really well with giant battling monsters' story.

4/5 Stars.

 Happy watching!



I'm tackling most of the early Toho Studios' Godzilla and Kaiju films in honor of the newest Godzilla (2014)

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film (and 5 other classic kaiju films) through these links:

Mothra (1961)

       "Mothra will soon be here!"

Mothra (1961) (モスラ) is an early Japanese kaiju film by Toho and directed by Ishiro Honda who directed the original Gojira (1954).  Mothra is based on the serialized novel The Luminous Fairies and Mothra by Takehiko Fukunada, Shinichiro Nakamura, and Yoshie Hotta.

While investigating the presumably uninhabited Infant Island a group of sailors find the island is not only inhabited by humans but other strange beings including small human-like fairies. However when capitalist Clark Nelson decides to kidnap the fairies and bring then back to Japan to make a profit off their existence, he may be putting all of Japan in harms way without even realizing it.

[Note: this review is referencing the original Japanese version of the film.]

I really liked the story of this film. Its almost a remake of the King Kong (1933) plot, but then it works in the environmentalist message a lot better than that film ever did. And the entire film has such and interesting mood to it, its very much unlike anything else.

This is actually a really good film to watch if you are learning Japanese, because the characters speak relatively slowly the entire film and they don't actually use a lot of complicated words most of the time. So that's interesting.

I felt like the kaiju in Mothra were a bit hit and miss. I really liked Mothra's larva form a lot and thought it looked unique and moved in a very interesting way. But I didn't really care for Mothra's moth form truthfully. I just felt like they didn't really do enough with it, and even felt like she was far less menacing as a moth than in her larva form. Also coming after Rodan (1956), it's interesting that two of the very first kaiju films they made were of flying creatures. They're very different films, and very different creatures but I still wonder about how intentional or what the reasoning behind that decision was.

I really didn't like our lead character, played by Japanese comedian Frankie Sakai. Sure he was a bit funny, and there's something that's hard to hate about his character's boyish innocence during the whole film. But his character is just really jarring and seems out of place against the mood and tone (and even themes) of the rest of the film. And cutting between the drama of a giant monster attacking Tokyo and the underlying environmentalist message and this Lou Costello-esque comedian really didn't work at all for me.

The ending took too long to conclude. I think it's suposed to be this beautiful thing but it just takes way too long when everyone knows what has to happen after the main antagonist is no longer in the picture. Finish and get out people.

Also for some reason this film has a lot of English speaking minor roles, which are filled with tons of unintentional humor. Which although this is fun, it's jarring and kills the dramatic mood that the scenes are supposed to have most of the time.

The one thing I really loved about this film was the music. Yuji Koseki's score is really awesome. It's got its suspenseful moments, fun parts and the "Mothra song" is so haunting it really brings a lot to the movie and the story on it's own. It really works for this film.

Mothra (1961) is an very different and interesting take on the kaiju film genre. Not exactly to my tastes truthfully, but I appreciated it and did think it was quite an interesting watch.

4/5 Stars.

 Happy watching!




I'm tackling all or most of the early Toho Studios' Godzilla and Kaiju films in honor of the newest Godzilla (2014), check back next time as we finally return to our main kaiju, Godzilla himself in King Kong vs. Godzilla (1962).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film (and two others) through these links:

Godzilla, King of the Monsters! (1956)

     "So, they believe that this Godzilla is responsible for all the ship disasters?"

Godzilla, King of the Monsters! (1956) is the American edit of the original Japanese film Gojira (1954). The American edit was directed by Terry Morse and features extended scenes of actor Raymond Burr (who you mig recognize as Perry Mason) spliced in as an American reporter who happens to be in Japan during the initial Godzilla attacks.

[Note: this review is referencing the American, dubbed edit of the film.]

Surprisingly, the English writing in this film is actually pretty good. It's a bit over dramatic but that was the style of the 50s monster movies, so it's very much in line with that.

The Raymond Burr scenes are inserted into the film rather flawlessly. This is ever more apparent when watched nearly back to back with the original (like I just did). But it's cool to see how simply and effectively you can make it look like two people are in the same room together through the magic of editing. I also think it would have been fun to be on set for the filming of Raymond Burr's parts because so much of it would have been filming him watching things off screen silently.

Let me start by saying that most of my issues with this film come only from comparing it to the masterpiece that is the original Japanese Gojira. This film does work on its own quite well but tonally it's quite different than the Japanese version.

Sadly some of the elegance of the Japanese version is lost in this version. This film has a lot faster cuts and far less subtle storytelling (how American!) Unfortunately the faster cuts, and this version's lack of patience to get to the destruction and kaiju lead to a lot of the original's suspense to be lost. A lot of Burr's dialogue seems to over explain the situations unfolding, for example the love triangle between the Japanese heroes is rather bluntly brought up and referred to here, rather than implied as in the Japanese version. And when Emiko brings up Dr. Serizawa's oxygen destroyer in this version it's rather poorly inserted. I couldn't see any reason she would have told Burr about it (and neither could the writers either apparently!)

Additionally there are scenes where the attentive viewer may realize something fishy is going on with the cinematography. There are scenes were Raymond Burr is talking to a character but the camera never shows the face of these characters in the same shot, this is because it's just another actor wearing similar clothing to the Japanese actors and the film (somewhat) cleverly shows only the back of their heads. Or some very obviously looped footage of Dr. Serizawa on the phone during a phone call with Burr's character. These are rather obviously the result of the fact they tried to put Raymond Burr's character in too closely with the main Japanese protagonists of the original film. It would have been fine if Burr was just observing and reporting the events but they had to make him an "old friend" of nearly all the Japanese main characters, which is just problematic.

The really magnificent thing about this film is how much of the original they actually kept. I've seen a lot of dubs and edits in my life and it's unique to find one like this which very much changes the tone and reinterprets the story for another culture, but also keeps much of the original's plot and charm too. If nothing else I recommend watching the two close together some time just as a case study. I liked the way they basically added Raymond Burrs part in by basically taking one of the most minor strands in the original (the Japanese reporters who are on the scene during the first land attack of Godzilla) and expanding upon it.

Godzilla, King of the Monsters! (1956) is very much the American version of the original Gojira (1954) but it's interesting to see how much of the original they kept.

4/5 Stars.

 Happy watching!



I'm tackling all or most of the early Toho Studios' Godzilla and Kaiju films in anticipation of the newest Godzilla (2014), check back next time to see my review of it!

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film (and 5 other classic kaiju films) through these links:

King Kong (1933)

     "Beauty and the beast."

King Kong (1933) is a highly influential RKO Adventure/Monster movie which combined live action, stop-motion and models.

Filmmaker Carl Denham travels to a remote, uncharted island in search of his next film subject, a legendary creature known only as "Kong." On this Island, Denham finds more than he could have ever imagined and makes a risky choice to take Kong back to New York in hopes of earning a fortune.

[Note: this review is referencing the original completely uncut version, running approximately 100 minutes.]

This film's really brutal action sequences really do a lot to enhance the danger and drama of the otherwise mindless action scenes, (like the excessive amount dinosaur attack sequences!) This film really doesn't hold back: there's vicious dinosaurs attacking a man in a tree, men crushed to death after battling Kong and even Kong beating a T-rex by breaking it's jaw, (then continuing to play with it after its dead!) These sequences make you really feel like the main characters may not make it out of this which is truthfully something lost on the comparatively "mild" action films of today.

I didn't care too much for the designs of most of the creatures in this film. I just felt like they were all a little dated and most looked fake by today's standards. And apparently a lot of the dinosaurs were recycled from earlier stop-motion films for years before, which might show. However, the wonderful animation and acting of said creatures by the early stop-motion guru Willis H. O'Brien is so good that it often helps to "sell" what is happening far better than the actual creature designs.

Also the score brings a lot of excitement and helps put you on edge during various sequences here, I've heard a lot of Max Steiner's classic scores and when you put this one up against them, it really shows the range the guy had. This score may not be as memorable or "classic" as Casablanca's (1942) or Gone With The Wind's (1939) scores but it really shows the skill of the guy, and it fits this movie quite well too.

I enjoyed the film's morals relating this fairy tale to that of Beauty and the Beast, however the film tries to hammer this home a couple too many times for modern audiences. With a little more subtlety it would have been really magnificent.

The writing in the film is mostly decent/passable with the exception of being overall sexist. Granted this is a product of its time but characters don't even bat an eye at talks of trading women, there's chauvinist characters who outright and openly hate women which is well... just kind of awkward.

The bad writing is only further enhanced by some really bad acting our romantic leads are really pretty awful. Early starlet Fay Wray is an absolutely terrible actress (with a great scream though, so maybe that's why she was cast?) Her rushed romance with (not much better at acting) chauvinist sailor Driscoll, played by Bruce Cabot, is barely watchable on mute. But with such great lines like, "Say, I guess... I love you" I wonder how much was really their fault in the end. And the romance really isn't the focus for most of this film (they prefer to focus on the titular character most of the time) so once you get past a certain point, you forget the human characters are there for most of the film.

There's also some bad science here and there like man-eating herbivore dinosaurs. And some leaps of faith like the fact they were able to keep Kong under-wrap, and under some form of continual sedation for 6 months until the end of the film. and when Kong finds Anne at the end of the film among a whole building/skyscraper of people in only the second window he looks into, what a lucky ape! These all kind of seem like just carelessly lazy writing/direction. But as my friend pointed out it's a movie about an island where giant apes (who eat humans) and dinosaurs still live so who really cares anyways.

And lastly for my taste (and I'd assume most modern audiences) the mindless dinosaur/monster fights go on a bit too long, it's actually surprising to learn that a bunch more actually got cut before the initial release even! I would have just appreciated a little more substance during these sequences.

The film has a great "modern" action pace that seems unique for such an early film, even more so considering Kong isn't even seen until about 45 mins into the film!

Most of the special effects and stop motion action borders between amazing and good! There are some exceptions here and there, but when you consider that nearly all of these shots is comprised of stuff I can do in my living room (with modern technology) the shots are set up in a way that they are well thought out and have great staging to show scale and depth in a shot. It's actually so effective that sometimes its hard for me to even tell whats plastic, whats a painting and what is real life in some shots! This is especially true in the city sequences where there's a lot of masterful cuts between stock shots of real cities, studio shots and models, all done with great calculation and superb planning.

King Kong (1933) is one of those films you watch and its easy to forget how long ago it was made, highly influential still to this day and yet very modern feeling. It's actually surprising people keep attempting to remake it.

4/5 Stars.

Happy watching!


This is the precursor to my next few posts which will be tackling the early Toho Studios' Godzilla and Kaiju films in anticipation of the newest Godzilla (2014) movie. Check back next time for the original Japanese kaiju film, Gojira (1954).

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:

Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust (2000)

NIGHT 23

     "Because I'm a dhampir. I don't get to have a life, not like you."

Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust (2000) [バンパイアハンターD] is a Japanese horror OVA anime loosely based on the third novella of the Vampire Hunter D series, D - Demon Deathchase written by Hideyuki Kikuchi and illustrated by Yoshitaka Amano. This is the second film based on the novellas, following Vampire Hunter D (1985). This film was directed by Yoshiaki Kawaijiri and produced by Madhouse inc.

When a young woman named Charlotte is abducted by a vampire noble, her father hires the vampire hunter D to bring her back or kill her. Charlotte's brother also hires a group of hunters known as the Marcus brothers. These two hunter teams race to win the bounty but sometimes things aren't as simple as they seem.

I'm not a big fan of the Marcus brothers in this film. They're fine, they're far better than half the characters in the previous film. But they get a lot of screen time and I'm not sure why I should care about them at all, really. The film uses Leila quite a bit to try and make you feel for these characters and she's done better than the others, but just having her as an emotional character doesn't make you care at all when her friends die.

The other good thing about this film is it really works on its own! You can watch this film by itself, before the previous film or after and with or without the books and you'd be fine. Although if you have seen the previous film, it probably enhances this one because of the similar plot and themes and the reversals in this one will really surprise you.

I really like the vampire noble of this film, Meier Link. He's vicious, cool and yet still sympathetic. I love the scene early on when he goes out into the sunlight to try and protect Charlotte. This scene just says so much about this character and makes you realize that he may not be as evil as you were originally led to believe.

Also gotta mention how much I love the score of this film. It's super chilling and very much has a "classical" vampire feel to it and in this world of reinvented vampires and post-apocalyptic ghouls it's awesome to have some epic organ music over the film.

I don't understand really what was the deal with Carmila and her plot at the end, it's not that interesting or prevalent to the the rest of the cool things in this film, and I think this is supposed to be a more "dynamic" twist because the original plot kind of resolves itself in the end on its own. It also gives them a chance to talk about D's lineage but, really don't think it was necessary and just feels a bit shoe-horned in.

I love the animation in this film. Japan seems to be the only country to find a good way to integrate a combination of CG and traditional animation and have it really work well. This film is absolutely beautiful and the less traditional "anime style" really helps a lot.

Bloodlust creates a beautiful enhancement of the world I loved so much in the previous film. This film seems like they took more from Yoshitaka Amano's original designs and illustrations and the darks seem darker, the evil seems more evil. Of course the budget was of course way higher in this film, so that helps. But I love the opening scene of this film with the vampire carriage rolling into town with lights flickering out and crosses bending, and time seeming like it stops. It's directly out of the books, and a really successful effect that just draws you in to this world from the very beginning.

I also love the story of this one, it's a very simple premise and yet full of interesting twists and turns along the way. It also makes for a great follow-up to the previous film because the story is unexpectedly different situation than the likewise vampire-courted human in that story. And I love the simple little things that this film does with time, because D doesn't age. It's very simply done and not too much of a focus.

Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust (2000) is one of the higher budget anime films, enhanced by the simple yet interesting story. It'd be hard not to recommend this one.

4/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




Tune in tomorrow on the 31 Nights of Macabre Movies as we're going to change gears a bit and switch to yet another horror sub-genre!

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links:

Horror of Dracula (1958)

NIGHT 21

     "Sleep well, Mr. Harker."

Dracula (1958) (also known as Horror of Dracula) the second in a long line of Hammer horror films following The Curse of Frankenstein (1957), and like that film this film stars Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee and is directed by Terence Fisher.

Jonathan Harker has traveled to Count Dracula's castle posing as a librarian, however in this version of the classic tale he already knows exactly what he's in for.

This is a solid retelling of the Dracula story, I love the way the film starts very much like the beginning of the previous films (and of course the novel) and then you realize that Jonathan Harker actually knows what's up already. From then on the movie keeps you guessing by doing things that are close to the original story but often twisted or changed a bit. And I'm happy to say most of those twists and changes are for the better and work very well in this film. I like the way our heros assume that Dracula is after Lucy because Jonathan killed his vampire bride. It's little changes like this that make me think somebody really went over the source material and was like, "how can we make this work better for an hour and a half film."

Hammer films tend to have the whole range as far as sets go and these early ones have some of the better ones. There's parts where the walls looked a bit fake and the forced perspective were a bit off but overall the sets in this film were really good, especially the sets of Dracula's castle.

My biggest complaint with this film is the characters. My friends and I had a brief debate during the beginning of this film on whether or not Jonanthan Harker is actually a Vampire Hunter as his profession. It would seem weird to me that he he would keep something like this from his family and yet it's very clear that Dr. Van Hellsing is a Vampire Hunter in this version (in theory, at the very least) and he is close friends with Jonathan. Yet Jonathan is the one who cares enough about the extinction of the evil Count, so much that he decides to martyr himself in attempt. (Note: he's not very good at it.) I could go either way but the problem is the film doesn't really seem to care either. As far as the characters are concerned the film has only the most basic understanding of who they are and what they want. And beyond what the actors bring to the roles the characters seem like shells of the characters from the novel.

There's also some really awkward moments in this film that are the result of bad staging. Hellsing realizes that Dracula is no longer in his coffin so he runs into the next room, where Dracula is no where to be found... then Dracula busts in from the door at the top of the stairs where he enters to fight Hellsing. Why did Dracula pop out like that? Just to make an epic entrance? Did he forget his cape in the other room? I understand what the director was trying to do, but the staging makes it very humorous.

Despite their not being much in the way of characters the acting in this film is really quite decent. It's super obvious from these earlier Hammer films why they led to a ton of sequels and spin-offs. Peter Cushing really does a lot with his limited material, you really feel for him and want him to succeed in his efforts and likewise I personally am a huge fan of Christopher Lee's portrayal of Dracula. He may not have much to go on and kind of is a shadow of a character in this one but he's really awesome, and pretty frightening for how little he actually does in the film. I also really liked John Van Eyssen's Jonathan Harker, it's unfortunate that he retired from acting soon after this because he really makes the small role quite memorable.

I love the practical effects in this film, some are testing the limits of early exploitation but most of them are quite fitting and almost all of them still hold up really well. I think these alone make the film still feels very modern. It's funny we lump these early ones in with the 60s' and the 70s' films and that should say something about how ahead of their time they really were. Compare it to the bad sci-fi films that Universal was making stateside during the same time in the late 50s' and these films feel a whole lot more modern than them. And despite the higher concentration of effects this film has that really awesome low-budget feel to it. It's the early days of the Hammer studio and there's more of a passionate, "consolidated" feel in this film, like everyone who worked on it wanted to be doing this.

Dracula (1958) is an early gem in a long line of Hammer Horror films. It's easy to see why the studio really took off after this one.

4/5 Stars.

Happy watching!




Tomorrow on the 31 Nights of Macabre Movies we'll do the animated Japanese classic that was originally inspired by these Hammer films, Vampire Hunter D (1985).

Be sure to check out Daimeon's review of this film too!

Like this blog? You can support it by buying this film through these links: