Cultarama

     So, we come to that age-old decision, is it camp, classic, and basically does it fit into the archetype cult film status that we've all come to know and love.  Usually, big-budget films that were very popular and did well in the theater don't necessarily fit under a cult classic label, but some stories actually do it quite well. Dracula is a little different in that it's one of the few multilayered posts I've done, something that takes up a whole universe and has a mythos to it.  Many horror movies with all their remakes, sequels, prequels, miniseries, and alternate storylines also have that air of existing within its own universe, much like the earlier movies by John Waters starring Divine had their own connected universe as well.  Similar.   

     Anyway, I had just finished the Bram Stoker original novel and fondly remembered the fancy remake starring Winona Ryler and Gary Oldman, but how long had it been since I saw the original 1931 Tod Browning film version of Dracula with the vampire legend himself Bela Lugosi?  So I gave it a rewatch and I guess you could say it was classy, but only by the standards of the time, otherwise it was quite campy.  Movies in general were still relatively new and campy crap was always gonna sneak in there somewhere.  From the cheap bats on strings to armadillos being used at Castle Dracula instead of rats (in Transylvania, seriously?).   Having seen Bela in his most revered and prized lifetime role (in death too, he was buried in his Dracula costume and cape), it's not a far cry to see him drifting into cheap Ed Wood films.  Even though we loved them for their absurdity, it was sad to know that it was mostly because of Bela's heroin addiction which had caused him to have to work well past retirement age while being in terrible health as the only real reason that he starred in them.  Bela's Dracula/overlord role in Ed's Glen or Glenda, a movie that couldn't decide whether to be a horror movie or a serious attempt at explaining transexualism, is totally a treasure to behold.  And for all his efforts to try and provide his idol and friend a job, Ed Wood tried his very best, too bad it always came out has his very worst.  Even though Bela's acting isn't all that great in Dracula, it was just such a sexy role that I think most people really didn't care and it propelled him into super stardon, at least for a short while.  When stars fall on hard times, some turn to drugs and alcohol, some turn to doing porn or Ed Wood films.  Bela kinda did both...but with a completely alluring Hungarian accent.

     Bela carried his own without a doubt, but when it came to acting Renfield stole the show.  I mean that laugh was creepiness personified.  The rest of the cast faded into the background.  For as much a part as she plays in the book, I always expect the character of Lucy Westenra to be as over-the-top girlie girl as possible and for Mina Harker to be the quintessential woman of virtue, but the 1931 film missed these two character opportunities by a mile.  The rest...meh.  I much more enjoyed the culty camp factor, which was plentiful.

     In the 1992 remake, both the original movie and the book were merged pretty seamlessly into a whole new film with the exception of one huge change.  The secret romance between Mina Harker and Count Dracula.  It may not have been anywhere in the book or original movie, but it made for a much more interesting love story, albeit an atypical one, but still had tremendous merit and made for some delicious dialogue and quotes that will live on in infamy.  "I've crossed oceans of time to find you". You so crazy you coulda jus called.  Personally, I really liked the remake and it's new plot twist.  Something about turning Mina from a goody two shoes into a vampire slut cheating on her husband was much more appealing, especially since Jonathan Harker was a bit of a real estate bore anyway.  The cinematography and costumes were well worth the overall effort, which I believe took away several awards for each.  

     Overall, I think the book was a bit simplistic, but it had a unique tone to it throughout.  It's separated into three basic parts.  Jonathan Harker's initial experience with Count Dracula in Transylvania, the death and resurrection of Lucy Westenra, and the final showdown between Jonathan Harker, Professor Van Helsing (plus a few extra henchmen) and Count Dracula.  The ending is rather anticlimactic and the characters are a little one sided, but the imagery and symbolism are what make it a classic among classics.  The baptism of blood sequence in the book where Mina drinks the spurting blood of Count Dracula, then bitches about how unclean she feels afterwards even though she seemed to enjoy it, just screams of regretted fellatio.  And then of course in the days of HIV, the whole taboo of unclean blood received through a form of sexual pleasure takes on a brand new symbolism.  It's metaphoric horror themes like these that make a classic endurable throughout the ages, and Dracula is one of the best.  Campy, classy, and very cult, on many levels, both in writing and in film.