Happy birthday, to one of the great Universal horror films. Dracula premiered 80 years ago today, opening at New York's Roxy Theatre on Thursday, February 12, 1931.
It took Universal two years and $40,000 to obtain the rights for the picture from Bram Stoker's estate. There have been rumors that the star of the stage version, Bela Lugosi assisted Universal in their dealings with the Stoker estate, however I emailed Dracula expert and horror historian, David J. Skal about this and he said,
"HE (Lugosi) ONCE SAID HE DID BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE NEGOTIATION FILES TO BACK THIS UP."
The play version of Dracula earned over two million dollars. Despite being the star of the stage play, Bela Lugosi was far from the first choice in the part of Dracula, for producer, Carl Laemmle Jr. Several other actors were considered, but fortunately for Lugosi he was in Los Angeles, traveling with the stage production and could lobby for himself. He begged and haggled, and only earned the role when he agreed to work for a pitiful $500 a week for seven weeks of shooting. Thirty-five hundred bucks, OUCH.
Production of the film was chaotic. Director, Tod Browning was pouty from not getting a chance to work with his choice for the Dracula role and one of the biggest stars of the time, Lon Chaney. Chaney had died. Actor David Manners said that Browning did not talk to the actors and was frequently missing. Manners said the limited amount he was "directed" was by Cinematographer, Karl Freund.
Another interesting fact is that when the crew was done filming each day a separate crew came in at night and shot a Spanish version of Dracula simultaneously. The versions are a bit different from each other. The Spanish version is longer by about 30 minutes. Some scenes are cross cut to build tension instead of run one after the other. The actress' showed a little more cleavage and the vampire women in the beginning are actually the ones to bite Renfield. The lighting is also much moodier. I believe the "Legacy" DVD of the Spanish Dracula also has a better original print source. I feel like it's trendy to say that the Spanish version is better, but I really think it is. It was also shot for $66,000 versus the Tod Browning one which was shot for $355,000.
I'm not sure of the date of the Spanish Dracula's opening or where it opened.
I did not know much about the Roxy Theater in New York. I was surprised to learn that Dracula only ran for eight days there. I was shocked to learn that The Roxy Theatre held nearly six thousand movie-goers! Dracula sold nearly 50,000 tickets in the first two days. Can you imagine getting there a little late, "Sorry bud we only got seats in the 626th row."
Universal opened the picture on a Thursday, to avoid any Friday the 13th publicity. They were not sure how the public would react to a straight horror film. Previous horror films had either had some comedy or the story would end up being a nightmare or flashback. This was in your face horror, 1931 style!
My buddy, Vince, also wondered about the curious opening date for Dracula. Why didn't they open the film on Valentine's Day? After all, the tag for the film was, "The Story Of The Strangest Passion Ever Known!" He found this harsh, but funny, paragraph in John T. Soister's Of Gods and Monsters:
"Tod Browning, master of the macabre, showman extraordinaire, moved Dracula's debut up a day, to the more emotionally neutral February 12. The logic of a move to Valentine's Day is so compelling that most fans remain positive that's when the film opened. While narrating the TV special 'Lugosi: The Forgotten King,' even Forrest J. Ackerman maintained that the picture, billed as a Gothic romance, 'premiered Valentine's Day in 1931.' Once again, Browning had snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. How fitting that the next genre outing for the original Man with His Head up His Ass was MGM's Freaks."
After it's run at the Roxy, Dracula opened nationally in March.
While it's a classic and one of my favorites, it's hard to imagine the good folks in the 1930's actually being scared while watching this film. In my email to David J. Skal I asked about the rumors that people fainted from the horror and he replied:
"THIS WAS MOSTLY DONE FOR THE STAGE VERSION. STOOGES WERE HIRED TO SCREAM AND FAINT. "NURSES" WERE SOMETIMES STATIONED IN THE LOBBY."
"Treatment differs from both the stage version [by Deane and John Balderston] and the original novel [by Bram Stoker]. On the stage it was a thriller carried to such an extreme that it had a comedy punch by its very outre aspect. On the screen it comes out as a sublimated ghost story related with all surface seriousness and above all with a remarkably effective background of creepy atmosphere.
Early in the action is a barren rocky mountain pass, peopled only by a spectral coach driver and shrouded in a miasmic mist. Story proceeds thence into a tomb-like castle. In such surroundings the sinister figure of the human vampire, the living-dead Count Dracula who sustains life by drinking the blood of his victims, seems almost plausible.
It is difficult to think of anybody who could quite match the performance in the vampire part of Bela Lugosi, even to the faint flavor of foreign speech that fits so neatly. Helen Chandler is the blonde type for the clinging-vine heroine, and Herbert Bunston plays the scientist deadly straight, but with a faint suggestion of comedy that dovetails into the whole pattern."
Posters from Wrong Side of the Art.
Thanks to David J. Skal for helping me with some of the research. Be sure to check out his site.
Thanks to my friend, Vince, for some of the fine research.
No comments:
Post a Comment