MovieChat Forums > Dracula (1958) Discussion > Anyone find this film boring?

Anyone find this film boring?

posted 16 years ago by landocolt45
47 replies | jump to latest

I just watched this film a little while ago. It is the first Hammer film I have ever seen. I grew up looking at my grandfathers Famous Monsters mags, but still never got around to seeing one. I heard people rave about them over the years. I came across the Dracula 4 pack DVD for $10, so I said what the hell. There were good scenes, but found the film to be boring. Granted, it is much better than the Universal Dracula film. I thought Lee was good as Dracula. Cushing was good, but I expected more from him. I then realized all the people who loved it are only the people who grew up watching them. I don't know anyone my age (34) who is into them. Is everyone on this board people who grew up with the film and like it for nostalgic purposes or saw it later in life like I did?

Larry The Cable guy swallows

[–] a_heathen_conceivably 16 years ago

Acting; Presence; Atmosphere; Great sets on a ridiculous shoestring budget; Legendary finale with justly famous, ground-breaking, hugely influential horror special effects.

Landmark horror film, amongst the most world-famous of all time.

The nearest I got to Hammer films as a kid was on bubble-gum cards.

I was well into into my teens before I started to see them on telly (telly? that's British for TV). Saw a few lesser shown ones a few years ago and started furiously collecting them on DVD from age 40 (not all of them, some truly are awful, but -this one- yer kiddin' me pal!?) Add three years.

There are Hammer fans here in the UK; the US; continental Europe; 'Down Under'; Japan... all over the world.

"Oh look - a lovely spider! And it's eating a butterfly!"
'' ,,

[–] johnnyparker 16 years ago

No, Dracula is not boring, not to most horror film aficianados. If younger people find it boring it is likely, alas, because they have been weaned on a diet of MTV-style pap. So few action or horror movies today bother to spend time building credible or likeable characters, preferring to plunge straight into a welter of jazzy but empty digital FX. And if that's what you've always been given, it's what you grow to like - like McDonalds, I guess.

Dracula actually moves along at a cracking pace, and as heathen correctly points out scores highly on all sorts of levels - not least the acting of Cushing and Lee, the screen's greatest vampiric duo.

If they move, kill em!

[–] landocolt45 16 years ago

It seems like a nostalgia thing from what I can see from the posts (ages 40+ are the demographic). Thanks though. I am going to give the other movies a chance.

Larry The Cable guy swallows

[–] jamesabutler44 15 years ago

To some degree, you are correct. I am 50 and I grew up watching Hammer Horror films. To my generation, these were scary as hell! These films hail from a time when it wasn't necessary to depict blood and guts and slashing on film to achieve fright. Hammer horror films were horror with class. Atmosphere and musical score went a long way towards achieving chills and thrills! Unfortunately, people growing these days watching garbage like Saw can't appreciate the Horror of Hammer.

[–] vestdennis 14 years ago

Very good points Johnnyparker! They use so much computer crap today while not developing any characters or plot. Usually there is an abundance of blood, gore, sex, etc. Yes, the old Hammer films are different but these are classics that inspired many of the great horror writers today. I have most of the early horror films either on VCR or DVD. I love them!

[–] alcope2000 12 years ago

Exactly!! Why do films have to have non stop action and special effects to be entertaining?? This get repetitive. I think young people are very narrow minded today. And a big reason is because of video games and MTV.

[–] keepfishin2005 16 years ago

I'm 34 also, and didn't see my first Hammer horror movie until I was 22 or 23. I've seen a good handful of the Christopher Lee/ Peter Cushing films since then and love all of them. They really strike me as what non-slasher horror movies should be. Horror of Dracula was phenomenal, and in fact, I just watched it with my 11 and 8 year old and they loved it. As we speak my son and his friend are watching Horror Express.. a whole new generation of Hammer fans!

[–] vamtim 15 years ago

I'm 24 and the first time I saw this version of Dracula was when I was 20, it is by far my favourite film of all time, everything good that has been said about this film by other posters I agree with, the music, sets, cast and atmosphere is the world I wish existed. I LOVE THIS FILM!!

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] landocolt45 15 years ago

HALL Z- You just answered my question. You grew up watching these in the 80's as a kid-hence the nostalgia factor. They were without a doubt a head of their time visually.

Larry The Cable guy swallows

[–] Karl_Wolfgang_47 15 years ago

I'm 29 and I saw it when I was 6.

This movie is excellent. It has great atmosphere which modern movies sadly lack. Also, unlike most older movies it isn't at all boring. I bought it on DVD for nostalgic reasons and also because vampires are my favorite subject in movies. I was 27 when I bought this film. Thus I hadn't seen it in 21 years. I remembered only few scenes and my memories were very vague. I expected that this film will be boring and weak, but I was surprised how good it was. This masterpiece was made over 50 years ago but it is still better than 99% of modern movies. Even though I bought it for nostalgic purposes, I like it because it is so good movie.

"He is evil. He is the embodiment of all that is evil. He is the very Devil himself."

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 15 years ago

Thank you. Thank you. The greatest version of them all, but I still enjoy Frank Langella's version though not quite as much as this.

What is the sound an imploding pimp makes?

[–] orlox99-1 15 years ago

i thought the film was to fast actually

[–] Kammurabi 15 years ago

your viewpoint is not unexpected and is understandable.

However I am also 34 and I prefer this (and many older films) and believe it to be superior to today's horror.

There is much to be said for subtlety. Alot of that has been lost in the evolution of shortcuts in cinema. I enjoy Argento, Fulci, Deodato, etc. and to a lesser extent- Craven and Raimi but I feel none of these surpass films from 1910s-1960s. As has been said previously...atmosphere and leaving some things to interpretation are very underrated elements in horror.

Oh and for a current reference...I am actually bored by modern films for the most part. The Saw films, the flavor of the week remakes...just doesn't work for me.

.