Lugosi's DRACULA (31)

[Mitch Farish]

The problem with the fangs weren't just one with Lugosi—fangs in your mouth make it completely impossible to speak. And with Chaney's effect of using wires to keep the mouth open, it would have been like listening to a 12-year-old who just got braces talking.

Unless they just used the fangs in those close-ups before the bite. But I do see your point. Given the primitive sound technology of the time, Dracula would have come off better artistically as a silent, but being silent would have killed it at the box office in '29. And by 1931 they were forced to go with Lugosi, not that Lugosi was the worst they could have done. Edmund Lowe or Ian Keith would have been much worse.

[Donald Binks]

I think Mr. Lugosi managed to look horrid enough - without fangs! I mean, you wouldn't have wanted to bump into him on a dark night...

[Dan Oliver]

I've always thought Conrad Veidt would have been excellent in the part -- especially with someone other than Browning directing. And imagine how different horror film history would be if that had happened. Would we even know Bela Lugosi at all?

[bobfells]

David Skal's HOLLYWOOD GOTHIC relates (if memory serves) that a Leni-Veidt DRACULA looked like a go until Leni suddenly died and Veidt wanted to return to Germany rather than learn English in a hurry. IMO, I think you could drop Veidt into the Browning DRACULA and he would have been every bit as good as Lugosi, and even better because he was a better actor than Lugosi. Veidt's role in THIEF OF BAGDAD (1940) has some glimpses of what his Dracula would have looked like.

[Mitch Farish]

I've always thought Conrad Veidt would have been excellent in the part -- especially with someone other than Browning directing. And imagine how different horror film history would be if that had happened. Would we even know Bela Lugosi at all?

I think you're correct until you consider that by 1930 Veidt and Leni were no longer around, and during the depression, without a bankable star, Universal was unwilling to invest too heavily in something that could have been a huge flop. And if the film had been made without sound in 1929, it would have tanked at the box office. I have heard that Veidt's role in The Last Performance was supposed to be his audition for Dracula. Skal also says Lugosi and Clara Bow had a brief but intense fling in 1927 after she attended one of his performances in Dracula, a story that has scant documentation to back it up other than the questionable statements of Lugosi's ex-wife after their divorce. Don't believe everything Skal says.

But if Veidt had played Dracula (and it was a hit), he may also have gone on to play the monster in Frankenstein. Then we might not have had Boris Karloff! That would have been a tragedy.

[Michael O'Regan]

Skal also says Lugosi and Clara Bow had a brief but intense fling in 1927 after she attended one of his performances as Dracula, a story that has scant documentation to back it up other than the questionable statements of Lugosi's ex-wife after their divorce. Don't believe everything Skal says.

Well, we can't really blame Skal for putting this rumour around. It's been mentioned elsewhere.

[Wm. Charles Morrow]

I think Mr. Lugosi managed to look horrid enough - without fangs! I mean, you wouldn't have wanted to bump into him on a dark night...

For me, it isn't so much the way Lugosi looks (which is rather elegant, what with the sleek evening wear and all) as the way he sounds. That accent, and his eccentric delivery, gives his performance a lot of its power. I don't think he could've been anywhere near as effective in a silent version.

Ironically, poor ol' Bela grew into the part and looked a lot more Dracula-like when he played opposite Abbott & Costello in '48. As a kid I saw Lugosi in A&C Meet Frankenstein first, that is, several years before I saw him in the "real" Dracula, and despite the fact that it was a comedy he and Lon Chaney Jr. scared the beejeezus outta me.

[Donald Binks]

I've always thought Conrad Veidt would have been excellent in the part

Don't know about that. Veidt had a rather strong German accent without any nuances. (Listen to his recording about a Lighthouse for example). Lugosi on the other hand was Hungarian and his accent to my mind was ideal for the part - bearing in mind that Dracula was from Transylvania (at one time in Hungary). Also, Lugosi seems to delight in giving extra special treatment to all the lines which makes the picture all that more enjoyable. Without Lugosi being Lugosi I don't think the picture would have had quite the same appeal. As to the picture being made as a silent - well I think the treatment would have had to be totally different to make it more engrossing.

[Einar the Lonely]

Nosferatu didn't have to audibly talk, maybe thats why he got the fangs...

[Henry Nicolella]

I wonder what a Paul Leni "Dracula" would have been like? There's a lot of humor in his other horror films so perhaps his take on the thirsty count would have been a bit fang in cheek? I love Conrad Veidt but I'm not sure about him doing Dracula, at least in a talkie; his voice seems wrong. As far as "Last Performance" being a dry run for a Veidt Dracula there's some support for that in the longer version of the film that surfaced awhile back. You see Veidt as Erik the stage magician hypnotizing a group of people in the audience. There are a few intense close-ups of Veidt's face and eyes as he puts the whammy on them in a very Dracula like manner.
Henry Nicolella

[ClayKing]

I love Conrad Veidt but I'm not sure about him doing Dracula, at least in a talkie; his voice seems wrong. As far as "Last Performance" being a dry run for a Veidt Dracula there's some support for that in the longer version of the film that surfaced awhile back. You see Veidt as Erik the stage magician hypnotizing a group of people in the audience. There are a few intense close-ups of Veidt's face and eyes as he puts the whammy on them in a very Dracula like manner.
Henry Nicolella

I don't know that I agree. Think of Veidt as the evil magician in Thief of Bagdad or in one of his Nazi roles. He could be very sinister and threatening, and his accent, as long as it had a "foreign" sound, probably wouldn't have mattered to the great unwashed.

[Lokke Heiss]

I could see Veidt in the part. Had Leni directed it, I wonder how close to the Deane/Balderston play the film would have been.

The problem with the fangs weren't just one with Lugosi—fangs in your mouth make it completely impossible to speak. And with Chaney's effect of using wires to keep the mouth open, it would have been like listening to a 12-year-old who just got braces talking.

This is exactly right and for anyone who has dressed up as a vampire for Halloween, it quickly becomes clear than fangs render normal speech impossible, requiring the skill of a ventriloquist. The Hammer series (and beyond) uses cuts and other devices, you almost never hear a fanged actor talking, or if they do it's only a few words, and then a quick cut, or dubbing later when they can synch the words at leisure.

The most 'famous' fang problem was Dark Shadows, which was mostly shot on the fly and with no time for close-ups or for repeat takes. The solution was: medium close-up, the two actors talking, then the camera pans to victim while the actor playing vampire turns away from the camera and quickly puts the fangs in his mouth while the camera keeps rolling and then the camera pans back to the actor, now with fangs, who having said the necessary dialogue can now attack. Gotta love those solutions by necessity.

[Silent Film Buff]

Hi everyone. Just thought I’d submit my thoughts on this.
I have to agree with Donald Binks Dracula was Lugosi’s film all the way.

Now I love Conrad Veidt, he was fantastic. Cesare in The Cabinet of Dr. Carligari is frankly iconic. But I don’t’ think he would have had the same impact playing Dracula that Lugosi did.

Veidt’s portrayal would have been cold, hard, like a clear diamond. Not necessarily a bad thing, it would have been different; but it wouldn’t have been Lugosi.

If you ever have the chance to look at Lugosi’s best work – Dracula, White Zombie, The Silent Command, The Black Cat, The Son Of Frankenstein (please don’t think about the later films when he was dazed and befuddled by drugs) you can see the power, the presence that he brought to each role. You can imagine what he must have been like in Dracula on the stage and get an inkling of the impact that he must have had, and the following that he garnered with this one role alone. I don't want to compare who was the better, or more versatile actor. Veidt was brilliant. The screen rarely allowed Lugosi to show what he could really do (take a look at Nitchoka, or The Invisible Ray).

These are the things that people don’t emphasize when talking about Lugosi, how versatile he had been on the Hungarian stage (because he was so sadly typecast by Hollywood, and yes, he had played numerous types of roles in Hungary); the matinee idol presence (yes, he had been a matinee idol in Szeged, if not yet in Budapest when he left Hungary); his sheer charisma; his presence – these are the things he brings to Dracula. When he is onscreen in that film you don’t look at anyone else, there is no one else in the film (except perhaps Dwight Frye); he dominates each scene he’s in, he dominates scenes he’s not in (his presence hovering over each scene like a black bat, always heavily in the back of the viewer’s mind).

As for the eccentric mannerisms, the delayed and halting speech found in his performance in the film – these things were not part of his struggling with English (he could speak English at this time – he did not learn his role phonetically – besides he’d already played the role numerous times before). Lugosi and Browning worked specifically on the delivery, the manner of the Count. He was to be an other-worldly being who had not been alive for centuries, consequently he finds it difficult to emulate human speech and bearing once more; he is straining to remember, he must drag his human life into existence again after a period of centuries. Of course his movements are stiff, his arms held at strange angles (bat-like), his speech halting. He is straining to remember what it was like to be human again.

As for his affair with Clara Bow – this was absolutely true. This was not a myth, it’s actually quite well known. Lugosi had a picture painted of Clara (or she gave one to him). You can see it in the background of a number of photos taken of Lugosi in his home. She purportedly kept a photo of him with her until the end of her days. Their first meeting is outlined in Jack Oakie’s autobiography – how Clara was anxious to go see Dracula while it was touring in Los Angeles, how she was so excited to go she just threw her coat on over her swimsuit, and how after the performance her ‘entourage’ went to Lugosi’s dressing room and he came back with them all for a party that night. While they were an item she used to come to the theatre and wait outside for him on the theatre steps.
Think of him how he must have been in Clara’s time. Before the drugs and Hollywood got its claws into him he had been a matinee idol – quite handsome, with tremendous magnetism.

Here’s a couple of pictures to set the scene – Don’t think of the Ed Wood films (please, please don’t think about Ed Wood) or ‘The Devil Bat’ – think of the period through the 1910’s all through the 20’s and early 30’s – full of life and energy and power.

Thanks for listening,
Silent Film Buff

new2.jpg (20.07 KiB) Viewed 1277 times

m_69a0727fffe440a59d55500d54a83e75.jpg (6.87 KiB) Viewed 1277 times

l_553268c238bd4b9fb829b79d22c2f0c8.jpg (93.2 KiB) Viewed 1277 times

[Mitch Farish]

the delayed and halting speech found in his performance in the film – these things were not part of his struggling with English (he could speak English at this time – he did not learn his role phonetically – besides he’d already played the role numerous times before). Lugosi and Browning worked specifically on the delivery, the manner of the Count. He was to be an other-worldly being who had not been alive for centuries, consequently he finds it difficult to emulate human speech and bearing once more; he is straining to remember, he must drag his human life into existence again after a period of centuries. Of course his movements are stiff, his arms held at strange angles (bat-like), his speech halting. He is straining to remember what it was like to be human again.

I agree Lugosi could be very effective. I loved him in The Black Cat, a very nuanced and complex portrayal. He needed more roles like that. But your description of Tod Browning's direction is not the Tod Browning I have read about. David Manners didn't remember him being around that much, and said Karl Freund directed much of the picture. I blame Browning more than anyone else for the way Dracula drags once the action gets to London. As for Clara Bow, what I remember from Skal's book is that Jack Oakie said she wanted to go see Dracula because she was fascinated by what she read about Lugosi needing to learn lines phonetically (circa 1927). The stuff about their being attracted and having an affair came from Lugosi's bitter ex-wife who I'm sure didn't like having a nude portrait of Clara hanging in their home. He could have had that painted without her posing for it. I'm not saying an affair didn't happen, but there is no real evidence.

[Michael O'Regan]

Silent Film Buff said:

Lugosi and Browning worked specifically on the delivery, the manner of the Count. He was to be an other-worldly being who had not been alive for centuries, consequently he finds it difficult to emulate human speech and bearing once more; he is straining to remember, he must drag his human life into existence again after a period of centuries. Of course his movements are stiff, his arms held at strange angles (bat-like), his speech halting. He is straining to remember what it was like to be human again.

Where did you find this information? I'm curious.

[Doug Sulpy]

Too bad Clara and Bela never officially hooked up. Think of all the scary red-haired little vampire children they might have produced...

Seriously, though... I must confess I'm not much of a Lugosi fan. He was fine in Dracula (for what it was worth - I don't think it's that hot of a film in the first place), and I enjoyed him in "Island of Lost Souls," but, to me, he never had the acting chops or innate likeability that Karloff had.

[WaverBoy]

Too bad Clara and Bela never officially hooked up. Think of all the scary red-haired little vampire children they might have produced...

Seriously, though... I must confess I'm not much of a Lugosi fan. He was fine in Dracula (for what it was worth - I don't think it's that hot of a film in the first place), and I enjoyed him in "Island of Lost Souls," but, to me, he never had the acting chops or innate likeability that Karloff had.

Lugosi could be wonderful when the script let him. Apart from DRACULA and ISLAND OF LOST SOULS, he's excellent as Ygor in both SON OF FRANKENSTEIN and GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN, absolutely the best part about those films. Fantastic as Vitus Verdegast in THE BLACK CAT as well. If only he'd had more chances to stretch on film; by all accounts he was extremely versatile during his stage career.

[Michael O'Regan]

I enjoy him in WHITE ZOMBIE also.

[Silent Film Buff]

Sorry to drop a couple of bombshells and run.
In regards to Lugosi's affair with Clara Bow, it's mentioned in a number of books on Lugosi I've read, and most extensively in 'Bela Lugosi, Dreams and Nightmares' by Gary D. Rhodes.
Page 64 of my edition shows a picture Lugosi in his home, the painting of Clara on the wall beside him (and it's quite a large picture). To quote from the book: 'Whatever admirers, whatever affairs, though, none would become as famous as Lugosi's romance with film star Clara Bow.' The quote goes on to cite Jack Oakie's memoirs, then continues with: "Little is actually known of Lugosi and Bow's relationship, but it does seem to have gone beyond simply being "good friends." Marion Schiling, whose father Peter had invested money in the 1928 West Coast version of Dracula, remembered: 'Clara Bow, then at the peak of her fame, attended at least two performances a week during the two months run. She'd sometimes come directly from her beach house wearing a fur coat over her bathing suit. The play's attraction for her? Bela Lugosi! She had a terrific crush on him. Bela liked to tell my father that if I were a bit older, without question he'd marry me. I'm certain this was a bit of blarney. In comparison with the scintillating Clara, what chance would poor green little Marion have had!"

It actually doesn't sound like the affair lasted very long, and I don't think it did. Nothing more than a fling on the part of either of them. But Rhodes goes on to say: "Whether they ever spoke during the 1930's or after is unknown. But they certainly parted with fond feelings for one another. They both kept mementos of one another till their deaths.... And Bow always kept a signed picture of Lugosi in he collection of photographs."

In regards to Lugosi's halting, stiff delivery being intentional - can't quite remember the source for that. I will try to look it up and report back. I think that in regards to Browning, it seems that he lost interest in the production part way through, and this accounts for Manners' memories, as well as the slow, slow, slow pace of the second part of the film. Would have been better if Freund had had more input. This to me does not detract from Lugosi's impact in the role, or the success of the film ushering in the first wave of Universal's horror cycle.
However, I will quote from the filmscript for Dracula that I have, shot E-17: 'CAMERA MOVES DOWN TO LARGE CLOSEUP LABEL ON BOX, showing it to be addressed to "Count Dracula, Carfax Abbey, Whitby, England." HOLD CAMERA ON THIS FOR A MOMENT as there is the sound of the lid being laid aside - then MOVE CAMERA QUICKLY BACK TO MED. SHOT and pick up Dracula, standing beside box from which he has just emerged. His attitude is one of a heavy sleeper aroused from a restful dream. Lethargic at first, his expression becomes singularly alive - his eyes light up in anticipation of the period of freedom before him. He starts to move slowly towards door, with the curious, gliding movement so characteristic of him,..."
The deliberate movement, described here as 'curious'. This stiff portrayal was intentional - a being more used to being in the form of a bat or a wolf than in human form. Of course in other films of this period Lugosi does not act in this manner at all - it is a performance suited to this film.

I will look this quote up however, because it may have been Lugosi himself that said it.

Anyway wall the best.
Silent Film Buff

[Michael O'Regan]

In regards to Lugosi's halting, stiff delivery being intentional - can't quite remember the source for that. I will try to look it up and report back. I think that in regards to Browning, it seems that he lost interest in the production part way through, and this accounts for Manners' memories, as well as the slow, slow, slow pace of the second part of the film. Would have been better if Freund had had more input. This to me does not detract from Lugosi's impact in the role, or the success of the film ushering in the first wave of Universal's horror cycle.
However, I will quote from the filmscript for Dracula that I have, shot E-17: 'CAMERA MOVES DOWN TO LARGE CLOSEUP LABEL ON BOX, showing it to be addressed to "Count Dracula, Carfax Abbey, Whitby, England." HOLD CAMERA ON THIS FOR A MOMENT as there is the sound of the lid being laid aside - then MOVE CAMERA QUICKLY BACK TO MED. SHOT and pick up Dracula, standing beside box from which he has just emerged. His attitude is one of a heavy sleeper aroused from a restful dream. Lethargic at first, his expression becomes singularly alive - his eyes light up in anticipation of the period of freedom before him. He starts to move slowly towards door, with the curious, gliding movement so characteristic of him,..."
The deliberate movement, described here as 'curious'. This stiff portrayal was intentional - a being more used to being in the form of a bat or a wolf than in human form. Of course in other films of this period Lugosi does not act in this manner at all - it is a performance suited to this film.

Interesting. Thanks

[Mitch Farish]

His attitude is one of a heavy sleeper aroused from a restful dream. Lethargic at first, his expression becomes singularly alive - his eyes light up in anticipation of the period of freedom before him. He starts to move slowly towards door, with the curious, gliding movement so characteristic of him,..."

Fascinating stuff. Although, if that is what Browning was supposed to put on screen, he failed. The actual scene is very static. I would like to believe that Bow and Lugosi did have some kind of relationship. It's a good story, might make a good film - The Vamp and the Vampire, but memory and oral history are notorious for evoking wish-fulfilling fantasies. I'm still not convinced it was more than that. I would be much more convinced if Lugosi's ex-wife had testified under oath in court instead of stating it to the newspapers.

[Silent Film Buff]

Yes, no question about it, the direction for that film could have been better. But I have to say, when the direction was on, it was spot on (but was that more Freund than Browning?). The meeting with Renfield at the bottom of the stairs and Dracula at the top is still powerful, with Dracula clearly overpowering Renfield from the start and setting the tone for their relationship for the rest of the movie. Of course what the film does best is capture Lugosi's powerful persona, and in that it is a triumph.

Anyway, can't find the quote, but I do believe it was Lugosi himself who indicated to someone that his performance onstage had been different from his performance on film and that there had been discussions regarding this. Why this is not widely known is that (according to Bill Everson as quoted in Vampire over London) Lugosi just did not talk too much about his film performances - it was all in the past according to him.

Couple more quotes regarding Clara Bow:
I was a monster movie maker: conversations with 22 SF and horror filmmakers
By Tom Weaver
P. 255 interview with Ray Walston (everybody’s favorite Martian) who had worked with Lugosi and knew him: ‘they made a special exception with Lugosi: His funeral thing went up the street. Now, that’s what I was told; whether or not it’s true, I don’t know. But this one happens to be very true: He came out here in the early ‘20s, but he didn’t make Dracula until 1930. And in between, he had a torrid romance with Clara Bow. That surprised me."

Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff: the expanded story of a haunting ...by Gregory William Mank.
Commenting on Beatrice Woodruff Weeks’ disastrous 4 day marriage to Bela and subsequent divorce – stating ‘Beatrice vengefully embraced the press….She went on to attack his eating habits (and gave a graphic description of how Bela ate an apple), cite his affair with Clara Bow…” P.30

In any case, as you say, it makes for a great Hollywood legend. But likely it did not last more than a few months at most. Lugosi was likely very tempestuous and Clara Bow was at the very least a live-wire, the very epitome of the 'Jazz Baby'.

Anyway, at this I think I will leave the subject before I make a total bore out of myself (if I haven't already).

Thanks for your patience and for listening.

Silent Film Buff.

[Mitch Farish]

Yes, no question about it, the direction for that film could have been better. But I have to say, when the direction was on, it was spot on (but was that more Freund than Browning?). The meeting with Renfield at the bottom of the stairs and Dracula at the top is still powerful, with Dracula clearly overpowering Renfield from the start and setting the tone for their relationship for the rest of the movie.

I think we can agree to disagree about Clara Bow. But Browning's direction didn't serve any of the actors well. I think Lugosi did as well as he did in the Transylvania sequence because he had years of living with the part on stage. He gave some terrific line readings and was generally very creepy in that portion of the film - the part that showed off Freund's atmospheric cinematography the best. I think I read some place that parts of the art direction in that sequence were based on Freund's sketches instead of Charles Hall's (a distant shot of Dracula's castle). But in London Browning's leaden style is definitely in evidence. After Paul Leni died, and Chaney was still being considered, Browning must have seemed a logical choice since he had directed London After Midnight in 1928. But as I was thinking about Veidt in The Last Performance, I wondered why didn't anyone consider Paul Fejos, whose films, talking and otherwise, were never static. Take a look at some clips from The Last Performance and Lonesome on YouTube. As a fellow Hungarian he surely would have communicated better with Lugosi.

[cjh5801]

Film scholar Gary D. Rhodes has demonstrated that there is more camera movement in the final two acts of DRACULA than Browning is generally given credit for (see http://www.monstersfromthevault.com/Cur ... racula.pdf), and the slow pacing is apparently the result of the studio's last minute edit that was done without Browning's involvement or consent (see http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuk ... 0VvoPF5mSM).

As demonstrated in that last link, the pacing in the final two acts picks up considerably when the film is re-edited to match the continuity in the shooting script. It's still a bit slow by modern standards, but seeing the film with the proper continuity is a revelation.