Hot take: Christopher Lee's Dracula was better and more accurate than Bela Lugosi's hammy performance.

I think the black-and-white cinematography and the masterful production design of the 1931 Universal film hide just how hammy and over-the-top Lugosi's take on Dracula was. Yes, Lugosi was extremely entertaining to watch and by no means a mediocre actor. But certain facial expressions and the exaggerated accent in lines like "....tomorrow evening" felt a bit cartoony to take the character seriously.

On the other hand, Lee's Dracula was exactly like how he was described in Stoker's novel. His athletic and intense presence, his sudden energetic movements, his lustful dangerous aura....he could've given the same performance this year and still wouldn't feel out-of-place. Whereas Lugosi's take would only be proper in a Mel Brooks directed parody film today.

And, of course, Schreck's Nosferatu would remain timeless even centuries from now.

Submitted January 27, 2024 at 08:46PM by ShaonSinwraith https://ift.tt/wFVO93j