IMDb > Dracula (1931) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Dracula More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 41: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 404 reviews in total 

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

It may be dusty, but it's still a classic

Author: Adam Peters from Birkenhead United Kingdom
25 August 2014

(62%) It is without doubt a classic owing to the fact that it is so well made, and so memorable. The sets are some of the greatest ever to appear on any film, and Lugosi is great as the awful head vamp. It's more than a little dated of course, so there's no blood/biting or on-screen death or murder, plus the acting is very theatrical at times, and there's quite a few long drawn-out sections of total silence that highlight exactly how old and pioneering it is.With that said, all horror fans should watch this at least once, as it does make a great late-night Halloween movie that will live on - just like the old count himself - forever.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Dracula (1931)

Author: skybrick736 from Waconia, Minnesota
18 August 2014

Tod Browning put on a complete show that didn't disappoint the least bit in this adaptation of the Dracula novel. It was faithful, had solid characters and a strong presence of Bela Lugosi to carry the way. What I liked about this Universal Picture was that it was fast paced and never really had any dull moments. Classic movies sometimes drag and don't hold my interest entirely but I never really seemed to hit pause. I was glued from the get go from the starting opening scene in Transylvania. Renfield, played by Dwight Frye was very sufficient and creepy. The characters of Van Helsing, Dr. Seward and Mina were terrific and casted perfectly. Bela Lugosi as Dracula was of course the star of the film and spawned a long list of Universal movies for himself. The role of John Harker was annoying at times and didn't have the best dialog written for him. It's obviously a classic that all horror fans have to watch. I would be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't like 1931's Dracula despite its few flaws.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Look Into My Eyes...

Author: Rainey-Dawn from United States
26 June 2014

A bloody horror film classic! One of the best vampire films ever made. This is another must see film for all horror movie fans.

What makes vampires so alluring, so irresistible? Is it their charming ways? Is it the fact they have eternal life? Is their brooding dark ways? Is it their style of dress and homes? Is it their manners? Or, maybe, it is simply their really cool fangs! Whatever it is vampires are sure to stay in fiction films for a long time yet to come. And some older vampire films like "Dracula(1931)" will surely never die!

I could watch this film classic again maybe because Count Bela has hypnotized me with his famous line "Look Into My Eyes..." Another great last night flick!


Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Classic Horror

Author: Gerardrobertson61 from Australia
31 May 2014

For Xmas last year I got the Universal Monsters box set containing 8 of Universals horror movies from the 30's and 40's. I started watching this set with Dracula, a movie that I watched back in the 80's, so I haven't seen it in 30 years, It's still a chilling and frightening movie when you put it into the context of when it was released. Bela Lugosi's movements when he attacks and the light across his eyes must have really scared the daylights out of the 1930's audience, today it's almost humorous. But the movie is regarded as a classic movie from that period. It was the start of the horror movie genre, Classic Lugiso lines including "cheeldren of the naight", "I nevair dreenk vine" and "I am Count Draculaaa", and no doesn't say, "I vant to dreenk your vlodd".

The scene where Dracula meets Van Helsing is a classic, especially when Van Helsing asks what sort of creature makes marks on a neck, and the maid introduces Count Dracula. This scene is quickly followed up by the lack of Dracula reflection in the mirror.

Dwight Frye's Renfield is excellent, his creepy laugh and the expression on his face when he is not given his insects is memorable. Bela Lugosi epitomizes the perfect Dracula, no other actor has ever matched Lugosi's Dracula. Combined with Dwight Fryes Renfield, they were the perfect pair for this movie.

Interesting that nurses were stationed in the lobbies of theatres when the movie was released to attend anyone who was scared by the movie.

I love this box series and I am really enjoying watching Dracula, one of my favourite classic horror movies.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

THE horror masterpiece!

Author: Norm Vogel ( from S. Bound Brook, NJ.
15 August 2001

Bela Lugosi is my all-time fav horror actor and this is HIS film! It is a masterpiece! While not based on Stoker's novel ("Nosferatu" is much closer), it is an interesting story, none-the-less!

Almost every line that Bela utters has become a classic ("Children of the night".... etc).

The only fault is that the acting of the hero/heroine is EXTREMELY "wooden", and the "romance" isn't convincing.

Having seen both this film AND the Spanish version, I have to say that (in THIS aspect) the Spanish version is MUCH better; the characters are move "believeable"....BUT.....they didn't have LUGOSI!

BTW...there's an interesting "blooper" in this film, that not many people know about. About 37 mins in, Lugosi leans down on Nina's bed (to bite her in the neck) -- if you look on the RIGHT side of the screen, you'll see a PIECE OF CARDBOARD that was attached to the lampshade, to take the glare off her face! (You've never seen it 'cos Lugosi's acting is RIVETING!). Look for it!

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A superbly atmospheric, cobwebbed delight!

Author: Alph-2 from Sydney
25 February 1999

The Transylvanian sequences in this film are a superbly atmospheric, cobwebbed delight and Lugosi's vampire has a presence unmatched by any other screen Count with the possible exception of Christopher Lee.

The theatrical origins of the screenplay (it was an adaption of a stageplay based on Stoker's novel) are more apparent in the second half. Unlike the book Dracula at first conceals his vampiric nature from his English victims, which echoes Jeckyll and Hyde somewhat.

Nevertheless I feel the spirit of the book survives in this version better than it does in closer adaptions. Along with 'Vampyr' (1932)and 'Nosferatu'(1922) - also a loose adaption of Stoker - it is probably the best vampire movie ever made.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Stopping By Dracula's Castle on a Windy Evening

Author: bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York
5 July 2006

One kind of film that Universal Studios did better than any other was the Gothic horror story. Carl Laemmle practically took out a patent on those films. The sets were already on the lot, he just kept making Frankenstein, Wolfman, and Dracula films at minimal cost and they made money for Universal. In fact until Deanna Durbin started singing for this studio and Abbott&Costello brought over their vaudeville routines, these horror films were the bread butter of Universal Pictures.

Interestingly enough though Bela Lugosi only played the role of Count Dracula twice on film, he became so overwhelmingly identified with the part that Lugosi's whole life was taken over by the undead Count. He was buried in fact in his Dracula costume.

Lugosi however did portray the vampire Count on Broadway in a play adapted from the Bram Stoker novel three years before he did the screen version for Universal. It was on Broadway that Lugosi first got acclaim for Dracula. Carl Laemmle bought the screen rights to the play after seeing Lugosi on stage and just in time for sound. Edward Van Sloan as Van Helsing and Herbert Bunston as Dr. Seward also came over from the Broadway cast.

Although Bela got his career role from this film, Edward Van Sloan as the vampire killer Van Helsing also got the role that people identify him with. Van Sloan practically duplicated his role in The Mummy which also became another series of horror films for Universal.

Oddly enough Lugosi himself killed the Universal horror genre by that second appearance as Count Dracula in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. When those mythic horror monsters became comic foils for Bud and Lou, the demand ceased for these kind of films. It only started again when British Hammer films revived the genre by making them far more explicit and bloody.

Still with that Hungarian accented voice of cultured menace, Bela Lugosi remains for purists the only real Dracula ever put on screen, Christopher Lee notwithstanding.

Like in The Mummy which I've also reviewed good use is made of themes by Tschaikovsky as background music by Director Tod Browning. But it's Bela Lugosi who makes this film a horror picture for the age.

Dracula will be still frightening viewers centuries from now. After all vampires are eternal.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Lugosi is Dracula

Author: elpaz79903 from United States
3 February 2006

The one that started it all for me all those years ago back in 1987. I first saw Dracula at the age of five and it scared me with fear, especially those eyes. Bela Lugosi's best movie of his career and really brought out the monster in his character. Edward Von Sloan also did a superb job as Van Helsing, the hunter sent to kill the dreaded Dracula. Dwight Frye also did a wonderful job as the demented Renfield, Dracula's faithful servant. Universal hit it on the nail by making this movie and an entire collection involving the Dracula character. Though tame by today's standards in horror movies, Dracula remains as one of the best horror movies of all time and I agree one bit with that comment. A true masterpiece that will forever fright moviegoers young and old.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Still Very Scary

Author: JoshtheGiant from United States
12 December 2005

"Come Children of the night."

This is one of the few horror films that has withstood time, The original Frankenstein was made to look almost bad, and even The Shining has had some trouble and its one twenty-five years old. But Dracula is still a very, very scary film today in 2005. Dracula may not be a great film but it is sure a classic and one that everyone should see. The story is very, very good but not amazing it has its holes but is nearly perfect. The screenplay has good dialogue and characters but the best thing about it is that it understands two things, things that most horror films forget. 1. We are scared more by what we don't see. 2. Silence is often scarier than a lot of screaming and dialogue about scary stuff. The acting is horrible by most of the cast but Bela Lugosi as the infamous Count Dracula himself is amazing. The direction is very good. The visual effects are a little cheesy but hey it was made in 1930. A amazing and truly terrifying horror film

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

The Greatest Dracula Ever.

Author: vistag0 from United States
31 October 2005

Bela Lugosi was, is, and shall be the greatest Dracula of all time. No modern performance touches his. A truly underrated talent. If he had lived a few more years, he would have been in high demand. Mr Lugosi is the iconic Dracula of the ages. His performance in this picture and many more set the standard for a suave sophisticated villain of diabolical evil. His problem was that he was so completely convincing as Dracula, that his association with the character became, in the audience's mind, natural and eternal. The legion of fans of Bela Lugosi will remain grateful for his untiring efforts to entertain and enthrall us with his stylish and sincere performances even when confronted with a poor script and low budget. The films in some cases were not up to par, but Mr. Lugosi's performance was always above par and professional. The Spanish version of the 1931 Dracula was very well designed and photographed, but it lacked the main ingredient Bela Lugosi. The comparison of these two film should show anyone the power of Lugosi's Dracula. Bram Stoker's Character Dracula was given eternal life by the great eternal BELA LUGOSI.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 5 of 41: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history