dreamer
12-26-2004, 02:13 AM
...or, "Badham, you complete dick."
I picked up the new dvd of Dracula (1979, Badham/Langella) but haven't watched it yet - new tv won't be here for another week or more, and the picture's shot on the last.
Did watch a few extras, though, and even with the wrong color and the brightness/contrast gone, something was terribly wrong in every clip from the film. Where's all the rich colors? Where's the contrast? Where's the bloody life?
Today on the IMDb message BBs I found out. Badham had the color digitally desaturized from the movie. Yes, yet another director who has to "improve" his old work with his new digital toys until what made the movie work in the first place no longer exists.
Why did he do it? Well, his excuse is that he always wanted it that way to impart the look of Victorian engravings. The more pertinent question reamins, though - what was it supposed to add to the film?
I was so looking forward to having this, never having seen it before in anything but pan&scan butchery. It's my favorite of all the Dracula adaptations (have yet to see the Jourdan or the Dan Curtis, but still). It's unashamedly romanticized Gothic sensibilites make the perfect Dracula, and Langella is a revelation in a performance that has no tolerance for the typical horror cliche. The rest of the cast are fine, even the oft-derided turn Olivier gives Van Helsing. I've played Van Helsing twice - in high school then in a regional troop's production, and am very taken with Olivier's choice. In the field of Van Helsings, his stands out as uniquely gentle and humane, almost apologetic for imposing the horrors of if his knowledge on those not ready to deal with such things. Accusations of falling back on a stock routine I think are due solely to his use of a familiar accent rather than supported by the heart of his portrayal.
But most of all I love the mood of the film, it's sumptuous period reconstruction, it's art direction in set and costume...I love the mirrored sets of images: Lucy's arrival at Carfax seen from above through a web as spider moves in to obscure her from view as she succumbs to Dracula's charm...then the vampirized Lucy seen through another web (the grilles of her cell's ceiling) as she moves in on Harker. I love the reflection of Mina in the water (even if vampires cast no relection - and Badham's excuse would be a good joke if he weren't embarrassingly sincere about it). The textures...and what brings it all to life are the rich colors. The golden auras of the candles, the subtle sunset, the deeps wines and scarlets, the earth tones, the flesh tones ("I despise women with no life in them, no...blood.") The look of the movie, not least the color, brings it to life and gives it a suspension of disbelief no other Dracula movie matches.
These rich colors perfectly reflect and enhance the tone and substance of the film. For all the presence and subtlety and charm Langella gives the Count, this film is likewise nothing without it's visuals, it's atmosphere, it's unashamedly romantic score by John Williams - all perfectly echoed and supported by a warm, beautiful color scheme. The movie is not over-the-top*, it's very evenhanded...but what in the film is so understated that it is served by robbing ot of it's colors?? What kind of asinine move is that?
Has anyone seen this disc yet? Comments? Is it as bad as others make out? Are Mina's sad and terrifying red eyes gone forever?
*The controversial Maurice Binder segment is out of place for it's fx, but it could be improved much by at least excising the idiotic superimposed bat - ithe sequence is the one badly OTT element, but does at least convey the greater passion intended.
I picked up the new dvd of Dracula (1979, Badham/Langella) but haven't watched it yet - new tv won't be here for another week or more, and the picture's shot on the last.
Did watch a few extras, though, and even with the wrong color and the brightness/contrast gone, something was terribly wrong in every clip from the film. Where's all the rich colors? Where's the contrast? Where's the bloody life?
Today on the IMDb message BBs I found out. Badham had the color digitally desaturized from the movie. Yes, yet another director who has to "improve" his old work with his new digital toys until what made the movie work in the first place no longer exists.
Why did he do it? Well, his excuse is that he always wanted it that way to impart the look of Victorian engravings. The more pertinent question reamins, though - what was it supposed to add to the film?
I was so looking forward to having this, never having seen it before in anything but pan&scan butchery. It's my favorite of all the Dracula adaptations (have yet to see the Jourdan or the Dan Curtis, but still). It's unashamedly romanticized Gothic sensibilites make the perfect Dracula, and Langella is a revelation in a performance that has no tolerance for the typical horror cliche. The rest of the cast are fine, even the oft-derided turn Olivier gives Van Helsing. I've played Van Helsing twice - in high school then in a regional troop's production, and am very taken with Olivier's choice. In the field of Van Helsings, his stands out as uniquely gentle and humane, almost apologetic for imposing the horrors of if his knowledge on those not ready to deal with such things. Accusations of falling back on a stock routine I think are due solely to his use of a familiar accent rather than supported by the heart of his portrayal.
But most of all I love the mood of the film, it's sumptuous period reconstruction, it's art direction in set and costume...I love the mirrored sets of images: Lucy's arrival at Carfax seen from above through a web as spider moves in to obscure her from view as she succumbs to Dracula's charm...then the vampirized Lucy seen through another web (the grilles of her cell's ceiling) as she moves in on Harker. I love the reflection of Mina in the water (even if vampires cast no relection - and Badham's excuse would be a good joke if he weren't embarrassingly sincere about it). The textures...and what brings it all to life are the rich colors. The golden auras of the candles, the subtle sunset, the deeps wines and scarlets, the earth tones, the flesh tones ("I despise women with no life in them, no...blood.") The look of the movie, not least the color, brings it to life and gives it a suspension of disbelief no other Dracula movie matches.
These rich colors perfectly reflect and enhance the tone and substance of the film. For all the presence and subtlety and charm Langella gives the Count, this film is likewise nothing without it's visuals, it's atmosphere, it's unashamedly romantic score by John Williams - all perfectly echoed and supported by a warm, beautiful color scheme. The movie is not over-the-top*, it's very evenhanded...but what in the film is so understated that it is served by robbing ot of it's colors?? What kind of asinine move is that?
Has anyone seen this disc yet? Comments? Is it as bad as others make out? Are Mina's sad and terrifying red eyes gone forever?
*The controversial Maurice Binder segment is out of place for it's fx, but it could be improved much by at least excising the idiotic superimposed bat - ithe sequence is the one badly OTT element, but does at least convey the greater passion intended.