Dracula: Chill

In keeping with this month's theme I am also posting some stats for Dracula for the various games I have played over the years.
I have talked about my love for Chill before and in particular the wonderful Chill Vampires book.  These stats are based on the ones found in that book, but tweaked after playing other horror games.

Dracula

BASIC ABILITIES
Strength 110
Perception 100
Dexterity 65
Willpower 120
Agility 80
Luck/EWS 150
Personality 70
Stamina 150
Fear 6*
*Fear Checks. Characters need not make fear checks if Dracula appears as a normal human.

Attack **/95%
**Depends on the form Dracula takes

Movement Sprint in human form without STA loss. 75 as gas. 225 as Bat or Wolf

EDGES & DRAWBACKS (2nd Ed)
Name CIPs Notes
Psychological flaw 1 Obsessions (find a bride)

SKILLS
Name Rank Score Calc
Dagger/Knife (M) 160
Anthropology/ Archaeology (M) 130
Art Criticism (M) 165
History (M) 165
Hypnotism (M) 140
Investigation (M) 145
Language, Contemporary [English, German, all Eastern-European languages] (M) 165
Legend Lore (M) 165
Modeling (M) 135
Disguise(M) 123
Filching(M) 138
Graphology/ Forgery (M) 140
Occult Lore (M) 120

Movement: Varies according to form: in human form, can sprint without Stamina loss; can move 75' per round as mist or fog, 225' as bat or wolf.

Disciplines: Animation of the Dead, Appear Dead (Self), Change Self (to large bat, large wolf, cloud of fog), Create a Feast, Darken, Dreamsend, Evil Eye, Flight1, Gnarl, Influence, Quiet, Slam, Sleep, Steal Memory, Summon, Swarm, Wave of Fog

Dracula can use Flight at night. To fly, he assumes the form of a cloud of sparkling moonbeams that dance in the darkness, then materializes when the flight ends. He cannot be destroyed while in this moonbeam form.

IPs: 3300

Characteristics
1. As a Common Carpathian Dracula cast no shadow or reflection and cannot be photographed or video taped.
2. Human blood excites and enrages him. He must make a Willpower check.
3. Does not die when exposed to sunlight. Sunlight dos weaken him and limits his use of EWS powers.

October Movie Reviews: Dracula AD 1972 (1972)

It's Disco Dracula! Well not really, but it is the first Hammer Dracula set in the 1970s.

This movie reunites Lee and Cushing as Dracula and Van Helsing for the first time since Horror of Dracula.

Dracula AD 1972 (1972)
We begin this one with Dracula and Van Helsing (oddly name Lawrence, but that is fine I think I see what they are doing here) fighting on a coach.  They crash and both die.  One of Dracs followers collects the Count and buries him near Van Helsing.

Ok a minor stop here.  Normally I don't quibble about continuity, especially one in a horror film.  But if this takes place in 1872 and the event of Dracula (the book and supposedly the movie) in 1897 then...ok, repeat to yourself it is only a show...

Fast forward 100 years (to the day-why does it always happen like that?) we meet up with hipster 70s teenage set, Jess (Jessica Van Helsing) and her friends which includes a Johnny Alucard.  Jessica is the grand-daughter of "Lorrimer" Van Helsing, who is in turn the grand-son of Lawrence.  Johnny proposes this new way to "get some kicks" (it's the 70s) and that is a Satanic rite (yeah, the 70's).  The rite brings back Dracula (of course) and the first victim is Caroline Munro.
Her body is found the next day and the police seek out Van Helsing on the matter since they think there may be a ritual slaying angle.

Soon Van Helsing is on the trail but not before we get a few more bodies.  Dracula is after Jessica of course, but wants to get Lorrimer too.   Big battle in the unsanctified Church and Dracula is killed, once again by Van Helsing.

Ok.
I have some issues with this movie.

First, it was not as bad as I was lead to believe.  Yes, it's not very good and the plot in not that different than what we saw in Taste the Blood of Dracula.  The count is still chasing after pretty girls, he is still hunting down people named Van Helsing and really all the is changed is the setting.
Speaking of which, I know it's 70's London, but did we really need the band going through TWO whole songs in the beginning?  It would have been ok if they had been someone, or even good, but we got a third-rate Sly and the Family Stone that I have never heard of before and doubt neither has anyone else.  edit: ok, they have their own Wikipedia page.

The Satanic angle was interesting, but un-needed,  Dracula is evil enough on his own without worrying about being upstaged by the Devil.

Like the Universal movies before it the Hammer Dracs are beginning to show their diminishing returns with sequels.  Granted Lee never had the indignity of facing off against the comedic duo of the time like Lugosi eventually did, but taking out a group of English Mods is almost as bad.

What I do like is the idea that Van Helsing family has been doing this for years. There is room in my games for a Lawrence, Lorrimer, Jessica, Abraham and even Rachel Van Helsing.  Not so sure about a Gabriel though.

In the end this movie was a disappointment in terms of lost potential.

October Movie Reviews: Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970)

For my October Reviews I continuing the Hammer Horror Dracula Collection with the first entry of the 1970s..

Christopher Lee has returned in the next Hammer film and it starts as the previous one of completing.  Dracula is struggling on the cross he was impaled on and  soon dies, leaving his cloak, ring, and blood.  A passerby witnesses this and we are off an running.

Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970)

This one begins as Dracula has Risen From His Grave ends. So timeline wise we are still just around 10 years from Van Helsing's destruction of Dracula.  A passerby, Weller, sees Dracula die so he collects Dracula's clothes and blood.  We switch to a church scene where we meet the principle families.  The father, Mr. Hargood scolds his daughter later for "flirting" with a young man before he heads out for his end of the month "charity work".  In reality he, and the other men from the church, Paxton and Secker, have formed a small club where they partake in prostitutes.  Now here I want to point out that while Dracula's castle seems just down the raod a bit, this all looks like 1890s London.  I know I should not quibble.
Anyway they meet up with a disgraced Lord who plans to show them all sorts of pleasures.  He purchases Dracula's blood and makes a drink of it using his own blood.  The others do not drink and it kills the Lord.  Later Dracula rises up, transforming the dead body into his own.  Neat trick that.
Dracula vows to kill those that have killed his servant.
He attacks Hargood first, convincing his daughter to beat him in the head with a shovel. He get's Paxton's daughter and she kills her father and likewise with Secker and his son.  Dracula is about to get rid of Alice Hargood when her boyfriend shows up, now armed with knowledge left to him by her father, to destroy Dracula.  He puts a cross in the door (Dracula should really get that door changed, people keep doing that) and blesses his coffin.  Dracula falls from a balcony and lands on alter turning to dust.

This was a more interesting movie for a few reasons.  One, Dracula manipulates others into doing his killing for him, though he is not above doing some himself.  Plus this movie is the first that has Hammer pushing the boundaries some more.  While there was always beautiful women and sex-appeal, this is the first of the Dracula films with some nudity in it and explict references to sex.  It was 1970 afterall, but I think this was more due to the fact that audiences, now fat on American movies and American sex and violence, wanted more and Hammer needed to fill the seats.  So this does feel more like a "slasher flick" than some of the previous movies.
This was yet another movie where Lee nealry didn't reprise the role of the Count, but in the end he must have gave in.  This was also one of the last of the Victorian era Hammer Dracula movies (as far as I can tell).  After this (and Scars of Dracula, which I don't own) we move on to Dracula 1972 which sets it in the modern age.

I know I had never seen this one before, others I might not be clear about, but this was a first time viewing.

October Movie Reviews: Dracula has Risen From His Grave 1968

For my October Reviews I continuing the Hammer Horror Dracula Collection.

Dracula has Risen From His Grave (1968)
This film takes place one year after the events of Dracula Prince of Darkness and the villagers still fear Dracula, though he is dead. An accident though causes a priest to bleed into Dracula's tomb and just like that he is back.

Though we spend the first 45 minutes or so dealing with the Monsignor and his family (his sister in law and niece).   We don't even get a victim till then.  That being said Dracula has still spoken more lines here than in the last movie.  The movie centers around Dracula's revenge on the Monsignor and getting his niece.
This movie did something very cool in it, Dracula was staked and before the hero could do anything else about it he pulled the stake out of his own chest.

I saw this movie, so long ago now that all I can recall of the movie the end scene where Dracula was impaled on the cross.  Though in the back of my mind I must have remembered the scene with the stake since I made an allusion to it in the Ghosts of Albion game.

In the end there was not much to this movie.  No creepy assistant, only one death due to draining by Dracula and two incidental deaths unless you count the girl in the beginning. No Van Helsing either.
Dracula didn't even burst into flames when he is impaled on a cross.  He just sorta died.

Certainly the weakest of the Hammer Dracula's so far.

October Movie Reviews: Dracula Prince of Darkness 1966

For my October Reviews I have another one from the Hammer Horror Collection.

This movie is a proper Dracula sequel since it features Christopher Lee as the Count; though he never speaks a line in it.  Unlike the Brides of Dracula before it, this one does not have Van Helsing.

Dracula Prince of Darkness (1966)

We are treated to a montage from Dracula (1958) of Van Helsing destroying the Count.  The movie starts proper with a funeral (in my memories all Hammer Films started like this) of a young girl who we soon learn is believed to be a vampire.  We are introduced to an Abbot or Monk (I was never sure of the difference) who claims she isn't and deserves a proper burial.

The scene changes to the Kents, two brothers and their wives, who are on holiday from London to travel.  Our Abbot meets up with them and invites to them to stay at his abbey and warns them to stay away from Carlsbad and the castle (which does not show up on their maps).
As fate would have it, they end up there due to a broken carriage wheel and are forced to take shelter.  They find the castle warm and inviting, with food laid out for four.  They meet the supposed sole inhabitant of the castle, Klove. He claims he is carrying out the final wishes of his master, Count Dracula.
They stay the night and one brother follows Klove to Dracula's tomb where he is killed and his blood is used to resurrect the dead ashes of the vampire.  Dracula goes after the brother's wife and vamps her.
The other brother wakes up to find his brother and wife gone.  He and his wife try to leave, only to be brought back to the castle by Klove.  Here Dracula and Helen attack.  The escape, only to be thrown in their stolen carriage and recued by the Abbot. 
The Abbot knows about vampires and claims that Dracula is their master and was killed 10 years ago (Dracula 1958).  While they rest, Dracula attacks Diana and takes her while Helen is left behind to be killed by the Abbot.
Charles and the Abbot ride to Dracula's castle where they manage to kill Klove on the way and rescue Diana.  Dracula is trapped on the ice surrounding his castle.  The Abbot shoots the ice cause Dracula to slip into the running water and "drown".

Ok. This is an odd one.  First there are no lines for Dracula.  That is no big really, he had few lines in the book too.  But Modern Dracula is a chatty guy-or rather we like our bad guys to be chatty.  Blame it on Bond I guess.
Of course this movie is really nothing more than a proto-80's slasher flick.  Replace Dracula with a psycho killer and the tourists with teens and you are set.  Of course instead of four we would need six and Drac would need to kill more, but the idea is the same.
There is no Van Helsing here which is not that big of a deal really.
This is one of the first Dracula "resurrection" movies.  No ceremony, just pour blood into vampire ashes and mix well.  It's simple and it works.  The effects for Dracula's return are great for the time and I am sure they were quite proud of how it turned out.

The movie is not bad as far as plot goes. The action is slow at times, but that is more due to the time in which is was filmed.

I can't recall if I have ever seen this one or not.  Some of the older Hammer films all blurred into one in time, and it has been 25-30 years since I have seen some of these.  I didn't recall anything specific about this one, so it is likely it was new to me.

Dracula: other stats

I have posted Dracula stats in the past.

Here are some links:

Big Eyes, Small Mouth 3.0
Mutants and Masterminds (2nd Ed)
Doctor Who, Adventures in Time and Space

Enjoy!

Dracula: AD&D 1st Edition

I have been watching a lot of Dracula movies of late. That has gotten me thinking about how much of a great D&D antagonist Dracula really is.

These differ from my B/X/C stats a bit. Mostly I wrote these many, many years ago.

Count Dracula, AD&D 1st Edition

DRACULA (Vlad Tepes)
FREQUENCY: Unique
NO. APPEARING: 1
ARMOR CLASS: -1 (-4 with dexterity)
MOVE: 12”/18”
HIT DICE: 13 (103 hp)
% IN LAIR: 50%
TREASURE TYPE: G
NO. OF ATTACKS: 2 (by touch or weapon)
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-8 (+7)
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Blood drain*, hypnosis, +4 to hit in combat
SPECIAL DEFENSES: +1 or better weapon to hit
MAGIC RESISTANCE: 25%
INTELLIGENCE: Exceptional
ALIGNMENT: Chaotic evil
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: 204
Attack/Defense Modes: B,C/J
S: 19 D: 17 I: 17 C: 19 W: 17 CH: 17

*Dracula drains blood at the rate of 2 CON points per attack. He must succesfully attach to the neck of his victim and drain them of blood. His touch does not drain energy levels.

Getting Dracula to your AD&D world should not really be a problem. There are the Mists of Ravenloft, various Gate spells and even the Psionic Discipline Probability Travel. The how is not as important as the why. Why would you want to bring the King of Vampires to your world?

Long ago when playing AD&D 2nd Ed in college I ran an adventure where an Atlantean Mage summoned Dracula and was promptly killed.  Dracula the began his killing spree anew.

I am always looking for reasons to bring him back.

October Movie Reviews: Dracula 1958

Next for my October Reviews I am moving on to what is the first of a dynasty of movies.

The Dracula from 1958 would have not been a remarkable movie. Really. The pacing is slow, the script takes a number of liberties with the Stoker tale and the play as well for that matter. But it gave us Christopher Lee as the Count and Peter Cushing as Van Helsing, and it was the first of many Hammer Horror films.  Hammer almost created it's own mythology of vampires and other creatures that nearly challenges the original tales.  Hammer surpass even the Universal Horror monsters in the minds of many fans, myself included.  It has been years since I have seen Dracula.  It was great to see it again with new eyes.

Dracula (1958)

Also sometimes called the "Horror of Dracula".  This is the first of many Hammer films on Dracula and starring Christopher Lee as the Count and Peter Cushing as Van Helsing.  Lee might be the quintessential Dracula, equal amounts of sinister monster and suave seducer.  He might not look like his counterpart from the book, but certainly he can pull off the menace very well.  Of the actors that have portrayed Dracula he might also be one of the best.   This movie though is also one of the greater departures from both the book and the play.  Harker is a vampire hunter working with Van Helsing.  Arthur Holmwood is here and works with Van Helsing later in the tale when his daughter, Harker's fiancée, Lucy is killed and his wife Mina is attacked.
Cushing's Van Helsing is younger than most portrayals, and more "English" but he displays such a calm resolve.  He is, if the comparison can be made, more like the Doctor.  He knows all and anticipates the Count's moves.  They are more evenly matched here than in previous films.
Christopher Lee brings a presence to the role of Dracula that was different than that of Lugosi.  Where Lugosi was a suave monster, Christopher Lee's Dracula is a barely contained beast.  Dressed in the veneer of a man, you know he is but one bad moment away from ripping your throat out.

This version of Dracula comes back from the dead more often than any other Dracula; which is good, cause Dracula in this movies goes down rather easily.  Van Helsing uses two candle sticks to form a cross and that keeps the count at bay.

Despite all of that, there is something here.  Something that shows the promise of the future Hammer films, not just the Dracula ones.

Dracula: B/X Companion

The new B/X Companion Rules give us the Greater Undead including a Greater Vampire.  This is awesome since it was also something I had done back when my Expert Set was still new.  Of all the Greater Vampires out there, what one is greater than Dracula himself?
Since I have been watching all the movies I figured now is a good time to see if my B/X skills are still good.

Dracula
Greater Vampire*
Armor Class: 0
Hit Dice: 18*** (135 hp)
Move: 150', 180' Flying
Attacks: 2 (or 3)
Damage: 1-10 + Special / 1-8 + life drain
No. Appearing: 1
Save As: Fighter 18
Morale: 12
Treasure Type: G+H (in lair only x2)
Alignment: Chaotic
XP: 6,000

Dracula is one of the most powerful of the greater Undead.  In life he was a great warrior and now in undeath he is even stronger.  Dracula can attack with claws doing 1-10 hit points of damage, if both claws hit, Dracula will then latch on with his fangs and drain blood from his victim equaling two energy levels.  He prefers to only drain his prey with his fangs; his claw attacks never drain life levels (though they can if he chooses).
Dracula is quite adept with a sword or spear, but prefers to use his bare hands.

If encountered in his castle he will also have 2-20 human gypsies to serve him (treat as Fighter 1) and his three vampiric brides (treat as normal vampires).   He will have double the normal treasure of his kind when encountered in his lair, but nothing on him outside of it.  He wears a ring of protection +1 with the Dracula family crest on it.

As per the Vampire, Dracula is immune to sleep, charm and hold spells.  HE may summon 10-100 rats (5-20 giant rats), 10-100 bats (3-18 giant bats) or 3-18 wolves (2-8 dire wolves).    Dracula may shapechange into a large bat or wolf, but his hit points remain unchanged.  Dracula may also regenerate 5 hit points per round as long as he has fed.

Dracula shares all the same weaknesses of other common and Greater vampires including revulsion to mirrors, holy items and garlic.  Running water will destroy him, but a stake in the heart will only immobilize him. Dracula may make a "Bend Bars/Lift Gates" check to remove the stake.  He must be beheaded.  Dracula can also move about during the daylight hours, but prefers not too since he cannot shape change.

October Movie Reviews: House of Dracula 1945

Lon Chaney Jr. returns, but not as Dracula, but as the Wolf Man.

This movie is a sequel to the House of Frankenstein and the second of the Universal "Monster Mash" movies. We have a Mad Scientist, Dracula, the Wolf Man, Frankenstein's Monster and even a hunchback. All the monsters are here and we even have an angry mob of villagers.

House of Dracula (1945)

Dracula comes to visit renowned scientist Dr. Edelmann searching for a cure to his vampirism.  At the same time Larry Talbot comes looking for a cure for his lycanthropy.    Oddly enough the two classic monsters never share any screen time.  Along the way Talbot, in a failed suicide attempt, discovers a cave where Frankenstein's monster is buried.

Dracula attempts to seduce one of Edlemann's nurses, one he had met before, so Edlemann tryies to deal with Dracula.  Dracula double crosses him and feeds him some of his own vampiric blood via the transfusion.  Edlemann later manages to kill Dracula, but the blood in his veins produces an odd Jekyll and Hyde like effect.

Edlemann, in one of his moments of clarity, manages to cure Talbot, but then also slips and kills a local.  The villagers attack while Edlemann is trying to revive the Monster.  He kills his nurse, but is shot by an now cured Talbot and the place goes down in flames with the Monster inside.

What I thought was interesting about this one was both Dracual and the Wolf Man come to Dr. Edlemann to seek a cure. Though I am certain that Dracula had other plans, Talbot I was sure was sincere.
The hunchback was a bit of a surprise.  This was not your ugly Quasimodo, but instead the attractive form of  Nina, played by Jane Adams. Whiled billed as a monster, she is more of a sympathetic victim.  Though our mad scientist, Edelmann, serves both that role and that of a Jekyll and Hyde.

Lon Chaney J.r is back where "he belongs" as the Wolf man and John Carirdine is taking a tour as the Count. I like Caridine as the count. He has the features and he acts like the nobleman that Dracula should be.  In fact in the movie poster linked here he looks a little bit like Christopher Lee.  I did enjoy seeing Dracula's top hat back.

Frankenstein's Monster is utterly wasted here and most of time he is on screen are archived footage from previous movies.  Which is interesting given his "top billing".  The Wolf man, like our hunchback, is more to be pitied than feared.

If you will pardon the pun, Universal's monsters were getting a little long in the tooth at this point.  The next movie after this one was "Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein" a completely fun movie, but so far removed from horror.

Next:  Hammer Time! (had to do it)

October Movie Reviews: Son of Dracula 1943

Dracula also had a son it seems. Fitting title (or was it contrived that way) for the son of the Man of Thousand Faces who also almost was Dracula.

With this movie I think we are getting into what most people think of as the Universal Monsters. Lon Chaney Jr., more modern settings and an American setting.  Plus we are getting into that Golden Age of Hollywood, with the stars and the glamor and, in the case of this film, some more special effects.
This is the third movie of Universal's "Dracula Trilogy" and it is also something of a transitional piece.

Son of Dracula (1943)
The setting for this film is New Orleans, a full 40 years before anyone else will associate it with vampires.  Hungarian Count "Alucard" arrives invited by one of the daughters of a plantation owner.  I am not 100%, but nearly so that is the very first time we see the Alucard alias.  Something that will be later used all over the place.   Alucard seduces Katherine Caldwell, the daughter, when they had met previously in Hungary.  Soon her father dies, leaving her the plantation Dark Oaks and her and Alucard are quickly married; much to the chagrin of her fiancée and sister.

Her distraught fiancée Frank confronts them and shoots Alucard, only for the bullets to pass through him and kill Kate instead.  He runs to Dr. Brewster's home, a family friend, and admits he killed Kate.  Dr. Brewster goes to Dark Oaks to see a seemingly alive, but very pale, Kate.  Alucard as the new "Master of Dark Oaks" warns the Dr. off  saying the he and his new wife wish to left alone.
Dr. Brewster, noticing the Dracula/Alucard parallels contacts Hungarian Professor Lazlo, who comes to Brewster with the suspicion of vampirism already formed in his mind.  The police head out to Dark Oaks during the day where they find Kate's dead body and lock up Frank.
Kate visits Frank in his cell and Alucard visits Brewster and Lazlo.  Kate convinces Frank that the only way they can be together is to destroy "Dracula".  She helps him escape, while the two men of science fight Alucard.
Frank  heads out to the Dark Oaks plantation ahead of Brewster, Lazlo and the police.  He manages to destroy Alucard's coffin and leaves Alucard to burn in the morning sun.  He then rushes to where Kate is.  When everyone else has caught up to him we see Kate's coffin ablaze as well.

Ok despite a somewhat simple story there is a lot going on here.
First this is Lon Chaney's first (and only) outing as the Count.  I was impressed with his ability to look very different here, he certainly had some of his own father's skills.  But I have so associated him with Larry Talbot and the Wolfman that it was hard to see him as Dracula.  He just didn't seem European enough.  Yes, I mentioned that in the book Dracula took great pains not to sound Transylvania, but here Dracula sounds like he was the Mid West.  It wasn't just the accent; he didn't seem royal, he didn't sound like Dracula.
And that is the other thing.  Was this supposed to be Dracula or his son Alucard.  The movie is a tad ambiguous, but I felt for certain that he was supposed to be the true Count.  I think the "Son of" appellation here was more due to Universal and due to the actor himself.  Lon Chaney Jr. after all was the son of the man that almost got the role of Dracula in the 1931 film.
We got more special effects this time than the last two films combined.  Lots of Dracula turning into and from a bat here, an effect that would be used to great effect (and profound impact on my young mind) in the later "Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein".  While that one is notable, there was the less dramatic, but no less cool, Dracula and Kate turning into and from mist or fog.
I mentioned above that this is a transitional movie for Universal. Transitional in that we are now moving farther away from the source materials (Dracula and Frankenstein novels) and more into modern re-tellings.  For the first time Dracula is setting foot on American soil (and is given good reasons for it in the plot).  It is also the last of the proper "Dracula" films before moving onto the "Monster Mash" films that Universal became known for.  "House of Dracula", the next Dracula film on my list, features Dracula, the Wolf Man, Frankenstein, and even a hunchback and mad scientist.

We are missing a Van Helsing in this one, mostly due to it begin modern (1940s) times, but we do have Dr. Brewster in the obiligator Seward role and Prof. Lazlo as our ersatz Van Helsing.  Prof. Lazlo was actually quite an interesting character and would make for a great vampire hunter on his own.

I can't recall if I have ever seen this one or not.  I am sure I must have, but that could have been 30+ years ago really.

Tomorrow. It's a monster mash.

October Movie Reviews: Dracula's Daughter 1936

Next up for my reviews is one of the firsts of a major trend in horror movies; the sequel (though Bride of Frankenstein (1935) was the first true sequel) . This one is is a sequel of sorts to Dracula. We also get a few other firsts: The angst vampire and the lesbian vampire.

Dracula's Daughter (1936)

Dracula's Daughter is an interesting flick.
This time our hero Van Helsing is up against Countess Marya Zaleska, played by Gloria Holden, who is Dracula's Daughter and also a vampire herself. Like daddy, she also has a taste for pretty girls. Though unlike daddy, Zaleska abhors her state as a vampire. I am reminded of the Marvel Comics, Lilith the Daughter of Dracula (not to mention one of the female victims of this film is a model named Lili). She had a similar relationship with her father and her condition.

The plot is similar to the the Stoker story of Dracula's Guest, or the first part of Dracula. But there is more to that. I like how Zaleska wants to ritually destroy Dracula's body in hopes it will cure her.

The film has it's moments, but in the end it is not as good or memorable as the Lugosi effort, which is of course too bad given where the the female vampire in cinema would take us during the Hammer years and later into the 80's. Zaleska is the spiritual forerunner to Miriam Blalock. Though heavily glossed over with the censors of the 1930's.   I have read reports about this film long ago in the Celluiod Closet, but the reality of film is much for subdued than the reviews claim.  It's subtle, but there is a subtext there. 

There is no Dracula in this one, but we do have Van Helsing.  Something we will see again with Hammer and "The Brides of Dracula".  

As a monster you end up feeling sorry for Zaleska more than anything.  Holden has a why of making you feel like she is the victim here.  Mind you that doesn't stop her from mistreating her servant (to her ultimate demise) or attaking the young couple, there is a quality about.  She actually reminds me a bit of Betty Davis here.  Smoky beauty with a hardened heart.

This biggest issue I think here is the movie is slow, even for the time I think.   I'd love to see a high quality remake with a modern cast. 

Next up. Dracula also had a son.

October Movie Reviews: Dracula 1931 (Spanish version)

For my October Reviews I am now moving to a real classic.

Continuing with my delving into the great 1931 Dracula, this time the Spanish language version.

Drácula (1931)

Drácula was a Spanish language version of the Tod Browning movie, filmed on the same set at night.  The effect was a much moodier look and tone to the movie.  If you can speak Spanish (and even if you can't) check this movie out.  It has everything that the English language has, but just seems so much cooler.
According to the audio commentary on Dracula and the documentary, Road to Dracula, the "B" team would film at night on the same set as Dracula.  The director would watch the "Dailies" from the Browning/Lugosi crew and cast and work to improve on them.  They also cleaved closer to that actual shooting script.
The differences are subtle, but still noticeable.  
This production for example seemed to learn from the mistakes of the previous day's shooting.  Also because the censors didn't care about the Spanish version, they got away with more sex appeal.  For example the dresses revealed more cleavage and Lupita Tovar's  performance as Eva (Mina) in general.
In the end this is a hard one to review since I don't speak Spanish and what I see is so close to the Bela Lugosi one that I instead look at them as a whole.  But I am glad I finally got to see it.  Carlos Villarias will never really get mentioned in the same breath as Bela Lugosi, save as a comparison, and his acting was not great.  But there is something about the roll that he also made his own; despite what looks and sounds like a Bela Lugosi impression. In Spanish.

If you are a Dracula fan then I think you need to see this at least once.

October Movie Reviews: Dracula 1931

For my October Reviews I am now moving to a real classic.

When watching these movies I try to keep in mind the time that they were made.  What we consider horror is not the same thing as 20, 50 or 80 years ago.  Every generation remakes the classics and leaves their imprint on them.  The 30's gave us two great examples.  Today, Dracula and tomorrow the Spanish language Drácula.


Dracula (1931) (and audio commentary and documentary)

This is the one that gave us Bela Lugosi as the immortal count.  Lugosi's performance is a bit over the top, but he does give us the suave Dracula.  Some scenes of this movie are so iconic that they have almost outlived the context they were presented in.  Dracula on the stairs in his castle is one, and the meeting of Dracula and Van Helsing in the library is another. Dracula spreading his cape like a bat, or heck even the cape at all.  Here is a question, did Dracula ever say "I never drink ... wine." in the book or play?  No.  That came from this movie and it also appeared in the 1979 and 1992 versions.  I also think, more so than the book or play before it this movie really personalized the battle between Dracula and Van Helsing.  Something that was taken to a new level in the Hammer films.

Lugosi got his start playing Dracula on the stage, something that Frank Langella would repeat almost 50 years later.  Though unlike Langella, he never quite escaped the roll.  For better or worse he has been so entwined with the roll that when watching the movie you should keep this in mind.  A lot of what we associate with the roll comes from right here.

Reinfield replaces Harker here in the begining, or rather they are combined into one character. Despite this Dwight Frye is a great Harker-like character. We do get a Harker later on.  The coach ride to Castle Dracula is very reminiscent of the similar ride in the 1992 movie.  Mina is Seward's daughter, again from the stage-play.

Audio Commentary:  Given that I have seen Dracula before, I wanted to watch this with the audio commentary on.  Things I didn't know:  They are speaking Hungarian in the movie.  There is a lot in this movie that never happened before in movies.  Some of the shots used here, which we take for granted, were new here.  Lon Chaney was supposed to be Dracula.
Listening to the audio commentary it is interesting,  a lot of what is now well known of Dracula lore came about by complete happenstance.  Dracula speaking in Eastern European accident came about because the director of Broadway play could not afford his first choice and he had to hire Bela Lugosi, who could barely speak English. For the movie Lugosi earned $3500.00 for 7 weeks of filming.

The Road to Dracula: A very interesting documentary on the making of Dracula and the Spanish language version.  It talks about a lot of the same things mentioned in the audio commentary, only in much greater detail.  We hear from film historians, Bela Lugosi's son and Clive Barker among others.  It's very cool.

October Movie Reviews: Nosferatu 1922

For my first of the October Reviews I want to start with a classic.

Now I have been huge Dracula fan for as long as I can recall, but the one thing about the mythos I hate is the desire to make Dracula a misunderstood or even worse a tragic hero. Now I get the desire to make him suave and sexy and even a desire to connect the mythical Dracula to the historical Vlad,  but lets get serious here.  This is Dracula, not Twilight.  He is a monster.  He killed Lucy, her mother, tried to kill Johnathan and Mina and pretty much everyone else in the book.

That being said you can see the evolution on the thoughts of the character by viewing him through the eyes of the popular films.

Nosferatu (1922)

The first major cinematic release.  If you have not seen this movie then put it on your Halloween must see list. This movie is silent, black and white and an absolutely a classic.  There are issues with the script, mostly due to the insistance of the Stoker estate.  So Dracula became Count Orlock; and Orlock is a monster.  He is rat-like, bald and devoid of anything that could be considered "sexy".  This is a good thing, I think.  The cinematography in this movie is fantastic.  The special effects are state of the art for the time and any time you see Dracula's shadow move without him you have this movie to thank.

The characters outside of Dracula/Orlock are not as good, of course some of that over acting was due to the medium and style of the time.  Like most of the movies there are characters are missing, though not as many as future movies.
The movie though remains a classic, not because of it's age, but because it is still quite good.

There is something very, well, German, about this film.  It's has enough angst to knock the perm right out of Edward Cullen's hair, but yet not overwrought.  Or at least a different overwrought.  This can be seen in the later re-interpretations Nosferatu (1979) and Shadow of the Vampire (2000).

Horror Movie Challenge

I am thinking of participating in the October Horror Movie Challenge from Krell Laboratories.

Thanks to Darius Whiteplume over at Adventures in Nerdliness for pointing this out.  I had already planned to go through all my "Dracula" movies in October anyway so I might as well get in on this action!

Here are the ones I am thinking of watching for starters.  Most I have seen, some I have not seen in years and a couple are completely new.

1. Nosferatu (1922) (F. W. Murnau/Max Shreck)

From the "Dracula Legacy Collection DVD"
2. Dracula (1931) (Tod Browning/Bela Lugosi)
3. Dracula (1931) - Spanish Version (George Melford/Carlos Villarías)
4. Dracula's Daughter (1936) (Lambert Hillyer/Gloria Holden)
5. Son of Dracula (1943) (Robert Siodmak/Lon Chaney, Jr.)
6. House of Dracula (1946) (Erle C. Kenton/John Carradine)

Then I want to get into the Hammer films.
7. Dracula, aka The Horror of Dracula (1958) (Terence Fisher/Christopher Lee & Peter Cushing)
8. Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968) (Freddie Francis/Christopher Lee)
9. Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970) (Peter Sasdy/Christopher Lee)
10. Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972) (Alan Gibson/Christopher Lee)
11. The Satanic Rites of Dracula (1973) (Christopher Lee/Christopher Lee & Peter Cushing) have not seen this one since it was out.

Then onto the "modern" re-tellings
12. Count Dracula (1970) (Jesus Franco/Christopher Lee) Though not a Hammer film, and if I can find it.
13. Dracula (1973) (Dan Curtis/Jack Palance) Yes. Jack Plance as Dracula. I have this on tape somewhere.
14. Count Dracula (1977) (Philip Saville/Louis Jourdan) started it once, but never finished it. Louis Jourdan was good.
15. Dracula (1979) (John Badham/Frank Langella)
16. Nosferatu the Vampyre (Werner Herzog/Klaus Kinski) have wanted to see this one for years and can never seem to catch it.
17. Dracula (1992) (Francis Ford Coppola/Gary Oldman)

Need 13 more films (which I can EASILY find).

I need a Dracula Chess set

“So be it that he has gone elsewhere. Good! It has given us opportunity to cry `check' in some ways in this chess game, which we play for the stake of human souls.”
 -Van Helsing in Bram Stoker’s Dracula

So I have started to re-read Dracula again.  Something I like to do every so often. Inevitably I get back to something I have always wanted, a Dracula themed chess set.
What I want is the Franklin Mint to come out with one so I can agonize about it for years and finally find one on eBay.  But to my knowledge they never have made one.  The closest I have seen is a Scooby-Doo chess set.  So I want something nice, a show-off piece.

So far it doesn't look like anything like this exists.  I have found one ancient blog posting about it, but that is it.
Plus, when it comes right down to it, I am not a chess junkie.  I enjoy the game. I know it's importance in the communities I frequent (education, psychology and gamers), but I don't play very often and when I do play I do it only causally.

But this is something I'd still like to have.
I would make it a traditional chess set (no alternate rules) and I have had the pieces in mind for years.
Black
King - Dracula (obviously)
Queen - Lucy in her vampire or "Bloufer lady" form.
Bishops - Dracula's other brides (yeah missing one)
Knights - his gypsy henchmen
Rooks - Castle Dracula
Pawns - Wolves (with bats maybe)

White
King - Van Helsing (again an obvious choice)
Queen  - Mina Harker
Queen's Bishop - Jonathan Harker
Kin's Bishop - Dr. Seward
Knights -  Quincey Morris and Arthur Holmwood
Rooks - Seward's Sanitarium
Pawns - Holmwood's dogs.

I like how these fill out honestly.  Though I do need a place for Reinfield.  Maybe as one of the black Knights

I might have enough D&D minis to do this with, at least on Dracula's side of things, but not really for Van Helsing's side.

I guess my search goes on.

.

Dracula: Big Eyes, Small Mouth 3.0

So if I am going to do Buffy, I should at least add one of the greatest vampires ever.
Dracula, in one form or another, has appeared in a number of anime.  So it seems natural to include him here.

This build is roughly based on the vampire build in the BESM 3.0 book and on my own Mutants and Masterminds version.

Dracula BESM 3.0

BODY 15
MIND 10
SOUL 14

HP: 145 ACV: 16
EP: 120 DCV: 14
SSV: 29 Dam: 5/9

Attributes Level Cost Notes
Attack Combat Mastery +3 ( +30)
Combat technique (brutal, critical strike, lethal blow, lighting reflexes) +4 (+8)
Defense Combat Mastery +1 (+10)
Features: Appearance +1 (+1)
Heightened Awareness +1 (+2)
Heightened Senses (hear, smell) +2 (+4)
Mind Control (humans, depletes) +2 (+13)
Mind Shield +3 (+6)
Resistance +1 (+2)
Regeneration +1 (+10)
Special Defense (ageing 2, disease 2, freezing water 2, freezing cold 2, lack of air 2, poison 1) +11 (+22)
Special Movement +2 (+4)
Super Strength +4 (+32)
Tough +1 (+2)
Weapon Fangs +2 (+3)

Skills Level (Cost) (Modern-day Occult setting)
Acrobatics +2 (+4)
Climbing +2 (+4)
Cultural Arts +3 (+9)
Disguise +1 (+2)
Etiquette +3 (+3)
Foreign Culture +3 (+3)
Languages +4 (+8) English, Latin, Romanian, Turkish, German
Occult +3 (+9)
Performing Arts +2 (+2)
Seduction +5 (+10)
Sleight of Hand +3 (+6)
Social Sciences +3 (+6)
Stealth +3 (+6)
Street sense +3 (+6)
Urban Tracking +2 (+4)
Wilderness Survival +1 (+1)
Writing +1 (+1)

Defects (Cost) Notes
Achilles’ Heel (Wooden weapons) (-2)
Bane Sunlight (-2)
Bane Mirrors (-2)

Notes: Can move about in the daylight, but is very weakened. When sleeping or in his crypt he appears to be completely dead. Dracula lies in his coffin with his eyes wide open and can see everything even in his torpor.

Dracula here is a vampire at the top of his game with 145 Health Points, the same I put Buffy at.  With these stats they would go toe to toe for a while.  Same as in Unisystem.  But for an Anime Vampire Lord I am thinking he should be a bit more powerful.  That at least is the one thing consistent in all the Anime version of Dracula I have seen; he is a complete bad ass.