Everyone talks about how technically superior the Spanish Dracula film is, but to be honest, I find the stillness and stiltedness of the cinematography of the English version to be more unsettling for the most part. The English version also had better performances, at least from Lugosi, Frye, and Van Sloan.

One nitpick: “The Mummy” predates “The Invisible Man” by one year, not the other way around. (And real monster kids love “Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein.” But thanks for the video.)

The narration on this video explains why we are still fascinated and indeed still watching these characters almost 90 years later and others will be watching then in another 90 years. Great video!

the mummy was released one year before the invisible man the the correct chronological order would be:Dracula,Frankenstein,the mummy, the invisible man,The wolf man and the creature from the black lagoon. Great video!

Impressive and entertaining work and an ambitious project to boot. No idea why the popularity of your channel hasn't exploded yet! But you sure have found a subscriber in me.

Though Lugosi would bring his own unique nuances to the Dracula character, the overall presentation of the character as a suave attractive aristocrat dressed in evening attire and cape belongs to Hamilton Deane who adapted the novel into a play. Deane realized early on that to adapt Dracula as depicted in the novel was impossible - especially on a shoe string budget. He adopted the now familiar physical tropes for budgetary reasons solely and not artistic. Just goes to show that some of the greatest creative inspirations are bred through monetary adversity.

Its good to see a young man like yourself enjoying these movies Charlie. I would think for most people your age this movie and especially Dracula would move to slowly. When I look at new films I notice the scene changes every 2 seconds. There is constant movement the film is never static, Which I think is sad. good job well done

Mary would have hated the first official look of Frankenstein in that film.

i love the classic movies so much

2 Of The GREATEST Horror Movies EVER.

Great review. You do some of the best film reviews on youtube and every time one of your videos pops up I pounce on it. Only wish the content was uploaded a bit more regularly

Funny how it was Universal that created the shared universe and yet have recently failed in establishing a new shared universe to go against the now famed MCU,huh??

Am I the only person that likes Frankenstein meets the wolfman? It kept the tragedy that made the first few so effective and it was just a good movie.

The Original Dark Universe, the first Cinematic universe before MCU. Am I right?

your reviews are really, really good! deserve way more views

I'm glad there are people like you. Thank you for your insightful commentaries. They're very enjoyable.

Way back in 1963,there were assembly kits so kids could,"make their own monsters."I remember kits of the Phantom of the Opera, Dracula, Frankenstein, the Mummy,the Wolf Man and the Creature from the Black Lagoon. The next year I read more about the old time monster movies in a paperback with old articles from the magazine,"Famous Monsters of Filmland."

Love your commentaries on films!

Cool, new videos! Love your series man

Wow. I could not have put it so eloquently myself. love your video. 🦇

I’m a tad bit late to finding this video, but this was fantastic! I‘m definitely gonna check out your channel!

Universal Classic Monsters are for ever cool.

If you can find it, there is a Universal telegram that states "Do not, repeat, DO NOT hire Bela Lugosi for Dracula." I don't why, but it seems here that Universal had a dislike for Lugosi. They hired Lugosi because of time constraints. Time to begin shooting vs who'd play the lead. Lugosi even took a substantial pay cut to play Dracula. Universal, now loving Lugosi, offered him Frankenstein. He refused because he was offered the first script which had him playing a Golem type of monster. Universal had just declaired him the new "man of a thousand faces," Lon Chaney's title. Now refusing it, the studio began this dislike of him. But this gave us a new script and a new director, that of James Whale. His script offered a more sensitive and sensational monster. Lugosi was right to turn down his offered script. It would've been interesting to have seen him play the monster first and not in the later movies. The studio did not appreciate the talents of Lugosi and what uses they could portrayed him in their horror films.

I had the opportunity to watch Dracula and Frankenstein back to back and was surprised how much better Frankenstein is. Whale's film is better photographed, edited, acted, and actually has a score. With the exception of the lead actors' performance, the Spanish language Dracula is head and shoulders better than Browning's effort.

Such a masterpiece of a video I’m subscribed! I can tell how much do you enjoy cinema, Film and movies as a whole and as a nostalgic piece of art. I’ve been a movie buff for a long time and having a jailbroken Amazon fire stick I watch everything from movies from the 1930s up to modern films . It makes a lot easier to be a fan of Cinema! Get your popcorn ready guys 🍿 🎥 🎞

awesome vid bro

Great video!

I love the series! Pls keep on with this awesome work

Exellent doc. Thank you.

The way I see it, if we’re still talking about it even after 80 years, don’t question it just enjoy it

Excellent work. Very good job! I just suscribed.

Recently rewatched Dracula and was astounded at how inferior I thought it was to Nosferatu. Dracula has serious editing issues and pacing problems as well as an ending that defies suspension of disbelief (Dracula decides to just take a nap while running from his enemies and is subsequently killed). Nosferatu tells a better story and, I think, is genuinely scarier.

Watch Dracula closely, the background has cardboard pieces blocking out certain lamps, odd angles, someone on the set said that sometimes no one was behind the camera, it's obvious that the whole making of that Dracula was looked down upon by the movie industry people, until it blew up at the boxoffice and suddenly a great more attention to detail was put into these creature movies, funny how things change.

Hey man, put your Patreon and other links in the description! I know it's at the end, but a lot of people will never make it to the end of the video, as unfortunate as that is it is also true. Plus if you catch someones attention they may want to know more but forget by the time they stop watching.

I like your literate and probing approach towards Universal's early horror mythology You researched your topic very well How different the history of horror and fantastic films would have been if Chaney Sr had survived Would Chaney have opted for a LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT type of bloodsucker in his version of DRACULA? We can only guess Another what if- Conrad Veidt was being groomed as the next " big " horror star after Chaney and just before Lugosi Veidt was offered DRACULA but turned it down (because of his less than perfect English?) I have been curious if Veidt had accepted the role would he haved opted for a Nosferatu type of Dracula or the suave yet deadly Lugosi type?

Beautiful presentation..watching 103121..Halloween usa...thanks!!

It's funny how Universal is the oldest movie franchise of all time & that today they failed at creating a cinematic universe when they created the 1st ever cinematic universe.

Nice.

Does anybody remember gill man from the ocean man music video?

Universal Horror is about the Tragedy of Monster.

Dracula 🧛‍♂️ is 90 now Update: So is Frankenstein 🧟‍♂️

Yes, for some one so young you know more than l do & im 58, & have studied them for most my life. Do you write it? Because who ever does did there homework. Awesome.

Thank you Bella lagosi

Make sure u all c Young Frankenstein!

great man ....Divine

Nice video, but you didn't mention Werewolf of London 1935. Also as far as the Dark Universe, starting with The Mummy and being female at that was not a good way to reboot the franchise. If they're going to make a dark universe work, the monsters have to look like their 1930's and 40's counterparts. Dracula has to look like Bela Lugosi. Frankenstein the monster has to look like Glenn Strange, a'la Abbott and Costello. That's the ultimate iconic Frankenstein look. So on and so forth. But werewolves can be of two types: The Henry Hull type and he Lon Chaney type.

you're the man

Cant wait for a clockwork orange

You can see a dead person in a mirror. So Dracula would have a reflection. Dracula would have to make himself invisible for him to have no reflection in a mirror.

You have the greatest sense of humor lol.

Check out Noel Carol, e.g. "Why Horror"

Excelente

The Mummy came first, the Invisible Man in 1933.

Back in the days where Hollywood movies were worthy to watch

They tried a bunch of actors for the role of Dracula, they didn't want lagosi, they thought his heavy accent and little English would hurt, they ended up conceding to lagosi for pennies, all other cast got way more than lagosi, funny happenstance.

I absolutely love horror classics, but there is something about the endings of the movies that I still dont like fully. On the oposite the hole movies are a masterpiece, specially for the time.

I would argue the 2 groups would have to pre mid 70s and post mid 70s.

my name is, Dadacuula

If this is supposed to be about Dracula then why does the thumbnail use a picture from Mark of the Vampire?

0:06 isn’t that the count from Sesame Street

Or coocoo nest

Are you living in Japan? This think so. Do tell.

Great video!! Keep it up!! Can you please check out our recent we know that you will love it!

I like waffles

Who else thinks Nosferatu is better than Dracula?

As an Englishman, why on earth do you say LABORATORY the stupid American way Labbra-tory instead of the correct English way LabORatory ? No excuse ! Take a hundred lines, that Boy !

Thats NOT a photo of Bela Lugosi as Dracula. Its Lugosi in MGM's 'Mark of The Vampire'