Was Christopher Lee an effective Dracula in the Hammer films

[LadySoth]

I've heard a lot of horror movie fans always talk about how "good" Christopher Lee was as Dracula in the Hammer Horror films. Now I love Christopher Lee in most everything he does, but after seeing 3 of the films, ( "The Horror of Dracula", "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" and "Dracula Prince of Darkness") I don't think these films were the best vehicle for him. In most of these films (at least in these 3), Dracula rarely makes an appearance, and when he does, Lee's lines mostly consist of "ARRRRRGGGGGG" or hissing, but very little dialogue. This seems like a waste of great talent, as Christopher is a great actor who can obviously play a number of roles well. So I was wondering what other people thought about Lee in these films, and why people continue to point to Lee as "the best Dracula" ever, and regard these films as classic. I think these films are a lot of fun, but very cheesy . . . So what do you guys think?

EDIT: I also want to add that I don't think Lee himself is to blame for a lackluster script or poor direction on these films. I think he had a lot of potential to be a great Dracula, however maybe he wasn't given the best direction in these films.

[ScS of the Fraternity]

I don't understand why he wouldn't make a good dracula.

I mean come on! He has a whole army of orcs at his disposal. He even managed to beat up Ian McKellen; and that guy has freaky magnetism powers.
I even have it on good authority that Lee has jedi powers. Of course, he might not be able to feed on people if he's already forced choked them.

Seriously though, I'm from the Coppola - "Bram Stoker's Dracula" era. Its hard to reconcile the same guy from Horror Express and Creeping Flesh with Dracula. Lee kind of exuded a sinister power, but didn't seem to be the kind to let base hunger drive his existance.

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

Yeah, I was a bit perplexed too with Satanic Rites... Barely a Dracula movie at all. But after seeing Scars of Dracula and Horror of Dracula I kinda "get it" a bit more. Despite the starring title role, Dracula's the bad guy in these, not a romantic antihero. Barely a character, more like a boogeyman. It's all about his presence, not his acting, per se. And Lee has presence like few other actors ever had. My vote is yes.

[JinnTolser]

I don't know what they were thinking with Satanic Rites either. Honestly, just reading the description on the back of the DVD case, the only way it could possibly be any good was in that "so bad it's good" sort of way.

As far as not having much dialogue, Lee isn't the only Dracula to have that. How many lines did Bela Lugosi have in Dracula? It's been quite a few years since I last saw it, but from what I remember, he had two or three lines and a bunch of reaction shots. And yet he was a great Dracula. So why is it any different with Christopher Lee?

[Ken of Ghastria]

Christopher Lee was a terrific Dracula. I'm just sorry your opinion was tainted by Satanic Rites, which was crap, crap, crap along with nearly everything else from the twilight days of Hammer Films.

If you want to see the quintessential Hammer movie, rent out or buy Dracula Has Risen From the Grave. It's Lee's third Dracula film. Is it Hammer's or Lee's best movie? Nope, definitely not, but it sums up everything that made Hammer great in the late '50 and '60s: gorgeous cinematography, solid directing and acting (mostly), lots of blood, and bodacious women. (Lee would understandably bemoan the fact that Hammer often placed more emphasis on the last two items!)

However, I'm still mystified by the decision of several directors (notably Terrence Fisher, who directed Horror of Dracula and Dracula, Prince of Darkness) to limit or even eliminate Dracula's dialogue. Lee has such a great voice that it's inconceivable that a good director or screenwriter wouldn't want to take advantage of that. Apparently, they thought that Dracula should be more of an animalistic force of nature than a being. (And that spectacular scene in Horror of Dracula where Lee bursts in, eyes and mouth full of blood, plays up to that.) Certainly, Lee would've liked more dialogue. Unfortunately, by the time he DID get some dialogue as Dracula, it was in the aforementioned craptacular Satanic Rites.

Clearly, I'm a big Lee fan. I did a blog post not too long ago about him and Dracula. It's because of Chris Lee and Hammer Films that I became a fan of Ravenloft.

[Brandi]

However, I'm still mystified by the decision of several directors (notably Terrence Fisher, who directed Horror of Dracula and Dracula, Prince of Darkness) to limit or even eliminate Dracula's dialogue.

Lee has gone on record as saying he did not like the dialogue in Prince of Darkness and refused to say it! He probably was not much happier with the dialogue in the sequels...

[LadySoth]

I don't know what they were thinking with Satanic Rites either. Honestly, just reading the description on the back of the DVD case, the only way it could possibly be any good was in that "so bad it's good" sort of way./

no its not even good in that way LOL

As far as not having much dialogue, Lee isn't the only Dracula to have that. How many lines did Bela Lugosi have in Dracula? It's been quite a few years since I last saw it, but from what I remember, he had two or three lines and a bunch of reaction shots. And yet he was a great Dracula. So why is it any different with Christopher Lee?

While Lugosi had a number of reaction shots, he also had at least 4 scenes of really good, solid dialogue. He had the authentic accent and odd line delivery when speaking and the hypnotic mannerisms and darkly handsome looks for the reaction shots. In the words of film critic David J. Skal: "He taught everybody how a vampire was supposed to look [and] how a vampire was supposed to act." While Lugosi's Dracula physically did not resemble Stoker's original creation very closely, his line delivery in those key dialogue scenes (particularly the theater scene) hinted at some of the deeper pathos Stoker's original character possessed in scenes from the novel. In my opinion, that made him a good Dracula, even thought the original film was marred by sloppy direction, cinematography and an arguably cheesy script.

In some of the physical seduction/neck biting scenes, Lee does a bit of this as well, stroking Mina's face before he actually bites her etc. And I agree Ken's post that said the shot of him bursting into the room is spectacular. I will have to check out "Scars of Dracula" and some of the other movies recommended here and then reevaluate my opinion of Lee as Dracula. Thanks everyone for the suggestions!

[Brandi]

Scars is a pretty ill-regarded Hammer Dracula (and not without reason), though you can get a laugh from seeing one of Benny Hill's regular cast members (Bob Todd) in the opening. It also has the worst fake bats since the Monogram Studios pictures of the 1940s.

Horror of Dracula is probably the best, with Prince of Darkness not too far behind. I've also heard Taste the Blood of Dracula is pretty good but I haven't had a chance to see it yet.

PS to Ken: apparently obsessedwithfilm.com doesn't like you hotlinking.

[Ken of Ghastria]

Yeah, Scars is pretty weak. I hated the scripts where Dracula, Lord of Vampires, is outwitted by college kids. Uck.

PS to Ken: apparently obsessedwithfilm.com doesn't like you hotlinking.

Da noive! Here's a different link to that image.

[Brandi]

I will give Scars credit for one thing, though: they actually had the Count make one pretty smart move. (attempt to spoiler-color text below)

He put his coffin in a sealed room that was only accessible from a window on the outside of the castle-- easy for him to get at when he can climb walls, but not so easy for most folks.

[LadySoth]

If you want to see the quintessential Hammer movie, rent out or buy Dracula Has Risen From the Grave. It's Lee's third Dracula film. Is it Hammer's or Lee's best movie? Nope, definitely not, but it sums up everything that made Hammer great in the late '50 and '60s: gorgeous cinematography, solid directing and acting (mostly), lots of blood, and bodacious women. (Lee would understandably bemoan the fact that Hammer often placed more emphasis on the last two items!)

Just finishing watching this one today. It started off kind of slow, but I think its the best of the Lee Draculas I've seen so far. I liked the supporting cast and thought the love story between the romantic leads was believable, and most importantly, I actually wanted the "good guys" to win at the end of this one.

In "Dracula has risen from the grave" Lee plays Dracula as a complete bastard who will do anything he needs/wants to do to survive. There was an utter ruthlessness there, even while there were some of those tender moments like I mentioned earlier: almost like even if Dracula wanted to, he couldn't change the way he is, because it is his nature to bring ruin and corruption to everything he touches, and he obviously doesn't want to change. So even while he is tender to the character of Maria before he bites her throat, and while he desires her companionship over the other village wenches, that still doesn't preclude him from ordering her around and getting physically violent when he doesn't get his way. I think in this film, Lee "got" what Stoker was going for in his novel: at the end of this film, I had absolutely no compassion for Dracula whatsoever, and I was actually rooting for the hero, which in most other Dracula films doesn't happen. So while he is still not my favorite Dracula, I think that after seeing this film, I can understand a little better why so many people like Lee as Dracula. Thanks everyone for the comments and suggestions. I am still trying to find "Scars" and some of the other films mentioned.

Clearly, I'm a big Lee fan. I did a blog post not too long ago about him and Dracula. It's because of Chris Lee and Hammer Films that I became a fan of Ravenloft.

I've always been a big fan of Christopher Lee as well. He's a great talent, and has a beautiful voice. I love some of the music he's done with Italian metal band Rhapsody.

BTW, your story of how you became a fan of Ravenloft through Christopher Lee I thought would be the start of a great thread. Posted Here: http://www.fraternityofshadows.com/foru ... php?t=6518

[LadySoth]

Yeah, I was a bit perplexed too with Satanic Rites... Barely a Dracula movie at all. But after seeing Scars of Dracula and Horror of Dracula I kinda "get it" a bit more. Despite the starring title role, Dracula's the bad guy in these, not a romantic antihero. Barely a character, more like a boogeyman. It's all about his presence, not his acting, per se. And Lee has presence like few other actors ever had. My vote is yes.

I completely agree with you on this. After seeing "Dracula has Risen From the Grave" I felt the same way, like I mentioned above. Sorry for double post, but I was unsure how to quote two separate posts in one single entry.