Creating Fear: The Evolution of the Horror Genre in the 20th Century

Part 4 - Dracula 1931 Vs Bram Stoker’s Dracula 1992

So how have films changed over time and do they still use the same techniques and conventions to scare as films back in the 1930s? Of course, as I’ve already discussed, the history of the genre has been one of evolution affected by social change.

In this chapter I am going to compare the 1931 ‘Dracula’, which played a crucial part in establishing Universal’s reputation for horror films, with ‘Bram Stoker’s Dracula’ (1992) which was directed by Francis Ford Coppola. I have chosen these films as they are both based around the same novel by Bram Stoker and each film attempts to portray a vampire which is more true to the original novel. In terms of the 1931 ‘Dracula’, Hollywood audiences had never witnessed the vampire before, whereas in Coppola’s version, he attempts to introduce a more accurate vampire to the novel.

Also, by selecting these two films which were made at opposite ends of the century, we can see how conventions have changed, especially with regards to story, style, technology and social context.

The Origins of Dracula

On the 5th October 1927, the day before the sound-breaking ‘Jazz Singer’ (1927) was released, the Broadway version of ‘Dracula’ opened to the public. Adapted from the highly successful British production, which in turn was adapted from Bram Stoker’s novel, the theatre production, in three seasons (18 months) made over 2.5 million dollars. (Dunbar, 2000, p.55)

The original British production had been poorly received by critics but highly praised by audiences, and this alone was what first caught Carl Laemmle’s (the head of Universal) attention. Hollywood, at the time, was well known for adaptations of theatre productions and literature as, in the midst of a depression, it guaranteed an audience.

The American production made a number of key changes for its audiences. Firstly, it disposed of the character Quincey Morris. Secondly, it sharpened the conflict (and dialogue) between the evil Count Dracula and his nemesis, Doctor Van Helsing, and, thirdly, it changed its 1890s London setting to a modern, 1920s capital.

In 1930, Universal finally bought the rights to ‘Dracula’ for film with the intentions to write the screenplay based upon the novel. However, financial and time pressures forced the Studio to resort to using the American theatre production script.

This was not the only theatre connection that the 1931 ‘Dracula’ had. Originally, Lon Chaney was set to play The Count, yet his death in 1929 opened the role to Bela Lugosi, an unknown actor who had played the vampire in the Broadway production.

Chaney’s ability to play grotesques would have created a vampire that was closer to Stoker’s creation and less sympathetic to audiences, but a trick of fate allowed Bela Lugosi to repeat his stage role, influenced by silent stars, such as Rudolph Valentino. (Dunbar, 200, p.57)

Other cast members of the Broadway production, such as Edward Van Sloan, Herbert Bunston and Dwight Frye reprised their roles for the Universal film.

The Origins of Bram Stoker’s Dracula

For Coppola, ‘Bram Stoker’s Dracula’ was a commercial project to pay off debts he had occurred and show his critics and studio bosses that he could make a large, mainstream film on time and within budget.

Actress Winona Ryder brought Coppola a copy of James V Hart’s Dracula script as a possible future project. Coppola particularly liked the fact that the script kept very close to the novel, but felt that a compelling theme was needed to attract an audience who were tired and bored with the traditional Dracula image.

His hunt for a commercial success led him to cast an array of young, attractive, up-and-coming actors and actresses such as Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves. Anthony Hopkins, who had won awards for his portrayal of Hannibal Lecter in ‘The Silence of the Lambs’ (1991), was brought in to play Van Helsing. A commercially attractive actor, hoping to bring a critical respectability to the film, it was anticipated that his name alone would draw a wider audience.

The title role was given to actor Gary Oldman, who was renowned for portraying outsiders and dangerous characters such as Lee Harvey Oswald in Oliver Stone’s ‘JFK’ (1991) released the year before.

“My biggest problem was-You can’t just do it again,” (Landau, 1992, p.2).

With this in mind Coppola sought to make a highly stylized, non- realistic film that would appeal to a modern cinema audience. He also made one key change to the story and that was to give the film a historical context. They [Coppola and screenwriter Hart] decided to introduce elements of historical Dracula, Vlad Tepes, and when they discovered a story about his wife committing suicide in the mistaken belief that her husband had been killed by Turks they decided to use this as the basis of the film. (Dunbar, 2000, p60)

This new twist to the tale changes the story of a blood-sucking demon who stalks Mina to make her one of his brides, to an immortal human’s tragic love story as he searches and finds his beloved reincarnated wife in Mina.

Censorship

To begin to understand how these films deal with the story’s key issues we need to look at the censorship codes that were in operation at the time as well as key social factors.

The contrasting depiction of sex and violence marks these films as products of their particular times. For modern audiences, Tod Browning’s film can seem ‘tame’, although some would say that its understated depiction of sexuality is more effective for being so. (Dunbar, 2000, p.68)

In 1930 the MPPDA (Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America) introduced a code of ethics that clearly stated what was, and what wasn’t acceptable within American movies. Within the code scenes of explicit violence must be avoided and themes of sex and venereal diseases were strictly forbidden. Therefore, a story such as Dracula, with its issues of sex, disease and violent power, had to tackle these issues whilst avoiding breaking the code.

But, as so often happened in movies of this time, film-makers circumvented the code through symbolism and subtle allusions, situations and dialogue with hidden meanings. So when Mina announces that she is a ‘changed girl’ and feels wonderful, the sub-text is not hard to decipher. (Dunbar, 2000, p.68)

Editing techniques were also used to allow the film-makers to create horror by using a cause and effect edit between two scenes. This allows the audience to make comparisons and draw conclusions between the two scenes whilst suggesting horror without breaking the strict ethical codes.

For example, after Lucy is bitten as she sleeps by Dracula there is a dissolve to a hospital operating theatre where Lucy lies dead after a failed blood transfusion. (Dunbar, 2000, p.42)

In 1968 a rating system was introduced to America restricting young people from seeing certain films. This meant that Coppola’s version could make explicit connections between the novel’s themes as the film had been given an adult rating.

Social Context

It is not just the code of ethics and the rating system that has determined how the story of Dracula is told. As I’ve discussed in previous chapters, horror films reflect the audience’s own fears and this social element can be clearly seen in Stoker’s novel and both Dracula films.

Despite a hundred years difference between the novel and Coppola’s version, the social fears that the story manipulates have remained generally the same.

Both the novel and the films present a fear of foreigners and the loss of tradition in society. When the 1931 Dracula was produced, immigration in America was creating unease with regards to American unemployment (America was in a depression at the time) and communistic ideas.

In 1992 American citizen’s still feared the growing rise in immigration but also, due to international hostilities, the perceived increasing power and threat posed by Eastern Countries.

In 1995 a bill was introduced into the House of Representatives reducing legal immigration from 800,000 a year to 500,000. Many republicans did not support the bill, wanting all immigration stopped while there was unemployment in the United States. (Dunbar, 2000, p.72)

Seen as art imitating life, Coppola’s version has been connected to the representation of the first Gulf War (1990-91) with the characters of Morris, Harker and Van Helsing representing America, England and Western Europe, as they battle against the Eastern Menace of Saddam Hussein (Dracula). However, this is only circumstantial but could have been a key social fear that the film played upon.

The changing role of women in society is the other key social fear that the film manipulates.

The demand of female rights in the late 1800s is reflected in Stoker’s original novel whereas women’s new-found independence, attitude and equal voting rights becomes the social fear of the 1931 film. This sexual liberation and awakening is suggested through Dracula’s biting of the neck.

The emancipation of women was a threat to families, and males in general, and was caused in part by the influence of immigrants bringing in new ideas and morals to the United States. (Dunbar, 2000, p.71)

The 1992 version adapts its representation of women for modern society; strong, independent female characters who are repressed by a male-dominated world. Whereas in the 1931 Dracula, Mina and Lucy are passive, dominated victims, in Coppola’s version they are presented as strong, independent women who the audience can sympathise with. The stronger role of women can also be seen in the fact that Mina is the character who kills Dracula at the end of the film. Although the men unite together to confront the Count with violence (the resolution of Stoker’s novel and the 1931 film), it is Mina sacrificing her life that essentially kills him.

Dracula: The Monster

Bela Lugosi’s seductive Dracula in the 1931 version was not the creation of Bram Stoker, but that of Hamilton Deane the playwright of the British Dracula theatre production;

“Stoker’s Dracula is a hairy- palmed, hoary-headed old Tartar whose bad breath and pointed ears make him an unlikely seducer” (Dunbar, 2000, p.74).

The iconic public image of Dracula was first established in the Broadway play by Lugosi. The original idea of Stoker’s Dracula did not hold enough appeal to make the film a commercial success and, therefore, Universal chose the stage representation as it had been successful with theatre audiences and presumed to be equally as well received in film.

Coppola’s film, with the introduction of the love story, also needed Dracula to appeal and be sympathetic to its audience as well as remaining close to Stoker’s original description. Dracula therefore changes his physical appearance throughout the film, a repulsive, pale- skinned creature, a young attractive male and a decaying, Nosferatu-like monster.

Lugosi’s Dracula however does not physically alter (due to limited special effects technology) but instead emphasized the character’s charm, politeness and sexual appeal. Although, the 1931 Dracula plays down the aggressive, dangerousness of the monster, Lugosi’s icy stare alone presents a monster of hidden menace, in a way resembling the killers of Paranoid Horror.

Coppola’s Dracula takes advantage of the Vampire’s shape-changing ability to demonstrate his human and non-human nature and to create a sense of horror. However, it is Coppola’s Dracula’s human, sympathetic and complex anti-hero qualities that make this Count vulnerable and non-threatening.

Visuals and Sound

With regards to both films, expressionistic lighting is not overly used. German cinematographer Karl Freund’s expressionistic lighting style in the first act of the 1931 film establishes the world of Dracula with strong shadows and a sense of eeriness. His lighting style is lost in further acts due to the films dialogue-heavy internal scenes, which show the films theatrical origin.

The film has achieved classic status for good reason. It has some of the most sinister Gothic sets ever made. It has the suavely grim photography of Karl Freund. It has Edward Van Sloan playing Dr. Van Helsing and Dwight Frye as Renfield, laughing the most terrifying laugh ever recorded in movies. (Landau, 1992, p.169)

As I’ve discussed in previous chapters, sound is also a key factor that helps build a films atmosphere and tension for its audience. It is a common mis-belief that, with Dracula being the first talkie-horror, the sound techniques and conventions were the same as they are today. With the silent films (as discussed earlier in Chapter two) live music was played during the film’s showing to create mood and atmosphere but, more importantly, suspense and tension. The first talkies, such as Dracula, only used dialogue and sound effects, which, although lacking the creation of tension and suspense through music, gave the film an eerie, silent quality.

The use of only diegetic sound was not just because sound technology and music editing hadn’t evolved greatly, it was also because it was felt that it gave the films an edge of reality, a factor that the Mathematicians theory claimed (as discussed in part 1) was highly important to a good horror picture.

‘Bram Stoker’s Dracula’ (1992) on the other hand uses a powerful operatic-like score to create tension and drama as well as highlighting the growing intimacy between Dracula and his love and creating empathy for the Count.

Sound technology had also evolved in the 61 year gap between the two films and the 1992 version used a surround sound recording system to optimise the sound experience for its audience.

As I mentioned earlier, the 1931 film used editing techniques to avoid breaking censorship codes, but it also used editing (intercutting) to create tension for the audience;

“Browning utilizes this to show how Dracula is preying on Mina while the men discuss whether Dracula exists or not.” (Dunbar, 2000, p.38).

The intercutting (montage) technique can also be seen in Coppola’s film, a stylistic trademark of his that allows the audience to contrast and compare as well as serving to build tension.

In Bram Stoker’s Dracula Coppola again [referencing Coppola’s The Godfather (1972)], uses a wedding scene as part of a montage sequence to contrast the brutal attack on Lucy with Mina and Jonathan Harker’s wedding in Transylvania... it is obvious that the attack on Lucy is in retaliation for, and in frustration at, Mina’s wedding. (Dunbar, 2000, p43)

The biggest difference between both films is in the way that it is shot. For example, Browning’s 1931 Dracula uses close ups very rarely, shooting the majority of the film in long, medium, or medium close up. The majority of the few close ups used are of Dracula’s face with the lighting carefully used to highlight his hypnotic eyes. This is a perfect example of the limited technology of the day and standard directing.

The result is a film (referring to Universal’s Spanish version of Dracula [1931]) that unlike many of the foreign versions, which are very forgettable today, is actually superior on most technical levels to the Tod Browning film... There’s a myth that the camera in 1930... was immobilized behind the sound boxes and it really wasn’t the case and there is a tremendous fluidity of camera movement in Spanish Dracula. (David J Skal, Universal Horror, 2000)

Coppola however, embraces the advances in film technology, using a range of different shots (including a Point-of-View shot achieved by using a Steadicam), the use of blue screen, improved stunt co-ordination and editing techniques. Again, it was hoped that this style of film-making would appeal to a wider audience and break the conventional mould of a Dracula film.

Summary

Both films differ from each other greatly in origins, story, themes and stylistic look. The 1931 film keeps close to its theatrical background, in script, actors and settings. Its German expressionistic style and limited sound technology, with no background sound, gives the film an eerie yet impressive horror atmosphere in the first act, yet is rarely used for the majority of the rest of the film.

Although the film suffers at times from the strict ethical codes in place when the film was made, its subtle sexual and horror tone is expressed more visually through the great performance of Lugosi, whose stare alone gives Dracula an unforgettable air of menace.

The 1992 version of the film was made solely to be a commercial success and, for this alone, the film employs a range of different styles, techniques, themes and genres to appeal to a larger, much wider audience. With the introduction of the historical grounding of Dracula and the love story between himself and Mina, the mystery, menace and, in turn, the fear of the Dracula character vanishes. Dracula becomes too human and the audience is made to sympathise with him which destroys the monster’s threatening, repulsive nature.

Final Conclusion

In conclusion to my question of what techniques do horror films use in attempt to scare its audience, I have found myself being pulled heavily towards social factors that were present during the production of each film.

From exploring a definition of what a horror film is has led me to gain an understanding that horror’s key characteristic is to horrify, and it is this emotional intent that influences the films conventional techniques.

From my study it is clear that social fears play a crucial part in the development of horror stories and the monsters that plague these tales. Horror has always been a key genre in storytelling, and the reason why it has remained both popular and scary is its ability to reflect our cultures established (sometimes repressed) fears. This reflection of fear is captured in the stories, themes and of course the monsters themselves. The historical study has revealed that this reflection of social fear is present in all periods of the horror genre; Nuclear Horror being a clear reflection of America’s fears of communism and the fears reflected in ‘Psycho’ (1960) of the loss of safety and trust in society.

The monster’s qualities as suggested by Carroll (1990) seem to fit all monsters across the genre and across time. Even the monsters that Carroll’s theory wasn’t intended for (the human monsters of ‘Psycho’ [1960], ‘Halloween’ [1978] and ‘Scream’ [1996]) fit cleanly into his break down.

My close comparative analysis of ‘Dracula’ (1931) and ‘Bram Stoker’s Dracula’ (1992) demonstrates the importance of Carroll’s claim that a monster must be; a) repulsive, b) threatening, and c) possible.

As the Dracula comparative study shows, removing any one of these elements can lose the horror of a monster.

The mathematician’s formula, although subjective in terms of information, offers a number of visual and audio conventions that are often witnessed in horror. Although I have already claimed that horror can not be defined by its iconography, the genre does use a range of similar visual styles, locations and sound techniques.

These techniques, often used to create atmosphere, tension, suspense and drama were brought to Hollywood by the employment of many German and European Filmmakers after the First World War.

Their influence of style on the genre is clearly evident from the sudden stylistic change of ‘The Phantom of the Opera’ (1925). The historical study reveals that the style of horror from the 1920s to 1960 hasn’t changed drastically, with ‘Psycho’ using many visual techniques employed in silent film.

However, when we consider a film such as ‘Bram Stoker’s Dracula’ (1992) we begin to gain an understanding that modern day horror’s style varies more widely in order to appeal to a larger audience.

This would be an area worthy of further investigation, looking at the development of Paranoid Horror from the release of ‘Psycho’ (1960), through to the Slasher franchises of the 1980s and the deconstruction- parody films of the late 1990s.

Horror, as we have seen is an evolutionary genre and its retained popularity is due to its ability to reflect our current social fears and make us; “Scream, and Scream again” (Scream and Scream Again, 2000).