Dan Curtis' Dracula(1973)
Top Comments
All Comments (17)
-
Fucking Jack palance!!!! That face. That diction.
-
omg LMAO jack palance as draculaLOL talk about miscasting. now i have to see this if just for the laughs ahahhaa!
-
I WAS 12 YEARS OLD WHEN THIS MOIVE CAME OUT! AND I WATCHED THIS MOVIE WITH MY GIRL FRIEND AND WAS FUCKING HER FOR THE FIRST TIME ! IT WAS HOT!
-
are they kidding?!! Palance was TOO UGLY to be him and he looks like the crazy old drunk uncle the family PRAYS doesn't come to the reunion or wedding plus he overdid it.
-
I like Palance in the movie. His eyes didn't have that hypnotic stare Lugosi and Lee had (except when Lugosi squinted when moving in on Lucy in the 1931 film), but he portrays him as a monster but a tragic one as well without making the film sily in places like the 1992 version. He's not my favorite, but he's good and the movie is more accurate with the book. Van Helsing is kind of average in it. Nothing bad, but no Sloan, Cushing, or Olivier. Overall it's a pretty good adaptation.
-
This looks great, but Palance was the worst mis-casting since Marc Warren's Dracula, I'm not saying Jacks a bad actor cause the man can act, but he has the wrong face & voice, when the camera zoom's in too his eye's you can't see the wide eyed terror, just his small squinty eye's, it's a shame because it looks like a really good film with other good actors, what's Van Helsin' like in this?
-
@geinman1287 Palance’s portrayal was near equal to Lee’s, malevolent, fiery, visceral and terrifying!
-
Not a bad version, but they made Dracula too sympathetic. Obviously influenced too much by Dark Shadows. Palance was OK though.
This was the first Dracula movie i saw. Jack Palance was a great Dracula
GU5T4F 1 year ago 6
christopher lee is the world smost suitable dracula.....no doubt bout that
gokhale2000 1 year ago 3