Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: World Dracula Day
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 07:00:55 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 127
Message-ID: <v34o2n$k8mn$2@dont-email.me>
References: <784230795.738410383.969226.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
 <865152017.738528406.707825.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
 <v32qor$70p0$1@dont-email.me>
 <2067644534.738578156.750235.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 16:00:55 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c93165480a052258e62723602774e1d0";
	logging-data="664279"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Acp6Cxd1ncED4HQYsSHS2qMZBcU/4WBk="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:warmL/xKXUWnMbeiL44xq1nHd6A=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <2067644534.738578156.750235.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
Bytes: 6305

On 5/28/2024 2:13 AM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>> On 5/27/2024 12:22 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>> anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> May 26, in honor of the publication of the original novel.
>>>>
>>>> What will you watch to celebrate?
>>>>
>>>> I’ve got the Dan Curtis/Jack Palance version going right now with music
>>>> from dark shadows. It’s a pretty good and a pretty faithful adaptation.
>>>>
>>>> Available on the Peacock, it’s a good copy in 16:9 with the ads front
>>>> loaded so it runs uninterrupted.
>>>>
>>>> Next up, I found the excellent 1977 Louis Jourdon version on the gray.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> Louis Jorudan played Dracula?!?  Why am I only just now hearing about this?
>>
>>> Asking the DVR to show me movies with Dracula in the title return 120 hits!
>>>
>>> I tried to watch the animated Batman and Dracula, but it was far too poorly
>>> made.
>>>
>>> Same notation for the 1992 Coppola version.
>>> I hadn’t suffered through it since opening night in the theater. I was
>>> laughing at the massive ineptitude and cringing at the parent intentional
>>> stupidity. What a terrible terrible movie at every level.
>>>
>>
>> I saw this in the theater back in 92 and at the time thought to myself
>> this is not a good movie.  But I was just a preteen and all the
>> professional critics seemed to insist the movie was great.  So I figured
>> what do I know, it must be good.  And over the years I've grown to not
>> mind watching it.
> 
> I tried and failed. It’s easily deserving of an MST3K or Riff tracks
> version. I could watch it with the viewing accomplice where we could point
> the screen and hold at  the ineptitude. But there’s no way I could watch it
> by myself and suffer in silence.
> 
> 
>>
>>>  From the writing (“he went to face a hoard from which he might never
>>> return!” Wait, what?) To the acting to the laughable costumes (red plastic
>>> kabuki armor? Really?) To Mike Magnola’s idiot, giant penis castles.
>>>
>>> I remember being incensed at them, trying to sell it as a faithful version
>>> and all the movie reviewers who are too stupid to read buying into it. Much
>>> of it is stolen from the Jack Palance version and some from the Louis
>>> Jordan version as well.
>>>
>>
>> Never saw a Jack Palance version either.
> 
> Worth it, especially if you are a fan of dark shadows. It plays very much
> like a remake of house of dark shadows.
> 
> I haven’t seen it in decades, but I recall the Jack Palance version of Dr.
> Jekyll and Mr. Hyde to be worth watching as well.
> 
> 
>>
>>> The one thing all these films have in common is that they get the year it
>>> takes place wrong.
>>>
>>> Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein gave me both my black-and-white and
>>> my Bela Lugosi as Dracula fixes.
>>>
>>> DRACULA, 2000
>>> “The first Dracula movie of the 21st-century! The first Dracula movie of
>>> the new millennium!“ Screamed the advertisements!
>>>
>>
>> Shout Factory just released a new blu-ray with a 2K restoration of the
>> print.  I haven't picked it up yet, but I plan on getting it in time for
>> a Dracula movie marathon in the near future.
> 
> Hopefully that’s the source I was watching.  Only one of the reviews on
> Amazon is for the shout factory version but it raves about it and says
> there’s lots of bonus stuff as well. Supposedly this is a 4K transfer, but
> it only seems to be available at 1080.
> 
>>


It's only on blu-ray.  But Shout just loves to release blu-rays with new 
scans then a year or two after I buy it suddenly come out with a new 4K 
disc.  I have been burned by them so many times!  At this point I'm 
reluctant to buy blu-rays from them and just wait for the 4K disc.  That 
being said, I have the old blu-ray and I know the picture quality on 
that is garbage.  So if I want to watch it again, and I do, I'm probably 
going to break down and get their new blu-ray.


>>
>>> Idiots.
>>>
>>> I like this movie. And it’s the first time I’ve ever seen it in the correct
>>> aspect ratio all the way through! They usually run just the titles
>>> widescreen and then zoom in for the movie itself.
>>>
>>> And, Jennifer Esposito at her very hottest!
>>>
>>> The were an incredible number of mashup offered to me (Bonnie and Clyde
>>> meet Dracula?) But none of them were free.
>>>
>>
>> According to my great aunt either Clyde or I think members of Clyde's
>> gang are distant relatives.  I saw a picture of him dressed like a
>> gangster straight out of a Hollywood movie.  I really should read up on
>> them at some point.
> 
> No better place to start
> 
> https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1117379/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk
> 
> The reviews savage it, but the sex and nudity rating is “severe“ so it’s
> got that going for it
> 
> IMDb says it’s free on the Tubi
> 


For some reason I was thinking this was an old movie from the 60s or 
70s.  Tubi?  Ugh.