dracula - Institution Notre-Dame Saint-Jean

DRACULA
LES ELEVES DE SECONDE 6 ONT COMPARE DEUX
VERSIONS DE DRACULA.
VOICI UN APERCU DE LEUR TRAVAIL
DIFFERENT REVIEWS COLLECTED FROM THE WORK OF THE PUPILS OF SECONDE 6
WHO SAW BOTH THE 1931 FILM VERSION AND THE PLAY IN BESANCON IN JANUARY
2013.
Amandine and Louise wrote:
“Dracula, the story of the vampire in Transylvania is known all over the world
thanks to the book of Bram Stocker adapted in several movies, plays and
musicals. We were lucky; we had the opportunity this year to see a movie and a
play realized by an English company. We had 2 different approaches of the
story, represented and played differently.
In the movie, the fog and the full moon which surround the castle of Dracula
give us an impression of mystery. When the camera is concentrated on the eyes
of Dracula we are in away hypnotized, attracted as well as frightened like his
victims.
The movie was shot in black and white, so the darkness is really present and
stresses the dark side of Dracula. The supernatural is also present to work with our
hearing, our feelings and impressions. Indeed the howling of wolves, the
beatings of bat wings, the doors creaking and the sinister voices of the
characters intrigue us and make the suspense even more credible.
In the movie, we can observe the attitude of the scientists towards superstitions
and the legends of vampires. Indeed, when M. Van Helsing announces that the
murders are committed by a vampire, the scientist completely refutes this
hypothesis because the existence of vampires was never proved scientifically
and because it is based only on faiths of populations of the eastern European
countries.”
Alexandre and Marwane wrote:
“At the beginning, the play looked mysterious… Renfield the narrator scared us
because he came behind us quickly and talked very loud: that was surprising.”
“At the beginning of the movie, we can feel the fear and the panic of the
inhabitants just when Mr. Renfield asks about the castle of Dracula. The black
and white film increases the feeling of fear.”
Lisa and Nasrine wrote:
“In the film the director used the close up on the eyes of Dracula to scare the
public. In the film and in the play, they used lots of sounds like the sound of bats
and the howling of the wolf and in both of them there was no music.
To conclude we would say, we found the film and the play both interesting and
amusing but we preferred the film, because the play was boring at times. But
we think it was a good experience to compare the two stories.”
Elisa and Louis wrote:
“What we liked best in the film were the characters and the atmosphere. In the
film, the characters were prodigious and especially the actor Bela Lugosi, Count
Dracula. Indeed, we think that the character of Count Dracula is the most
convincing because the actor performs so well. He is both fascinating and
terrifying by the strength of his eyes which are piercing or even cruel. He is an
eerie and charismatic character. His commanding height, seductive demeanor
and odd verbal cadences perfectly embody a sense of an immortal character.
On the other hand, in the play, the character of Dracula is less frightening, less
charismatic than Bela Lugosi. Concerning the atmosphere: it is much eerier in
the film than in the play, the lighting effects are used to change the scene and
moreover to make the transition between the cell of Mr.Renfield and the story.
In the film, the eerie atmosphere gives you the chills. The morbid and finally
deafening silence in each scene makes a heavy atmosphere.”
Solene and Ludivine wrote:
“In the film, there is no music except when Dracula is listening to a concert
because the director wanted to make the general atmosphere of the film more
frightening, gloomy.
In conclusion, we didn’t like this film because we don’t like horror movies and
suspense. We prefer comedies because they are fun, there’s love and the story
often ends well.”
Clément and Lucie wrote:
“The film is full of suspense; thanks to the absence of music and sound effects
which concentrate the viewer's attention on the image. We can observe closeups that emphasize the tragic moments and focus on the characters' feelings.
The places are strange, there are dark colors. The film is fantastic, unreal unlike
the play which is a comedy. We hear noises but unlike the film, the suspense is
little present, and almost due to the characters moving in the room. The film
created more tension in the viewer than the play because here it relied more on
comedy and it plays on our unbridled imagination by the suggestion.
The film gives us a sense of fear with all the doors that open only when Dracula
transformsand the reflection of the mirror (or its lack) and the crucifix which acts
as a repellent .It contributes to create a fantastic atmosphere and a scary film.
We found the crucifix again in the play. This has no impact on the viewer.
There is a proof of the depth of the film: there are two scientists. One of them, Dr.
Seward is a Cartesian psychiatrist who rather rejects superstitions and does not
obviously believe in vampires. Another doctor, Van Helsing, a vampire hunter
uses scientific means in his fight and that "the superstitions of yesterday may be
the scientific realities of tomorrow".
Luka and Louis wrote:
“I prefer the film because it is scary at times, because it’s a very dark picture.
There is a gothic atmosphere. There is no background music. During the film, the
doctor says that vampires do not exist, that there is a scientific reason. They are
often close-ups because it’s scarier; we can see the face of the characters, their
psychology, the fear, the pain, the anxiety. It’s not very violent.
The play is both difficult and easy to understand because it’s easy to see the
movement of the character. The play is much less scary; it was not gothic and
not dark because it was more humoristic than the movie. Science is not very
present.”
Camille and Apolline wrote:
“I didn't like the play all that much. It wasn't very scary either.
The only thing that scared me was when at one moment, MrRenfield
came up behind us and yelled “boo!”
The casting was very good but I think a logical part was missing.
Some played more than one part and I believe that, because of that,
I didn't understand well.”
Not everything is shown in the film to make our imagination run. Contrary to the
play, in the movie we do not see the teeth of Dracula. The shots in the movie
have in a lot of importance. There are close-ups to show the feelings of the
persons, the feelings of the characters have a lot of importance in the movie
and thanks to them we can better feel dread, fear or terror.
I didn’t like the movie because it is in black and white. The suspense is bad. The
movie isn’t realistic. It was not scary. No music, the movie was too calm.”
Anaïs and Marine wrote:
“In the film and the play, the suspense is built to scare, to intrigue the viewer. It
may be noted that it is constructed in relation to two senses: hearing and sight.
In the film of Tod Browning, the sound of bats, wolves, the creaking of the doors,
are there to scare us. The fog, darkness, candles, blood are present to give an
atmosphere that is not reassuring, which is terrifying. In the room, our hearing is
stimulated also from sounds of bats and wolves. The sight is stimulated by
obscurity, real candles in the play and the acting.
The play is scarier than the film because you really feel like part of the scene; we
are interacting with the characters at any time they can surprise us and frighten
us.
In the play, there are less supernatural elements because there were no special
effects even though we really feel that bats are beside us as we hear the
beating of their wings and the atmosphere is oppressive. “