Such a frustrating disappointment

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

A tiny village in Czechoslovakia is terrorized by a madman running through the streets sucking their victims dry of blood, and the doctor in charge of the investigation leads a series of radical events intended to drive the murderer out of hiding and stop the bloody rampage.This here was a pretty disappointing although still watchable effort. One of the few watchable areas here is the film's rather fine Gothic sensibilities which are rather in keeping with the general tone at the time as these scenes here give this one some rather exciting and chilling moments. The scenes at the castle are rather chilling as the two descend the stairs in such grand fashion where the dusty, cobweb-filled space which looks amazing as their eeriness walking through completes the scene, the group searching the underground crypts for their hiding spot is rather creepy going through the tombs finding the other bodies and being forced to leave them there gives this a highly chilling sequence and the big reveal at the end in the castle's main hallway where they play out the fruition of a rather ingenious plan makes for quite a great time here as the setting is put to great use here. As well, the other few attack scenes here to take advantage of the Gothic atmosphere as the fine scenes of the vampires coming after them in their house by sneaking into the hallways or confronting them in their rooms offers up some really enjoyable moments while the shots of them hulking about in the village countryside makes for some pretty chilling scenes overall here. As well, the other really good aspect here is the concept of the actual twist within this one as there's something to be said for what it aspires to do here. These few issues here are what makes it watchable and enjoyable to hold off the few minor flaws here. Among the big problems here is the fact that this one is really much too short to really get going with anything as there's barely anything here with the vampire. That this one tends to forsake a lot of the the true horror elements potentially found here in this story to instead go for a rather large amount of exposition towards unspoiling the whole twist to the others around the town which holds the pacing down. That also highlights the films' other big flaw in this where the way this one manages to undo itself with the twist here coming into direct contradiction to what happens in the rest of the film as being able to really believe that twist hurts the storyline here and really takes several scenes out of context here in order to make it work. There's little thought to how letting that play out affect the rest of the movie, and with the pacing issues here is what holds this one down.Today's Rating/PG: Mild Violence.

It seems that after the controversy of FREAKS, Tod Browning decided to play it safe with this film, unfortunately. What could have been an interesting little shocker is marred by a seen-it-all-before feel which comes from the fact that most of the action and events occurring are very similar to ones already portrayed in Dracula. Let's face it, this film offers up little in the way of originality, apart from a twist ending. However, if you're a fan of classic '30s horror then this film is still worth watching for some spooky moments where characters stumble through a misty graveyard and are pursued by those big, flapping rubber bats of which Universal were so fond. Otherwise it's a simple drawing room melodrama with lots of people arguing and not exactly doing much. The same old vampire folklore is gone over again adding to the sense of déjà vu.One of the film's big pluses is the excellent cast. Not one, not two, but three notable actors team up for this little flick and give it their all in over the top performances. Lionel Barrymore really gets his teeth into the role of Professor Zelen, an excitable fellow who rants about vampires non-stop until you think he's going to have a heart attack. Lionel Atwill also turns up as a gruff police inspector, essentially playing his powerful, brooding role which he always played - great! And one of the biggest names of all, Bela Lugosi, turns up in a cameo role as a mock-vampire who walks about occasionally but spends most of the time off screen! At least we get a classic Lugosi one-liner at the end of the film which almost made it all worth it. Also check out Carroll Borland's turn as a well spooky vampire girl who spouts giant bat wings in one hallucinogenic scene.Okay, so MARK OF THE VAMPIRE's real strength lies in its cast, but some real atmosphere and a sense of foreboding evil is built up with the vampires lurking about outside in the darkness. Added to this the classic cobwebby sets (which have all manner of creatures, from cockroaches to spiders to rodents running about) and lots of melodrama and you have a nice little '30s filler which doesn't amount to much but remains enjoyable throughout its short running time.

Films and stories with a twist at the end can be risky. If they get it right ('The Sixth Sense' and 'The Others', for example), audiences will be thrilled and eager to watch the production again to look for clues as to the denouement. Other ventures, such as this one, has proved to leave audiences feeling betrayed and reticent to re-view such a tremendous build-up, knowing that the final revelation is such a colossal let-down.By 1935, director Tod Browning's career was floundering. Three years earlier, his 'Freaks' production met with a disastrous reception for one reason and another. Here, he returned to more familiar ground, reuniting with Bela Lugosi (whom he directed in the ground-breaking 'Dracula' in 1931) in a remake of Browning's 'London After Midnight' (1927).What might have made the build-up even better would have been if MGM hadn't cut out nearly 15 minutes from its original version. Amongst the material cut was the story of Count Mora (Lugosi) and his incestuous relationship with daughter Luna (Caroll Borland), his subsequent killing of them both (explaining the bloodshot he sports on his temple throughout) and how he was condemned to spend eternity as a vampire.What we have left is one of the most beautiful horror films ever made. Languid, steeped in atmosphere, meticulous in detail, sumptuously played (Lionel Barrymore's Professor has been criticised by some, but for me is a perfectly judged creepy performance) and seductively directed. The murder victim is played by Holmes Herbert, (an actor curiously denied enough credit for his many horror roles) and it is his murderer Baron Otto (Jean Hersholt) who is the subject of a colossal hoax upon which the 'twist' hinges. Apart from the twist being unreasonable on many levels, Otto is hypnotised into a confession at the end anyway, rendering the hiring of actors to create the whole scenario pointless.Such a huge shame. Everything else is so good, from the grotesque hag being frightened by a bat at the beginning, to Luna's spectacular (but briefly featured) flight on outsize wings (a scene that took many takes to perfect), there is a rich sense of eeriness throughout. Lugosi plays his second vampire film silent (except for his brief dialogue at the end, as the actor PLAYING the vampire), which was (probably unintentionally) mirrored by Sir Christopher Lee's second outing as Dracula in 1965, which was also without dialogue.

When a nobleman is murdered, a professor (Lionel Barrymore) of the occult blames vampires; but not all is what it seems.This film started out as a remake of Tod Browning's silent film "London at Midnight" (which has unfortunately since been lost in a fire). Following his time making "Dracula", it seems only natural that Browning would cast Bela Lugosi as the Count in this film. Perhaps this gives the impression this is connected to Dracula (it is not) or perhaps it helped typecast Lugosi, but it was the right casting choice.The cast is rounded out with the two great Lionels: Lionel Atwill and Lionel Barrymore, as well as the striking Carroll Borland as the Count's daughter. Borland had previously appeared with Lugosi in a stage production of "Dracula" and was thus a natural fit. Her look in this film allegedly inspired the look of Lily Munster, as well as Vampira in "Plan 9 From Outer Space" (though this is disputed).Apparently between its creation and the form it takes today, twenty minutes were cut from the film that suggested themes of incest, suicide and some class humor. As this footage is no longer in existence, it is hard to know exactly how true this is and how subtle such themes were.Although no one denies the strong acting, interesting plot and solid direction, the film has got something of a bad rap over the years because of a particular twist in the plot (which shall remain unrevealed in this write-up). Is the criticism fair? Not really. Although it may not go in the way fans wish or expect, one can hardly deny Browning's clever turn on an already familiar genre.As a special note, it should be pointed out that the script was written (at least in part) by Guy Endore. Although Endore does not have strong name recognition today, he was instrumental in popularizing horror films in the 1930s, both with this film and "Mad Love", not to mention his werewolf novel "The Werewolf of Paris" (1933), which predated Universal's "The Wolf Man" (1941).