What is a great movie? Part Three: Who would vote for evil?

(This post is third in a series of which the total number is as yet unknown. We warn you in advance that it will not be appreciated by all -- we certainly do not wish to offend anyone, but our mission is clear and we bravely march ahead. That is our way.)

Let us examine the final minutes of Dracula, A.D. 1972, directed, appropriately, in 1972, by Alan Gibson, for the esteemed Hammer Studios of the United Kingdom:



Quite clearly, this clip has something for everyone: drama, excitement, lust, even a backstory, as indicated by the flashback. Horror fans are treated to a suitably gory dispatch of our villain, admirers of 70s film scores will thrill to the "hip" score, and adolescent boys of all ages will be suitably excited by the enormous breasts that menace Dracula throughout. Most importantly, it features Good (impeccably represented by Peter Cushing as Van Helsing -- he and his astonishing cheekbones are so good that he even seeks to cover the breasts at the end, although not, admittedly, before copping a feel) versus Evil (that tower of darkness Christopher Lee, here in his eighth turn as the Count), and that eternal conflict seems to satisfy all of us -- yes?

This is undeniably one of the weaker entries in Hammer's series, certainly not a patch on their first Dracula (1958, Terence Fisher), and hardly helped by its attempts to update the series (that score, for instance). Yet it is good fun, and we here at DHAIP are not ashamed to say that we would choose it, or even just this clip, over Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings series any day.

Lord of the Rings parts one through three, which also feature Mr. Lee, although in a less rewarding part, deal very strongly with good versus evil. In fact it may be said that they deal with nothing else. Their message, roughly, is as follows: Evil is wrong, and must be resisted, no matter how difficult that proves to be. This message also lies at the heart of Dracula, A.D. 1972, which did not, by our estimates, require 300 million dollars and six months of CGI work to make. (Digitally speaking, those breasts were quite real.) Mr. Alan Gibson was able to pull off the feat for considerably less, and to our mind a great deal more efficiently and entertainingly. DA 1972 runs a mere 96 minutes, as compared to nine hours in the theater, and far, far more on the DVD, for LOTR.

Yet not only millions of viewers, but a surprising number of critics laud The Lord of the Rings as being great films. Even those critics who have lashed out at the Star Wars sequels have gone on to state, almost grudgingly, as if their hands have been forced by genius, that Mr. Jackson's achievement is one of lasting greatness. Certainly it is a technical marvel, but few are claiming immortality for Independence Day or The Day After Tomorrow, both quite accomplished in that direction. That alone cannot suffice. The acting is generally quite competent, although the dialogue the actors have been given is no more poetic, or profound, than that employed in a fairly intelligent high-school Dungeons & Dragons session. The musical score has the subtlety of a falling walrus -- there is no subtlety on display anywhere.

Its strengths, it would seem, lie in the boldly primary. We have asked admirers of the films to explain their appeal, beyond that CGI. Their answer, inevitably, is the theme: Good and Evil. The two qualities are extremely easy to recognize, since evil is as ugly as sin itself and Good, for most of the films, wears a white cloak. The one chance at deceptiveness on this score, the treacherous Saruman the white, is played by the aforementioned Mr. Lee -- one might as well attach signs to his chest saying DO NOT TRUST and BADNESS WAITING TO HAPPEN. Dracula at least was sexy, in his bloodshot way. But who would be seduced into joining the side of the orcs, trolls, balrogs, and the now-octogenarian former vampire? Who would vote for evil?

Has film anything really to tell us on this subject? Are we prone to forget that evil exists, and thus need constant reminding? Are, then, the Lord of the Rings films, like the Star Wars series, with its light and dark sides of the Force, or the Dracula movies, or the Omen movies or the Raiders et al, et al, no more than fire-and-brimstone evangelism? Are the advancing armies of the Fellowship in the films' finale truly Christian Warriors? And if so, how many times can we relive Paradise Lost?

Mass culture, even the godless mass culture of the movie industry, is forever trapped in the Biblical: a peculiar blend of Christ symbolism, violence, and the body-worship of Riefenstahl. The Christ who exhorted "Resist not an evildoer" has transformed into the Muscular Jesus of George Lucas, Tolkien and Frank Miller -- be He small as a hobbit or as dark as Batman or as toned as Schwarzenegger, by His signs you shall know him, the Real Superman:





"And now tell me why you always use that expression 'good men'? Is that what you call everybody?"
"Yes, everybody," answered the prisoner. "There are no evil people on earth."
"That is news to me," answered Pilate with a laugh. "But perhaps I am too ignorant of life."

--The Master and Margarita, Mikhail Bulgakov