Mark of the Vampire (1935)
Sir Borotyn, a prominent Prague resident, is discovered murdered in his home, with all indications pointing to a vampire assault. The victim's friend, Baron Otto, and the physician who analyzes the body are certain that the vampire is the mysterious Count Mora, or perhaps his daughter, but receive little help from the law. Professor Zelen, an expert in the occult, is called in to assist with the investigation.
Watch Trailer
Cast
Similar titles
Reviews
How sad is this?
I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.
One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.
It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.
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.
Well--if all the classic horror books I've read over the years are true--then "Mark of the Vampire" takes its source material from Lon Chaney's lost film "London After Midnight." And that may be where the biggest problem with this film comes from. I don't think I'm giving anything away from a movie this old--but the plot twist that Bela and Carol's characters are not "actual" vampires, but rather paid actors in some half baked plot to expose the real killer of the film is very disappointing for an old school horror fan like me.In fact, if you're one who is viewing this primarily for the presence of Lugosi, then you can't help but feel let down--this is more like one of Bela's "red herring" roles where he was cast more for his name value on the marquee. Of course, all the actors are fine in their roles, but why this film had to dodge "real" vampires--particularly in the wake of Bela's success about 4 years earlier as the "real Count Dracula" for Universal Pictures is beyond me. Overall, I would say it's not a terrible film by any means, but not one I may revisit for many repeat viewings.5 stars
"Count" Bela (as I call him) is as good in this film as any of his other vampire films. Carroll Borland is outstanding - her trance-like state in the film is hypnotizing for the viewer to watch.The overall look and feel to the movie is dark and creepy while the story is suspenseful. Very good older horror film.If you have never watched this particular film I won't ruin it for you but I can tell you it's not what you would expect in the end - there is a twist and a mystery solved.Great late night movie if you want a different kind of vampire story.8.5/10
Sir Karrel Borotyn is found dead with two punctures on his neck and drained of all his blood. A professor (Lionel Barrymore) and a police inspector (Lionel Atwill) investigate and all evidence points to vampires. Now it looks like Sir Karrel's daughter (Elizabeth Allan) is being targeted by the blood suckers.Director Tod Browning's remake of his now-lost film "London After Midnight." In the original, Lon Chaney played multiple parts. Here his roles are divided among Lionel Barrymore, Bela Lugosi, and Lionel Atwill. Lots of horror fans dislike this one because they feel the ending is a cheat. I thought the ending was great, though it might not hold up on closer scrutiny of certain previous scenes. The entire movie plays out more like a murder mystery with horror overtones rather than a straight horror film, so I didn't feel cheated at all. It's beautifully shot by James Wong Howe. The cast is great. Lugosi barely says anything but is a menacing presence in a Draculaesque role. Carol Borland is sufficiently creepy as his "daughter." Definitely a keeper.