Dracula in Istanbul (1953)

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Blistering performances.

Over the years, I have seen several incredibly campy Turkish films from the 1970s and 80s, such as knockoff versions of "Star Wars" and "Captain America". However, I've never seen an older Turkish film until I stumbled upon this version of "Dracula" (1953) floating about on YouTube. It does have subtitles but in some ways is much better than the newer films I've seen. Yes, the production values are at times very bad....but the acting is pretty good and the film does provide a few frights...and it's not as campy as the other films I mentioned. Now I am not saying it's good....but at least it's not terrible.The story is generally that which you'll see in other Dracula stories with only a few major exceptions. It's set in contemporary times and instead of Dracula buying a manor in England, this one decides to move to Istanbul--which makes a lot of sense considering there aren't that many crucifixes there to dissuade him (you see none in the film)! As for Drac himself, he's a weird looking one with teeth that go out at 45 degree angles--which makes you wonder HOW his bite can penetrate ANYTHING!! Predictably, when Drac begins sucking Sadan dry, her family bring in a Van Helsing-like old bearded guy to help them put a stop to all this.A few things to note. First, although this was filmed in a Muslim nation, it was at the time officially a secular state and seeing some of the women wearing very little still surprised me a bit. Second, the print on YouTube is in terrible condition and I have no idea how else to find this film with subtitles. Third, while the IMDb trivia section says the word 'vampire' does not appear in the film, it is in the English language subtitles and in many ways it stays very close to the original Bram Stoker novel. Overall, not even close to being a must-see film. The camera-work is often sketchy (especially on closeups), the 'castle' is an obvious painting and the entire production looks pretty cheap.

Atrocious picture quality made this one nearly unwatchable, with innumerable breaks in the film, some scenes are blown out almost completely white, (unintentional?) double exposures, and even visible fingerprints.This is another fairy faithful adaptation of Bram Stoker's original novel, but inept on all other departments, from bland acting, to its depiction of Dracula as nothing more than a bald old man, to uninspired directing, and no budget sets, which really look like someone's redressed cellar. The film looks nearly comical, like a (lame) William Castle flick.Perhaps I'll give this a second chance, if I can ever locate a better copy of it, otherwise, I would have a difficult time recommending this to even the biggest fan of Dracula, even Pakistani Dracula was an improvement.

It kept most of the characters of the novel accept they did change the names of the supporting characters for Turkish audiences. This is the first Dracula film to show Dracula climbing down the walls. The Mina character was given a different name and a dancing career. The male characters with the exception of Dracula were given a name change. The story takes place in the 1950's instead of the 1890's. Film starts out with the renamed Harker character being taken by a cab driver to the Borgo pass equivalent and picked up by the Count disguised as a coach driver. Then he goes to the castle where he meets Dracula who rather forcibly insists that he stays and he is almost attacked by Dracula's one wife (3 in the novel)and then Dracula intervenes. The one wife was used later on in the fine 1958 Hammer film with Christopher Lee.This version has its Whitby and Dracula's repeated vampiric attacks on the Lucy character. Lucy becomes a vampire is forced by the equivalents of Harker,Seward,Van Helsing,Holmwood and Morris down and staked. A real weird Renfield character and Lucy's Mother are also in this.I also appreciate that this version kept in the fact that Lucy was a brunette and Mina a blonde.The women are rather exotic. This is a wonderful version I liked it a lot better than the German versions of 1922 and 1979 called Nosferatu which also used Bremen and Weimar as locations for the Dracula story. The 1922 version of Dracula changed Dracula to Count Orlock, Harker becomes Hutter,Mina becomes Ellen and Lucy becomes Annie and Renfield Knock. The 1931 Spanish version of Dracula based on the Broadway play and the Stoker changed the Mina character's name to Eva. The 1980 Showtime TV teleplay Passion of Dracula with soap opera veteran Christopher Bernau as Dracula changed the Arthur character's name to Gordon.The 2002 Italian version with Patrick Bergen as Dracula changed the Van Helsing character's name. What I am getting at is this isn't the first time that characters in a Dracula movie have been given a name or location change. For any real fan of Dracula films this version is a keeper and enjoyable to watch. It is hard to find sometimes Ebay or Amazon will have it available. For fans who can't find it on either it can be viewed on You Tube in 11 parts. Come to think of it I don't think Romanians would be very fond of this version the real Dracula Prince Vlad Tepes Dracul was a Christian Romanian national Hero who hated and fought and protected his country from the invading Turks of the Ottoman empire. Dracula as a young man and royal hostage of the Turks picked up a few cruel torture habits from the Turks such as impalement which Drac used to full advantage.One minus about the film it isn't dubbed in English at least the version I have isn't but if one of you film lovers has a friend who is Turkish or is of Armenian,Bulgarian or Kurdish and is bilingual please ask them if they would translate this into English for you. Enjoy the film.

I must say I found this movie to be 'cok ilginc' (very interesting!) or verrrrry inetersting as the late, great Vincent Price may have said. I gave it a verrrrry generous 7 out of 10. It is clearly a virtual ripof of Tod Browning's "Dracula," and it does even measure up to Werner Herzog's remake of F.W. Murnau's German classic "Nosferatu." But,as a Turkish-American, I have to thank showtvnet.com for providing this interesting guilty pleasure (sorry no subtitles) which does drag at times, but considering this film was made almost 50 years ago when Turkish film standards were even lower than they were in the 'ala Turka cinema renaissance ' of the '70s (when enormous numbers of bad films were made left and right) this has to be viewed as a noble effort. Along with "SCream Blacula Scream,' and perhaps (I've never seen it) "Billy the Kid Meets Dracula," it has to be one of the more unusual takes on this much-filmed saga.