Blacula is beautiful, Frankenstein is ugly

I believe that the universe conspires to distract me from my coursework. I don't think I've ever had a term paper due when the new issue of The Wittenburg Door hasn't appeared in the mailbox.

In this case it was a bag of DVDs left on my porch by misteroblivious. But they were a welcome distraction after wading knee-deep in philosophy for the last week. In fact, they just may have kept my brain from overheating.

Thursday evening I snuck in a viewing of Blacula. Don't let the title fool you. This film is a quite effective shocker with an above average script, only let down by the limitations of its low budget here and there. I couldn't help but compare it to another attempt at contemporizing the vampire legend, Dracula AD 1972. Even though my loyalty to Hammer Films is legendary, I have to say the nod for better picture goes to this blaxplotation effort by American International Pictures. Watch it and you'll agree: That's one strange dude!

Last night I watched the fifth film in Hammer's Frankenstein saga. For the uninitiated, the Hammer movies differed from the old Universal Pictures by following Doctor Frankenstein through a series of adventures -- not his more famous monster.

I guess its appropriate that the Doctor this late in the series has become more of a monster than any of his creations. Peter Cushing plays the part with a sinister edge that was mostly missing in the other films. Sure, the mad doctor was always willing to do horrendous things for the greater good of science, but this film finds him ruining people's lives with sadistic glee. It's not a great film, but it is an interesting twist on the Frankenstein theme -- you'll find yourself rooting for the monster! I watched it during a wicked thunderstorm which added to the fun!