TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

Organnall Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

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

Beulah Bram A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

poe-48833 The thing that struck me most about Tod Browning's remake of London AFTER MIDNIGHT was the outstanding craftsmanship- in particular, the cinematography. The cinematography alone makes MARK OF THE VAMPIRE a must-see for Fright Film fans: it's beautiful and atmospheric and almost without peer in the genre- and Browning's direction here is even better than it was in Dracula, because MARK OF THE VAMPIRE lacks the stagey, often plodding pace that often slowed Dracula to a crawl. It would've been interesting to see a Big Screen version of VARNEY THE VAMPIRE directed by Browning; MARK OF THE VAMPIRE, like Dracula (the Novel as well as the Movie), owed more than a little to VARNEY, anyway. Lionel Atwill steals the show, here, as was his wont.

simeon_flake 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

jadzia92 Enjoyable vampire film with Bela Lugosi again playing a vampire after Dracula. Pretty easy going and what a twist towards the end of the film as not everything is not what it seems. The twist demonstrates that this is not the kind of vampire movie that one would normally expect. It is instead a plot line that is pivotal to what is truly been going on in the movie. It is rather interesting on when this movie was released in 1935 as noted by the DVD commentators. The commentators said that this was released at a time before World War II as no one was worrying about some guy called Hitler. Looking at this with the benefit of the passage of time since its release it certainly presents the innocence of the time prior to the horrors the world would see in a few years subsequent to its release. The performances were overall fine and Lugosi seems to enjoy playing another vampire whose name isn't Dracula. Definitely a good way to pass the time. An easy-going fluff.

utgard14 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.