SPOILER DISCUSSION

1.The best gags are definitely the one involving the idea of inviting a vampire “in”, and the rug-bit with Dracula at Renfield’s apartment is legitimately one of the funniest moments of the film, perfectly playing in line with the comedic sensibilities of the film while poking fun at both the self-help nature of Renfield’s domestic improvements and vampire lore in general. The joke gets an extended bit when Dracula intervenes and comes to the group itself due to its inviting nature.

I only wish the gag was extended in a clever manner throughout the film. If anything, another textual refrain like the one that popped up defining a “familiar” would’ve helped set-up the punchline a bit better and made the form of the film much cleaner by setting up the film more as a comedic commentary on the rules and decorum of vampire lore.

2. In an attempt to explain the formal fumbling that the film finds itself at odds with, I’ve chosen to examine the manner in which it utilizes its non-diegetic musical tracks. This is less an indict of the film and more an exploration of the way it squanders possibilities at utilizing its style in a heftier fashion.

There are three such uses of music: first, when Renfield starts his own life and begins to decorate his apartment; second, when Rebecca and Renfield take down the Lobos’ goons; third, when Renfield and Rebecca begin to destroy Dracula and separate his body in such a manner as to render his regeneration futile.

The first sequence plays like a poppy montage and is filled with energy that very clearly demonstrates the catharsis that Renfield feels now that he can move forward in life. The use of split-screen and intriguing transitions reinforces the way he now controls his own space and can reinvent himself in a fun and creative manner. This maneuver seemingly ties the use of song to the idea of freedom which is accentuated by the editing choices.

However, the second sequence’s use of music stops at being a punch-line for the running ska joke and feels like a waste because it takes away the impact of the way the music is utilized in the previous section. Using a similar track to the initial fight sequence in the bar would have been preferable (although given the film’s dedication to the ska bit, it’s hard to see fault this moment for its commitment and my criticism, though predicated on the formal mishaps of the moment, are also due in part to my own boredom and lack of amusement with the bit in end of itself).

Then, the third sequence calls-back to the first sequence in the way that it ties the use of non-diegetic music to the idea of freedom; Renfield is finally taking responsibility and doing away with the evil undermining his life. Yet, opposed to the initial sequence’s energetic montage, this sequence is shot far plainer. If McKay had opted to go for split-screens (which would’ve been perfect given the numerous ways the characters deal with Dracula’s body), the idea of Renfield taking charge of his own life through the (de) construction of that which holds him back (Dracula) would be more pronounced and would formally tie the use of non-diegetic music to this feeling of freedom.

In other words, the initial musical montage feels like it was attempting to formally set something up even if that something was relatively simple (the manner in which Renfield finds and asserts his identity and freedom through reconstruction), but the latter two uses of music feel more commonplace and don’t reinforce the initial set-up in a way that make it more poignant.

It’s not that the filmic grammar of this first sequence is incorrect or improper, but the lack of repetition in the application of its stylistic decisions prevents the scene from being anything more than intriguing in the moment. Unfortunately, this formal imbalance feels endemic to the film, plaguing multiple stylistic choices (especially those employed in the opening monologue), and rendering them entertaining instead of something grander.