Dracula's Daughter/Son of Dracula

Location: Home » video » General » Dracula's Daughter/Son of Dracula

Similar Items:

•	Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man / House of Frankenstein
•	Son of Frankenstein / The Ghost of Frankenstein
•	Werewolf of London / She-Wolf of London
•	The Mummy's Hand/The Mummy's Tomb
•	The Mummy's Ghost/The Mummy's Curse

Editorial Reviews:

Amazon.com
Dracula's Daughter This cut-rate sequel to Dracula, sans Bela Lugosi, turns out to be an unexpectedly sleek and stylish movie. Gloria Holden, tall, dark, and continental, is the aristocratic title character fighting her nature and seeking a cure for her affliction. A sympathetic psychiatrist, Dr. Garth (Otto Kruger), encourages her to "face her fears," but when she lures a pretty young streetwalker to her room to model for a painting, the temptation of her fleshy offering proves too much to overcome. Edward Van Sloan reprises his role as Van Helsing, held by the police for the murder of Count Dracula (the film opens on the final scene from Dracula) but released in the nick of time to help Garth, now at the mercy of the bitter and vindictive vampire. Director Lambert Hillyer makes the most of his low budget, with austere, angular sets and an almost abstract sense of the foggy city night. Holden's mysterious face and tall, willowy body make her an even more striking vampire than Lugosi, and Irving Pichel's offbeat servant is like an American gangster with the breeding of a European aristocrat: thick and thuggish, but always proper. The script falls into the usual rut of Universal's later horror films, losing the mood in the busy plot, but the smooth style and Holden's dignified performance lift Dracula's Daughter above most Universal sequels.

Son of Dracula It was perhaps inevitable that, after playing the Wolf Man, Frankenstein's monster, and the Mummy, Lon Chaney Jr. would round out his horror resume with a turn at the great bloodsucker himself (not, as the title would suggest, his son). Looking dapper and dignified under the cape, if not exactly threatening, Chaney plays Count Alucard (that's Dracula spelled backwards), a mysterious Carpathian summoned to America by a "morbid" heiress (Louise Allbritton). Eric Taylor's script is rather clunky, but the story (by horror specialist Curt The Wolfman Siodmak) is often quite clever, playing like a supernatural twist on a psycho-thriller. Allbritton's frustrated fiance Robert Page accidentally "kills" her while trying to shoot Alucard (who imperiously stands up to the hail of bullets) and then goes stark raving mad as he watches the dead rise to life and the living disappear in wisps of smoke and morph into creaky stage bats.

Future film noir legend (and Curt's brother) Robert Siodmak (The Killers) does wonders with the swampy, misty Deep South setting despite his obviously threadbare budget, transforming the usual cliches into moments of inspired melodrama. Only the clumsy antics of the skeptical cops and the plodding exposition spouted by an old Carpathian doctor (he just happens to be the local MD) get in the way of this moody minor horror gem. --Sean Axmaker

Customer Reviews: Read 12 more reviews...

4 out of 5 stars

More Worthwhile Than You Might Expect! July 19, 2008
10 out of 10 found this review helpful

Well no, there's nothing on the level of "Bride of Frankenstein" contained in this collection, but these movies aren't as awful as they might sound. Sure, Universal was a factory back in the day, pumping out sequels without any real concern for the content. Still, there's some very good stuff to be found here.

Dracula's Daughter is, in my opinion, the weaker of the two Dracula sequels. Perhaps it's just too much of a departure from the original premise, featuring an almost likable vampire who enlists the aid of a psychiatrist to cure her of her blood addiction. There's little development in plot or character, no honest progression from point A to point B. Still, the acting and directing are both adequate, and Marguerite Churchill (Janet) really steals the show as the goofy, vivacious love interest who speaks her mind and cuts her over-serious boss down to size whenever she gets the chance. Add to that a truly unusual premise (even when it fails to deliver much), and some incredibly sexually charged subtext, particularly when the Countess abducts a young woman under the false pretense of having the girl "model" for her. This is one odd-ball film, full of concepts, sexual issues, and gender politics that were way ahead of its time. Not a great film in and of itself, but it certainly deserves a viewing.

Son of Dracula is a much stronger film in contrast. It comes dangerously close to being an incredibly impressive film, with stunning special effects (we actually SEE Dracula transform into a bat, as well as turn into vapor), an incredibly complex, emotionally charged plot, and some breath-taking acting (particularly from Robert Paige and Louise Allbritton). Unfortunately, there are two things that prevent the film from achieving greatness. The first is most certainly Lon Chaney Jr., assuming the role of Lord Alucard (Dracula backwards). Chaney never seems comfortable in the cloak, portraying a weirdness that is too subtle and unfocused for the role he is attempting to undertake. He's never an impressive character, neither as monster nor villain.

Perhaps the bigger problem with Son of Dracula is the camera work. Director Robert Siodmak is clearly a master of the technical aspects of directing. Movement and camera angles are almost always highly impressive, as well as smooth and unimposing upon the film. However, in a picture that contains such strong elements of passion, desperation, fear, insanity, and (of course) the supernatural, the camera always resists these forces, maintaining a stubbornly grounded and literal perception of the scene. The film always feels too realistic, unwilling to surrender to escapism, never daring to achieve something artistic and powerful. This is particularly disappointing in the final scene, which could have easily been immortalized as the greatest, most moving moment in Universal Monster Movie history had it been shot differently.

All in all, Dracula's Daughter and Son of Dracula are both worthwhile sequels that hold their own merit. While I would probably never watch Dracula's Daughter a second time, the first time viewing experience was certainly worthwhile. In contrast, I expect to return to Son of Dracula again and again. It's almost a brilliant film, and "almost brilliant" is still good enough for me.

4 out of 5 stars

DRAC'S BACK........WELL ALMOST! MORE UNIVERSAL FUN! September 27, 2007
8 out of 9 found this review helpful

Here are two more films from the Universal vault. They are surprisingly good considering Bela Lugosi isn't in either of them. The first one is 'Draucla's Daughter' which is a pretty good film and much more serious than the title sounds. The second feature is 'Son of Dracula' of course, Drac had to have a son too. This one is not quite as good as the other, but, it's good all the same. Both of these films are far less silly than some of the later Frankenstein films....maybe not as fun though. The DVD transfer is very good and you can find both of these films on the Dracula legacy set.

4 out of 5 stars

the Siblings of Dracula October 1, 2001
7 out of 7 found this review helpful

This DVD puts together Drac's two offspring, "Dracula's Daughter" and the "Son of Dracula" (although it IS Dracula, not his son. Oh well).

These two films often wind up low on fans' lists of favorite Universal Monster Movies, and are dismissed as second rate. I beg to differ- these two are actually some of the more original films made by Universal. Especially "Son", where Dracula is not the prime mover- one of his victims is! The story has some very interesting twists and turns, and is one of the most clever of the Universal Monster movies.

Much is made of Lon Chaney Jr's portrayal of Dracula as a well fed and burly vampire. True, but he also brings a brute quality to the vampire. This is one vamp who is a dangerous adversary physically, if not mentally.

A nice addition to anyone's horror collection.

4 out of 5 stars Monster Mash (Redux) January 18, 2002
7 out of 9 found this review helpful

Everybody knows that Universal went from producing some of the most stylish monster flicks of all times (in the '30s) to producing some of the dumbest and cheapest (in the '40s). "Dracula's Daughter" inhabits some weird boundary zone in between. It's actually a rather dull story, filmed on the cheap, but enlivened by the performances of its actors and an underlying plot subtext that can only be described as lesbian vampirism. It still has enough of the grand Universal style of the 1930s to merit an occasional viewing. "Son of Dracula," on the other hand, is '40s Universal schlock at its campiest, and quite enjoyable as camp. Lon Chaney, Jr., is a very beefy Count Dracula. (OK, OK, "Alucard" as he's known in the film. When I was about 10, I thought that was the height of clever chic.) In this flick, he's menacing the American South which, given the date of the film, is almost completely populated by people who were rejected by the WWII draft for some reason or other. Not exactly juicy pickings for a vampire you might say, and you'd be right. Somehow it works as a movie plot, certainly better than the plots of any of those truly dreadful Frankenstein and Mummy spin-offs that the studio seemed to crank out every other month during the war. Anyway, I like vampire movies where the "hero" gets the girl, and the Count succeeds here beyond his wildest dreams only to have the girl (by now Undead) turn on him in a neat plot twist that proves that somebody working on this movie had a real imagination. It doesn't bear a lot of analysis, but, hey, that's pretty much the point about horror films. If you take them seriously, "well, I warned you ....".

4 out of 5 stars Dracula sequels still have bite!! September 21, 2001
6 out of 8 found this review helpful

Once again, Universal Pictures have released another double feature DVD: DRACULA'S DAUGHTER and SON OF DRACULA. The first film is a direct sequel to the original Bela Lugosi classic, in which his sinister daughter (Gloria Holden) carries on his dreaded legacy. The film begins with the arrest of Professor Van Helsing (Edward Van Sloan repeating his classic role) for the "murder" of the count!! Only Van Helsing's friend, Dr. Garth, played by Otto Kruger can help him. The twist in this story is that Holden's vampire WANTS to be cured of her bloodlust as she seeks Garth's help. The cast is solid in this stylish thriller. Van Sloan is his usual rational self as the vampire hunter. Kruger adds warmth and a little humor to his rather typical role as the hero. Holden's cool beauty is put to great advantage in her title role. In the other feature, SON OF DRACULA, the mysterious Count Alucard (read the name backwards, folks)comes to the American South to seek out "new blood," so to speak. He enlists the beautiful owner of a local plantation, played by Louise Allbritton, to aid in his nafarious plot. Caught in the middle is the owner's fiancee, played by Robert Paige. Lon Chaney, Jr. plays the sinister vampire. While he is a little too well-fed for an undead monster, Chaney does have his effective moments and conveys the physical power of Dracula. Ms. Allbritton is wonderful as the fascinated beauty who flirts with the undeath that Drac brings. Scream queen Evelyn Ankers is unfortunately wasted in the minor role of Allbritton's sister. The film does move a bit awkwardly at times, but there are many effective moments including an eerie scene in which Dracula rides his coffin across a fog-enshrouded swamp. Overall, both films are fun, fast, and filled with their share of old-fashioned chills. Highly recommeded for horror film fans.

Powered by Associate-O-Matic

T-shirts, Posters

Pentagram T-shirts, bags, etc...

Gothic Posters

Antique Map Reproductions

Che Guevara shirts
and accessories