Rating: 
Summary: 4 stars because its universal horror
Review: bottom line-draculas daughter stinks....son of dracula brings back late sat. nite 60's fright shows. if you love universal horror buy it-if not that big a fan...buy the wolfman, its the best
Rating: 
Summary: So Many Draculas
Review: Dracula's Daughter, staring Gloria Holden, is the first sequel to Bela Lugosi's Dracula. The movie starts with the final scenes from Dracula, where Edward Van Sloan continues in the Van Helsing role (he is arrested for the murders of Dracula and Renfield). As Dracula's daughter, she is condemned to be a vampire but wants to be free. She seeks the help from a psychologist, Otto Kruger, that advises her that she must confront her problem if she wants to be free.
In Son of Dracula, Lon Chaney Jr. plays Count Alucard; Dracula spelled backwards, the second sequel to Bela Lugosi's Dracula (after Dracula's Daughter). Alucard is set on establishing himself, out of Transylvania and into Louisiana, by marrying the daughter of an upper-class family. He proceeds by turning his new wife into a vampire. Lon looks at ease in his role, has a cool moustache, transform to a bat, and moves as a puff of smoke.
Rating:
Summary: Monster Mash (Redux)
Review: 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 ....".
Rating: 
Summary: One sequel to be enjoyed, the other to be endured
Review: Here you have the first two sequels to Universal's classic 1931 masterpiece Dracula; these two films could not be more different. Dracula's Daughter is a surprisingly original and thought-provoking film, beginning where the original Dracula film stopped but going in a direction all its own. Son of Dracula, on the other hand, has nothing to do with either of the two previous films apart from the name of Dracula, and the only threat posed by Lon Chaney, Jr., in the role of Count Alucard (that's Dracula backwards, a subterfuge that gives you a pretty good idea of the lack of intellect of Chaney's Dracula) is his supernatural ability to bore audiences to tears with his impossibly bland performance.Dracula's Daughter presents us with the interesting proposition of Dracula's vampiric daughter longing to be freed of the curse that afflicts her. With Dracula's death at the hands of Van Helsing, she seeks to free her mind from the influence of her nefarious father, actively seeking the aid of psychiatrist Dr. Garth (Otto Kruger), who just happens to be a former student of Van Helsing and the one man Van Helsing has called upon to help defend himself from the charge of murdering Count Dracula. Countess Marya Zaleska (Gloria Holden) carries herself well and exudes a persona of aristocratic bearing and silent danger as she fights in vain to break away from the reality of her undead inheritance. This film eventually takes us all the way back to Dracula's Castle in Transylvania and leaves the viewer with the sense that he/she has seen a worthwhile and surprisingly stimulating vampire film. Son of Dracula, on the other hand, leaves the viewer with a sense of disappointment and disdain (which only manifests itself when the viewer actually awakens from the sleep-inducing stupor of the whole experience). Not only is Lon Chaney, Jr., in his role as Count Alucard given a convoluted, boring script in which to work, he proves himself incapable of generating one ounce of spark from his performance. Lon Chaney, Sr., may have been the studio's first choice to play Dracula back in 1931, but Chaney, Jr., is hopelessly unconvincing as 1943's Son of Dracula. Viewers are treated to several (too many, actually) special effects shots of Alucard transforming himself to or from his bat form, and it soon becomes apparent that the fake vampire bat has more presence and personality than Chaney, Jr. musters up in the vampire's human form. Both films are worth watching, if for no other reason than the fact that they are, after all, classic Universal "monster" films. Dracula's Daughter is an interesting, enjoyably original type of film; some people even find Son of Dracula appealing - for reasons I can't possibly comprehend. The only good thing I can say about Lon Chaney, Jr.'s portrayal of Count Alucard is that it helps show just how amazing a performance Bela Lugosi gave in Universal's original Dracula motion picture.
Rating:
Summary: One sequel to be enjoyed, the other to be endured
Review: Here you have the first two sequels to Universal's classic 1931 masterpiece Dracula; these two films could not be more different. Dracula's Daughter is a surprisingly original and thought-provoking film, beginning where the original Dracula film stopped but going in a direction all its own. Son of Dracula, on the other hand, has nothing to do with either of the two previous films apart from the name of Dracula, and the only threat posed by Lon Chaney, Jr., in the role of Count Alucard (that's Dracula backwards, a subterfuge that gives you a pretty good idea of the lack of intellect of Chaney's Dracula) is his supernatural ability to bore audiences to tears with his impossibly bland performance. Dracula's Daughter presents us with the interesting proposition of Dracula's vampiric daughter longing to be freed of the curse that afflicts her. With Dracula's death at the hands of Van Helsing, she seeks to free her mind from the influence of her nefarious father, actively seeking the aid of psychiatrist Dr. Garth (Otto Kruger), who just happens to be a former student of Van Helsing and the one man Van Helsing has called upon to help defend himself from the charge of murdering Count Dracula. Countess Marya Zaleska (Gloria Holden) carries herself well and exudes a persona of aristocratic bearing and silent danger as she fights in vain to break away from the reality of her undead inheritance. This film eventually takes us all the way back to Dracula's Castle in Transylvania and leaves the viewer with the sense that he/she has seen a worthwhile and surprisingly stimulating vampire film. Son of Dracula, on the other hand, leaves the viewer with a sense of disappointment and disdain (which only manifests itself when the viewer actually awakens from the sleep-inducing stupor of the whole experience). Not only is Lon Chaney, Jr., in his role as Count Alucard given a convoluted, boring script in which to work, he proves himself incapable of generating one ounce of spark from his performance. Lon Chaney, Sr., may have been the studio's first choice to play Dracula back in 1931, but Chaney, Jr., is hopelessly unconvincing as 1943's Son of Dracula. Viewers are treated to several (too many, actually) special effects shots of Alucard transforming himself to or from his bat form, and it soon becomes apparent that the fake vampire bat has more presence and personality than Chaney, Jr. musters up in the vampire's human form. Both films are worth watching, if for no other reason than the fact that they are, after all, classic Universal "monster" films. Dracula's Daughter is an interesting, enjoyably original type of film; some people even find Son of Dracula appealing - for reasons I can't possibly comprehend. The only good thing I can say about Lon Chaney, Jr.'s portrayal of Count Alucard is that it helps show just how amazing a performance Bela Lugosi gave in Universal's original Dracula motion picture.
Rating:
Summary: Better than average
Review: I really enjoyed Dracula's daughter. The story revolves around the female lead trying to free herself of the vampire curse and it flowed really well. It was nice to see a somewhat original story line tied in with Universal Dracula mythos rather than a rehashing of the same old story. The female lead played her role quite well, and it was interesting to see a powerful female character in the time when most females leads were basically victims. That's not to say that she wasn't a victim herself, as I did feel sorry for her at some points, but then her true nature would rise and show itself. Son of Dracula wasn't as good for me. I just had a hard time with Lon Chaney Jr. playing the role of Dracula with that pencil thin mustache. He kept reminding me of a used car salesman. I know he played almost all of the Universal monsters at some point, but he'll always be the Wolfman to me. I like how the characters involved actually plotted to use Dracula's power against him. I didn't really see how the title of the movie tied in the actual movie. The story seemed kinda screwy, but it seemed to pick up more in the last half as the plot started to unfold.
Rating:
Summary: Better than average
Review: I really enjoyed Dracula's daughter. The story revolves around the female lead trying to free herself of the vampire curse and it flowed really well. It was nice to see a somewhat original story line tied in with Universal Dracula mythos rather than a rehashing of the same old story. The female lead played her role quite well, and it was interesting to see a powerful female character in the time when most females leads were basically victims. That's not to say that she wasn't a victim herself, as I did feel sorry for her at some points, but then her true nature would rise and show itself. Son of Dracula wasn't as good for me. I just had a hard time with Lon Chaney Jr. playing the role of Dracula with that pencil thin mustache. He kept reminding me of a used car salesman. I know he played almost all of the Universal monsters at some point, but he'll always be the Wolfman to me. I like how the characters involved actually plotted to use Dracula's power against him. I didn't really see how the title of the movie tied in the actual movie. The story seemed kinda screwy, but it seemed to pick up more in the last half as the plot started to unfold.
Rating:
Summary: Good but uneven sequel to Dracula
Review: Look, this film picks up where Dracula ended (in more ways than one). Right after Van Helsing drives a steak through Drac (in the original film) this movie begins. After being arrested by Scotland Yard for Drac's "murder" Van Helsing never tries to contact John Harker or Professor and Mina Seward. Why not? Those three were alive at the end of film one and surely they could help Van Helsing prove Drac was inhuman. But they no longer figure into things by this movie. As for the rest of the film I hate the lesbian angle of Drac's daughter fixated on that pretty girl, Lily. Unless the filmmakers were saying that homosexuality is unholy (which it is according to the trusted Holy Bible), then I like it. Sexist attitudes (of a more traditional kind) against women abound in this film but hey it was made nearly 70 years ago so whaddya expect?
Rating:
Summary: Dracula sequels still have bite!!
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Dracula sequels still have bite!!
Review: 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.
|
