Own the rights?
18 out of 21 people found the following comment useful :- Better than Dracula?, 11 April 2000 Author: evilskip (evilskippy@mindspring.com) from Lurking about in the fog
To be honest I normally shy away from reviewing the classics. Rather stick to the lesser known shadowy obscure films to warn you about and/or poke fun at.But every so often there is a film that has a bad rap that is undeserved or the film is misunderstood and ol skip has to scream at the injustice. Dracula's Daughter is such a film. There is no need to go into the plot in detail.Dracula's daughter appears in London. She steals and burns Dracula's corpse.Thus she feels she is free of the taint of vampirism with the death of her father.But she isn't and tries to enlist the aid of a psychiatrist to help cure her. The film is atmospheric, foggy and great fun.Gloria Holden is superb as the Countess and Pichel is slimily evil as her human familiar.The drawback to the film is the extremely obnoxious leading man who is totally unsympathetic and unprofessional(but yet true to life). This isn't hampered by the drawing room bound settings that slowed Dracula to a halt.Definitely a classic to enjoy!
14 out of 16 people found the following comment useful :- Dreamy Gothic horror, 2 August 2005 Author: drmality-1 (drmality@sbcglobal.net) from Illinoize
After years and years of being a Universal horror fan, I finally see "Dracula's Daughter". What an interesting and haunting film it is,too. It's way ahead of the curve in portraying a vampire that wants to escape its cursed existence. The "daughter" of the title longs to live as a real woman but must answer the call of her blood. Is she really a blood relation to Count Dracula or merely a past victim who was especially close to him? Beginning exactly where Todd Browning's "Dracula" left off years earlier, we see Prof. van Helsing arrested for murder when he is found in the vicinity of Dracula's staked-out body. The dull-witted police commissioner believes van Helsing is either a lunatic or a liar but respects his scientific credentials enough to keep him out of jail. Van Helsing seeks the aid of his old student, psychiatrist Jeffrey Garth, to prove his innocence.Meanwhile, in a truly unusual scene, the body of Count Dracula is stolen from a pair of bumbling policemen by Countess Marya Zaleska and her pale, sinister servant Sandor. The undead Countess merely wants to give Dracula a dignified cremation by fire. His torment is over, but Marya's lingers. She is struggling mightily to resist the call to vampirism but Sandor seems to encourage his mistress to enjoy her bloody deeds.Through a tangled web of fate, Prof. Garth and Countess Zaleska become entwined. The Countess begs the psychiatrist to give her the willpower to escape her "obsession"...meanwhile, Garth is becoming uneasily aware of Marya's link to several vampire-like murders that have occurred in town. Most tellingly, he notes that her apartment does not have a single mirror...a sure sign of a vampire, according to Van Helsing.It all ends in Transylvania as the forces of good and evil collide once more.Gloria Holden is striking as "Dracula's Daughter". Her exotic Slavic looks and wide, hypnotic eyes make it easy to believe she is more than merely human. She has a tragic aura to her, but when she seduces a young girl to become a victim, she also seems repellent.The real monster of the movie is Sandor, who seems to be manipulating Marya for his own evil ends. Irving Pichel later became a director of some repute, but here he is a scary, foreboding presence with his ominous bass voice, deathly pale skin and Russian garb. Sandor's relationship with Marya is truly unique, as he talks to her as an equal, not a servant.Otto Kruger is great as Jeffrey Garth, a man of reason and wit who is thrust into the twilight world of the undead. Kruger was a very under-rated actor who should have been more well-known. His sarcastic romantic sniping with his sexy and uppity secretary comes across just as well as his more serious dialogs with van Helsing and Marya. He's a refreshing change from the usual David Manners type hero in the old Universals.It's a real treat to see Edward van Sloan return in the role of Dr. van Helsing. Calm, rational and collected in his thoughts, he is a contrast to the unholy creatures he duels with. ONe wonders if van Helsing would be sympathetic to Countess Zaleska...or if he would be hell-bent on her destruction. Never do we hear van Sloan's van Helsing voice any understanding or sympathy for the vampires he stalks.There's some odd comic moments...the two nitwit bobbies at the beginning in particular stick out like a sore thumb...and director Lambert Hillyer's vision of Transylvania seems more like a clichéd Germany, but "Dracula's Daughter" dares to be different from its more famous predecessor and in so doing, emerges as a bit of a classic itself.
10 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :- Dracula's Daughter (1936) ***, 9 August 2005 Author: MARIO GAUCI (marrod@melita.com) from Naxxar, Malta
One of Universal's most unusual horror films and a more than worthy successor to Lugosi's Dracula (1931) - although I wouldn't go so far as to say it's better: BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1935) it ain't! The film's approach is very different to its predecessor - despite having the same scriptwriter, Garrett Fort - as it presents the vampire lady of the title as a somewhat tragic figure rather than a mere spook, and Gloria Holden has both the exotic looks and acting talent for the role. Perhaps to make up for Lugosi's absence, the script features a creepy vampire acolyte in the figure of Irving Pichel: fine actor though he is, I think the make-up department went overboard in trying to make him look menacing!Otto Kruger and Marguerite Churchill are two of the oddest, and yet most likable, leads in a Universal horror film: not only their age difference is immediately apparent, as is their obvious intelligence, but they share a love/hate relationship all through the picture which is both fresh and endearing. The supporting cast is filled with stalwarts of the genre: first and foremost, naturally, is Edward Van Sloan who reprises his seminal Van Helsing characterization as if he had never been away; Billy Bevan, Halliwell Hobbes and E.E. Clive as coppers of different ranks; Gilbert Emery as the unavoidable incredulous Scotland Yard official; Edgar Norton as his 'fresh' butler; and, adding to the fun, there's also Claud Allister as an upper-class nitwit and famed columnist Hedda Hopper as a gossiping socialite. Nan Grey, later female lead of THE INVISIBLE MAN RETURNS (1940), appears briefly as one of Dracula's victims in what remains perhaps the film's most discussed scene (due to its lesbian overtones). Unlike the original, this sequel is briskly paced and the vampire's demise is not anti-climactic.
10 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :- Surprisingly original., 29 September 2004 Author: jaywriterXIII from USA
Being intimately familiar with modern day horror sequels, I expected this granddaddy (Grandmomma?) of horror sequels to follow the same routine: complete and total retread of the original's material with a significant drop in quality (a la Chainsaw Massacre). But to my surprise, these early horror sequels while not as good as the originals had admirable ambition and originality especially compared to today's horror sequels. While Dracula was the tale of a man cursed to immortality fueled by a blood-lust, and ultimately ignoring any moral convictions in his continued survival; Dracula's Daughter follows a more tragic tale of his vampyric offspring afraid of both ending her existence and of continuing that existence. Bela Lugosi's Dracula, while the villain, had a high level of sympathy due to his otherwordly charisma, and the charm of that film was the duality of wanting him to be stopped . . . and wanting to see him succeed. Immortality proved a curse. He's not necessarily evil, he's not exactly on the hero's path either, but you can't help but like the count. Dracula's Daughter admirably draws a sharp contrast to that film, giving the title character a genuine desire to overcome her cursed heritage. She's not evil. She's not the protagonist . . . but she wants to be and is trying to be. This sets up an interesting game as the fates play for Marya's future. On one hand, a servant seeking the infamous curse constantly pushes towards giving up these pure pursuits and taking the path of her father, while another character does genuinely try helping her with, sadly, an insufficient understanding of her real problem. It does provoke a number of questions worth exploring. I wondered if Von Helsing would try to destroy Marya before learning her intentions, if the characters would try to help her, and if they couldn't help her find a way to tolerate her blood lust?I guess it's appropriate that Dracula's Daughter can never escape the shadow of her father. Lugosi and Browning will forever come first in the minds of audiences before Holden and Hillyer. Even with that said, I still like Dracula's Daughter for finding its own identity and not retreading the film that came before it.Modern horror sequels have neither a thought nor a question. Modern horror sequels are nothing more than empty shadows of their predecessors. I find it interesting that this was not always the case.
6 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :- Eerie and groundbreaking film, weighed down by silly humor, 11 August 2006 Author: dr_foreman
"Dracula's Daughter" is a trailblazer in many respects. It's the earliest film I can think of that features a truly sympathetic vampire protagonist. It's also the earliest mainstream film that I'm aware of with such a strong lesbian subtext. (Actually, it's not even a "sub" text, it's plain as day!) As you might expect, these rather surprising elements make it a highly memorable viewing experience - perhaps even more memorable than its predecessor, Lugosi's "Dracula," which is basically just a truncated version of Bram Stoker's novel.Unfortunately, "Dracula's Daughter" misses the mark of greatness that it probably deserves. The film is only about an hour and ten minutes long, so there isn't sufficient time to fully develop Countess Zaleska, the title character. And it's extremely frustrating that the first fifteen minutes or so are basically squandered on a lot of painfully unfunny business involving two comedy constables. The humor has aged really, really badly, unless you somehow find it convulsively hilarious when one of the constables reacts to every strange and dramatic happening around him by saying "oooh..." I tend to complain that modern-day horror features too much dumb comedy that hurts its credibility, but "Dracula's Daughter" is living proof that studios were injecting silly rubbish into otherwise good horror material as long as seventy years ago! The serious parts of the film work well, however. Countess Zaleska and her faithful servant, Sandor, have some interesting exchanges about the loneliness of immortality and the darkness of the vampire's universe. The scene when Zaleska burns her father's body is also very moody and dramatic. (How does one get a job like Sandor's, anyway? Don't you think it would be fun to play personal servant to a glamorous female vampire? No? Maybe it's just me, then.) If the film has another flaw, aside from the comedy, it's the human protagonist, Dr. Garth. Otto Kruger plays the character as stubborn and really rather abrupt. He'll spew a few lines of psycho-babble at the countess, then charge out of the room and leave his job with her half-done at best. A more attentive psychiatrist might perhaps have made for a more sympathetic and proactive hero. As it is, he's basically just an irritating presence who distracts us from the "villains," who are infinitely more interesting and more worthy of our time.
6 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :- A bat flying under the radar..., 12 March 2005 Author: simeon_flake
Until getting Dracula's DVD collection, I never saw any of the sequels involving the Count & his undead progeny. I remember growing up that the Universal movies with the Wolf Man and Frankenstein's Monster were getting frequent revivals on television, but the "Draculas" were kept tucked away in a tomb somewhere.In the case of something like 'House of Dracula' it's understandable, but the Daughter proved to be a very worthy sequel, almost matching the Lugosi original. Gloria Holden is a very captivating presence as the ill-fated Countess Zaleska, wanting release from her vampirism but ultimately (after a few murders) realizing there is no breaking free from her eternal blood lust.Getting back to one of the murders, what a sight it was to see Countess Zaleska's attack on the girl Lili. Considering how stringent censorship was when the film was made, I'm a bit surprised that a scene with such a homoerotic undercurrent was left in the movie. And with Joseph Breen to contend with, it makes me wonder what the filmmakers might've originally had in mind if the mighty Breen consented to this girl-on-girl attack being left in the film.
5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :- Intriguing vampire movie full of eccentric characters and unexpected twists, 3 January 2007 Author: mlraymond from Durham NC
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
This movie is one of the most unusual horror films to come out of Hollywood in the Thirties. What would be expected to be a straightforward sequel to Dracula alternates between traditional vampire movie events, and situations that wouldn't be out of place in a typical screwball comedy of the period.The love/hate relationship between stuffy psychiatrist Jeffrey Garth ( Otto Kruger), and his little minx of a secretary Janet ( Marguerite Churchill), is full of the kind of banter and teasing between two people who don't want to admit they're in love, that is found in movies like Bringing Up Baby.Other humorous characters include two nervous British policemen ,arguing about who should be left alone with the coffins containing the late Count Dracula, and his fly- eating slave Renfield; a very proper English butler reprimanded by his stamp collecting employer for mixing up the Bolivian blue with the Guatemalan red, and an upper class twit who's always looking for another cocktail party. Throw in gossip columnist Hedda Hopper as a society hostess entertaining upper crust guests, and you've got an interesting setup...especially when her newest discovery is a mysterious Hungarian, Countess Zaleska,( Gloria Holden), who politely informs her hostess that she never drinks...wine.Edward Van Sloan is in fine form as Professor Van Helsing, joining with Garth, and Scotland Yard chief Sir Basil Humphrey ,to halt the latest plague of blood drained victims to strike London. Marvelous sets of foggy streets and dreary old buildings contrast with luxurious modern apartments and tri-motor aeroplanes, as Dracula's daughter adapts well to the modern world of 1930's London.The story keeps getting more complicated, and fascinating, as the Countess falls in love with Garth, much to the displeasure of her sinister servant Sandor, (Irving Pichel), and Janet. A great scene has Garth, by now almost certain that Countess Zaleska is the vampire responsible for the recent deaths, warning her to stay in London. When he leaves the room for a moment, she looks after him and says, in a soft, but emotional voice, "I'll leave...and you're coming with me!" There are so many great scenes and wonderful moments in this movie, crammed into a short running time, that those viewers who haven't seen it owe it to themselves to seek it out. One priceless bit has Garth refusing to ask for help tying his bow tie, and Janet deliberately tying it crooked. Then, when visiting the Countess in her apartment, he fiddles with the tie ,and looks around and remarks that it's the first woman's flat he's ever seen that didn't have at least a dozen mirrors. The Countess looks nervous for a moment, but then jokes that she's glad he's not Van Helsing, who would attach an occult significance to the lack of mirrors in her place. It's the kind of in joke that characterizes this movie. This is truly a gem of Thirties movie making and an intriguing addition to Dracula lore.
5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :- Different but solid official sequel to the classic "Dracula"., 13 June 2005 Author: Boba_Fett1138 from Groningen, The Netherlands
This movie literally starts off were "Dracula" finished. Since it is a sequel you would expect only more of the same old routine but "Dracula's Daughter" is surprising original and good on its own. This ain't your average bloodsucking vampire movie.Thing that was best about this movie is that they came up with a quite original and solid story that goes deep enough and features some strong and interesting characters. It's not like they wanted to surpass the original "Dracula" movie or became too dependent on the events that occurred in that movie. Instead they just tried to be original and create a new and different kind of vampire movie.Only returning character is professor Von Helsing (why did they ever changed his name?) played by yet again Edward Van Sloan. Van Sloan truly was a fantastic actor, I already loved him in "Dracula" and in this movie he reprises his role with just as much flair. Another actor that impressed me was Irving Pichel as the creepy looking Sandor.It's definitely a movie worth watching. It never becomes scary, mysterious or tense really but the story and acting are what makes this movie a very solid one.8/10
7 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :- Not A Classic But Very Unusual Horror Film That Will Please Fans, 31 December 2004 Author: Hal-900 from WA, USA
This belated, weird sequel to the 1931 Bela Lugosi movie, is actually a very interesting film, if a bit imperfect. Director Hillyer (wisely) chooses not to compete with the original movie, and this time around horror is replaced by a strong sexual subtext. In movies, sex has always been an important part of vampirism, but this film almost looks like sexploitation. Nothing wrong with that, but at times, the film almost forgets that this is supposed to be a horror film. It's like nothing Hollywood did in the 1930s. However, I do think the movie succeeds in exploring different aspects of the vampire myths. Here Dracula's Daughter (magnetic Gloria Holden in a Garbo-like performance) is presented as a tragic figure who is eventually forced to accept her heritage. There is one scene (Holden killing a beautiful model) that evokes both sympathy and horror. It is a great sequence among many memorable moments. I liked the film a lot, but I wished they had allowed Lugosi to reprise his famous role. Still, recommended to horror fans.
4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :- A worthy follow-up to Tod Browning's masterpiece, 5 April 2006 Author: The_Void from Beverley Hills, England
Dracula's Daughter begins right where Tod Browning's Dracula left off, and ironically sees vampire slayer, Van Helsing in trouble with the law for the murder of Count Dracula. This follow up doesn't have the same quality feel about it that the original had, and it seems clear that this was always meant to be very much a 'B' movie picture. But at the same time, its lots of fun to watch; and the fact that it begins straight after the ending of the Bela Lugosi film ensures that it's credible as far as Universal's series is concerned, and that fact will also give many fans of the original film a good reason to see it. The plot starts properly when a young woman turns up at the police station, wanting to know if Count Dracula really is dead. We then follow her as she tries to undo her family curse, aided by psychiatrist Dr. Jeffrey Garth. However, around the same time that this is going on; corpses begin appearing around London, and jailed Van Helsing is convinced that vampires are roaming the streets of London again.Unfortunately, this follow up doesn't feature the bloodsucking demon of the first film, and as the title suggests; follows his daughter instead. Gloria Holden excels in the title role as the daughter of Dracula. She's seductively sexy and has a definite air of understated evil about her at the same time. The rest of the support cast back her up excellently, and while nobody other than the title character is a real standout; the ensemble comes together nicely. Atmosphere is obviously a big thing here, and director Lambert Hillyer does a great job of photographing the locations, and ensures that the film benefits from a malevolent aura at all times. The story is obviously nowhere near as great as the original, which was based on the novel by Bram Stoker; but it's good enough. Writing a follow-up to Dracula can't be easy, and while the plot isn't too engaging, it's always at least interesting. There's an underscore of black humour hanging around just behind the central plot, and overall I would say this is a worthy sequel, although it's not a patch on the original film.
Add another comment
