Am I Missing Something?

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

I have absolutely never seen anything like this movie before. You have to see this movie.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

I was actually quite impressed how good this movie turned out to be. I won't put it in the same class as the iconic, original "Dracula" from 1931, but for Universal's first vampire sequel it's got a lot going for it. There's the atmospheric foggy sets and intriguing story line that casts the Countess Marya Zaleska (Gloria Holden) as the unfortunate victim of her father's legacy, attempting to free herself from the darkness of the spell he cast over her. Failing that, she falls for psychiatrist Jeffrey Garth (Otto Kruger) with the proposition of spending eternal life with him as a charter member of the undead. Only trouble is, her protector Sandor (Irving Pichel) is not too cool with that prospect, ultimately employing an idea inspired by Cupid, only with more tragic results.Unlike a handful of reviewers for this film that didn't care for the attempt at humor with the character of inept policeman Albert (Billy Bevan), I didn't seem to mind it much. I might have been ready for a bit of comic relief by the time he showed up with his partner Hawkins (Halliwell Hobbes) to investigate a couple of dead bodies. The dynamic between Garth and his secretary Janet Blake (Marguerite Churchill) was a bit unusual for a horror flick as well, the banter between them seemed to come straight out of a detective flick of the era. But what gives the picture it's dramatic flourish is the presence of Holden's Countess Marya, a perfect casting choice for the aristocratic bearing required to pull off the role of Dracula's daughter. She wasn't aghast at the thought of putting the torch to her father's corpse, and I felt she deserved a better fate than taking that arrow from the jealous Sandor. With that, the picture ends rather abruptly, but for all that went before, this was a compelling tale from Garrett Fort, one of the screenwriters of the original "Dracula". Now if we could only get to the bottom of those two sharp puncture marks.

Give props to Lambert Hillyer and Garrett Fort for following up from the first Dracula with a well-planned sequel that takes place pretty much directly after the original. They pulled it off too only bringing back one central actor, Edward Von Sloan, who didn't exactly have the biggest role. The new stars include Otto Kruger, who was a strong lead and also Gloria Holden are new villain. The writing for Holden's character, Countess Zeleska aka Dracula's Daughter, was more sympathetic than ominous, which in my mind wasn't really the right portrayal to make. A darker female vixen would have been an extremely effective move and added a bit of an excitement factor that the film was missing.Another aspect of the film which I thought might have been played out a bit more was a backstory about the daughter and Dracula's relationship. Not having that connection is kind of a missing element of the story-line but not having one at all is probably better than if it was overdone. Dr. Garth himself was a well-developed witty character and interesting protagonist, the type we rarely see, which has doubts about the adversary. Dracula's Daughter has its pros and cons just like any other film but from as a classical horror film perspective it's still a viable watch.

Five years after Universal launched a Bela Lugosi inspired Dracula upon the film loving world, the sequel arrived - only not with Lugosi's Count Dracula in it. Pic picks up at the end of the 31 film and finds Von Helsing (yes Von, not Van) under arrest for the slaying of the toothy vampire. Enter Contessa Marya Zeleska, who sets in motion the wheels of vampiric legends and torrid passions about to be exposed.There's an ethereal low-key mood to Dracula's Daughter, exuding the sort of atmosphere that Val Lewton would hone and trademark within six years. It's a beautifully photographed movie (George Robinson), while there's some neat touches in the screenplay - such as lesbian overtones and the fact our vampire lady is very sympathetic due to her searching for a cure to her ills. However. The play is over talky and very bloodless, it's like the makers forgot to actually put some horror aspects into the piece. There's also an odd blend of humour and drama which never sits right, while the ending is abrupt and disappointing.It's a nice film, a nice production, but nice is a word that really shouldn't be on your lips given the history of the source materials. 6/10

Highly entertaining sequel to Universal's classic Dracula. Picking up where that film left off, Professor Von Helsing (Edward Van Sloan) is arrested after having just staked Dracula. He summons a friend, psychiatrist Jeffrey Garth (Otto Kruger), to help him convince the police he's not nuts. Meanwhile, Countess Zaleska (Gloria Holden) steals Dracula's body and burns it. Turns out she is Dracula's vampire daughter and wants to be free of the "Dracula curse." When she meets Garth, she becomes intrigued by his ideas of overcoming addiction through force of will and he becomes intrigued by the mysterious Countess.Gloria Holden is excellent and brings a strong screen presence to the film. She commands every scene she's in. She does most of her acting with her eyes, which never seem to close. While perhaps not what many would consider a great beauty, she has a definite sex appeal and exotic allure about her that is palpable. Otto Kruger, a fine character actor I like quite a bit, seems miscast and too old for this part. Still, he gives it his all. Marguerite Churchill's character Janet is annoying, childish, and clingy. She's the worst part of the film for me. Cesar Romero and Jane Wyatt were set to play the parts that went to Kruger and Churchill. They had to drop out when filming was delayed. It's odd Romero was replaced by Kruger as the two couldn't have been more different, physically or stylistically. Irving Pichel gives a memorably creepy performance as Sandor, the Countess' manservant. In addition to being an actor, Pichel was also a fine and underrated director. Edward Van Sloan is enjoyable as always, though he seems to have little to do except provide a link between the original film and this sequel.Some obvious continuity issues aside (Von instead of Van Helsing, among others), it's a very good classic horror film. The highlight is Holden's "seduction" of a young and pretty model (Nan Grey), which is frequently discussed for its lesbian overtone. This is one of those horror films with a sympathetic villain that you find yourself rooting for more than the heroes. Countess Zaleska is certainly more captivating than stuffy Garth or bratty Janet. Director Lambert Hillyer, who normally directed low-budget westerns, does a remarkable job of creating the kind of atmosphere we associate with the great Universal horror films. I definitely recommend you check this one out.