All Comments about...

Dracula's Daughter 1936

Janet Blake: Please come right away. This is the zoo speaking.

Dr. Garth: The what? The zoo?

Janet Blake: Ja! One of our elephants is seeing pink men!

loading replies

It's old. It's slow. But overall, it's pretty entertaining.

This is a sequel to the original "Dracula" that starred Bela Lugosi. Dracula's daughter, Contessa Zoleska (played by Gloria Holden), comes to London to try and rid herself of her Father's vampiric curse. This sequel is quite different from the original, with Contessa seeming somewhat sympathetic at times.

The performances of Holden and Otto Kruger are the clinchers here. Kruger is solid as the psychologist and Holden is at once creepy and riveting. She is also clearly a threat, which adds even more to the complexity of the character.

loading replies

This was so much more entertaining than I'd been expecting and the little comedic asides were an added bonus.

loading replies
7

Shout by Chris Brink
BlockedParent2023-06-02T04:26:11Z— updated 2023-08-13T23:30:01Z

It's pretty damn' queer as-is, but can you imagine how gloriously queer it might have been if James Whale had directed it as planned?

loading replies

The Dracula legacy continues in Universal’s follow-up film Dracula’s Daughter. Picking up where the last film ended, Von Helsing is charged with the murder of Count Dracula; meanwhile the mysterious Countess Marya Zaleska comes to London to see the remains of Dracula, looking to cure herself of his curse. This is a rather poor sequel that stretched the material and doesn’t have a clear story arc. Additionally, the film isn’t as well cast and no one is able to bring the level of charisma that Bela Lugosi did. There are some interesting things in Dracula’s Daughter, but it doesn’t have the dark and foreboding tone that made Dracula so compelling and terrifying.

loading replies
Loading...