I have to wonder, darlings, not only how many kids Dracula actually had, but how they were conceived, and by whom????????? How come there was never "Dracula's Nephew?" Or "Dracula's Niece??????????"
One thing I am sure of--like "Dracula's Daughter," shown last week, this must have foreshadowed Anne Rice, who, I am certain, saw both these films, and was influenced by them. Especially "Son Of Dracula," which is set in and about a New Orleans plantation. Same for a lot the Rice novels? Coincidence, darlings? I don't think so.
The other thing I recall from seeing this film as a child, was Lon Chaney, Jr.'s appearance in the title role. He acts like he is out of his comfort zone; but, hey, he was top monster star at Universal, under contract, so, if he was told to play something, he did. That's just the way things were, back then. The role does not work in his favor, for, aside from seeming uncomfortable, he looks too big and beefy to be a vampire. Vampires are slim and trim hons, not having a middle-aged spread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The film also has a very sad ending, which I will not reveal, but, which reminds me of "Wuthering Heights." The film is not on a par with that masterpiece--either novel, or 1939 film--but the filmmakers were stretching themselves, with the Southern Gothic thing, which, as with "Dracula's Daughter," gives the film a visual fascination.
If only they had cast a younger, trimmer, actor in the lead!
Roddy McDowall was too young. But how about Hurd Hatfield????????????
Join us all, tonight at 8PM. Hope to see Toonie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeek!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is Dracula having an orgasm? Can vampires achieve that????????????????
There's a whole ridiculous tortured business history behind the various classic-era vampire movies, which explains how the very talented but asexual-lummox-looking Lon Jr ended up miscast in this one.
ReplyDeleteFirst, David O. Selznick nearly derailed the entire Dracula franchise in its infancy by snatching up the rights to "Dracula's Daughter" from the Stoker estate before Universal even had a chance to count the box office receipts from "Dracula". That is what chiefly held back a Dracula sequel from 1931 until 1936. Ostensibly Selznick wanted to make his own Dracula sequel and screw Universal, but in truth he just wanted to hold the rights ransom and cockblock Universal from an easy profit. Five years later he tired of the game and resold the sequel rights to Universal at a huge markup over what Fox had paid Stoker.
Unfortunately there was a dramatic management change at Universal right after they finally acquired the Dracula sequel rights from Fox. The new CEO and board were disgusted by the horror genre and largely bailed out of it. Had the company not just previously paid Selznick a huge fee for the rights to "Dracula's Daughter", it would never have been made. Even so, the "new" Universal dithered and stalled endlessly, not greenlighting production until literally the day the rights would have expired and reverted back to Stoker. "Dracula's daughter" began filming without a final script and was largely made on the fly, perhaps explaining why it still seems so unique and artistic (with no script, they really had to concentrate on mood and subtext).
"Daughter" did surprisingly well at the box office, but Universal remained hostile to the horror genre until yet another management change several years later. The new chiefs did a complete 180, embracing the studio's horror legacy as a cash cow they could milk to death. Sadly for Bela Lugosi, his relationship with Universal had soured by then and he was not considered viable for "Son Of Dracula" (it was felt too much dialog would have been mangled by his impenetrable accent). Lon Jr was cast by default due to his status as Universal's biggest horror star, but even he knew he was woefully out of his depth playing the Master Seducer (seriously, what woman would ever swoon for that dumpy sad sack?) Nonetheless, "Son" does have its moments (not least of which being the "Star Wars"-like reveal of who the "son" really is).
Lugosi had his revenge, tho: that same year, Columbia brazenly plagiarized the Dracula story and hired Bela to make its own unauthorized sequel titled "The Return Of The Vampire". Despite a miniscule budget and the necessity to use different character names (Dracula became "Armand Tesla"), "Return" was quite effective and is now considered a step above "Son" in overall achievement. A bittersweet last hurrah for Bela, who continued his steep professional and personal decline thereafter.
...vampires not having middle age spread LOL
ReplyDeleteMy Dear,
ReplyDeleteSo glad you commented. Now I know you are alive
and kicking--like a Rockette!
David O. Selznick in the horror genre?
No way! He would not have succeeded.
As for "The Return Of The Vampire,"
it was the first horror film I ever saw,
at age 6. The scene where the nursery doors
open, and the vampire hovers over the children
frightened me for months.
I was also dazzled by Nina Foch, and Frieda
Inescourt. I went around trying to imitate Frieda!
Victoria,
ReplyDeleteA vampire cannot be obese.
There is the coffin factor, and it
simply is not DONE! They have to have
an air of elegance, in order to lure
their victims!