Customer Reviews

The Return of Dracula [VHS]

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This United Artists release stars Francis Lederer as the Count coming to the United States using the identity of an artist he killed en route to visit his aunt. The setting is a small, folksy town with good people. The aunt, his female cousin and all around are fooled by the Count, whom while thought to be eccentric due to odd sleeping habits, maintains an aura of fascination due to his artistic temperment. Problems begin when the young son in the family comes home with the news that his pet cat has been killed. Then a female family friend is mysteriously anemic and proceeds to die. The Count has begun his rampage. Next, an investigator is killed by a dog (the Count). Suspicions grow as the female cousin discovers horrible paintings done by the Count showing her in a coffin. The female friend is staked (a brief color shot in a b/w movie-quite shocking for a 50's movie) and the Count is finally cornered in his cave when he tries for the last time to victimize the niece. Her boyfriend arrives to save her and drives the Count back with a cross, the latter loses his footing and well, you know, falls into a pit with a you know what at the bottom. I highly recommend this 50's flick with a good cast and excellent creepy atmosphere. Fangs for the memories.

That's one of the lessons to be learned from this underrated Fifties cult favorite. Produced in 1957, just before Hammer's classic Horror of Dracula made the Count a major draw again. Actually, this was the first Dracula film not made by Universal, and it followed his longest layoff (about 10 years) since his first appearance in 1931. Francis Lederer, in the title role, is the most human of Draculas, cold, calculating, and cruel. The supporting cast (filled with faces recognizable to serial and b-movie fans) is uniformly excellent, and the bland small town setting adds immeasurably to the film's eerie atmosphere. By placing the vampire into an immediately recognizable setting (at the time, anyway), the film manages to avoid many of the cliches commonly associated with its genre and therefore makes Dracula a much more unsettling menace. Excellent moody photography adds to the film's creepiness, as does a simply amazing score, easily one of the most foreboding of its time. Seldom does the film's obviously low budget interfere with its effectiveness. There's a few (surprisingly bloody) shocks along the way, but mostly this film relies on its menacing mood, making it one of the few American horror films in the classic supernatural mode from its time. It's also one of the best.

The previous reviews hit the nail on the head, so I will avoid repeating the plot here.
What I can say is that as a small kid in the late 60's this often played on New York TV as the "Curse Of Dracula" (often on WNEW's "Creature Features" on Saturday night), and I never missed it.
The slow motion scenes of Francis Lederer rising from his fog enveloped coffin are quite eerie and effective.
Unlike the early Universal series and the later Hammer color series (actually started back in 1959 just 2 years after this one), this film stands alone without any sequels. Too bad in a way, as Lederer really is a good Dracula. Though recently on a cable station I caught an episode of the Rod Serling early 1970's TV series "Night Gallery" where Lederer once again played Dracula, this time rising as a kind of hero against the Nazis who storm his castle. Interesting twist there. I recommend trying to catch that if you (like me) are nostalgic for this old black and white film.
I remember once reading from a horror film critic that this film was a breath of freash air when it came out in the late 50's because at that point nearly all horror had become sci-fi movies, or giant morphed radioactive invading bug films, and the more gothic style horror was out of fashion. Seems to be accurate as a list of the movies that came out at this time will bear out.
So, if you saw this as a kid, or are nostalgic for the time period, this certainly would have made a fun Saturday night after hanging out at the soda shop type of movie.
Now where's the DVD? My 1993 video copy is kind of grainy and i'm a bit surprised that, with all of the obscure films out there on DVD already, that this hasn't yet made in into the digital age.

THE RETURN OF DRACULA (the film's actual title--CURSE was its television moniker) is the final classic B&W Dracula film. Despite the low budget, this eerie shocker recalls John Carradine's turn as Dracula in Universal's HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN and HOUSE OF DRACULA. Francis Lederer is smoothly effective. The modern-day vampire hunters inspired Marvel Comics' TOMB OF DRACULA and the small-town setting is a chilling precursor to DARK SHADOWS. Best of all--the shock ending inspired Hammer Films' grisly finish to DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE and TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA. A worthy addition to any Universal Monster Classics collection. Kudos to MGM for reissuing this early United Artists gem.

No one really remembers that there were Dracula movies in between the original epics by Universal and the onslaught of Hammer films. This is a low budget flick to be sure, but it really carves out a unique niche for the Count. The execution is not all I would wish it to be, especially in terms of the script, but I like the direction this film takes. It would have been interesting to see what could have happened if this had started a series that refined its elements as the Hammer films were able to do.

A really excellent and under-rated Dracula movie. This movie which was made in 1958 has a distinctly 1950's flavor and is quite chilling. Francis Lederer does a creditable job in the title role and though the supporting cast are all names that would not be recognized it is nonetheless an excellent movie.

Return of Dracula always intrigued me. The movie was clearly low budget, probably targeted at dating teenagers parked in the drive-in, who were otherwise too engaged to keep their attention on the screen, which was too bad. The movie is actually good. This wasn't the kind of shlock that would come in the 60's and 70's like: Billy the Kid v Dracula, Dracula v Frankenstein, and the Blood of Dracula's Castle.

The look of the film could be compared to the TV sitcoms of the time with the pesky little brother, the overly serious older sister, and her amorous, but harmless boyfriend. Like TV at the time the film was shot in black and white. The family's last name was even Mayberry (as in Mayberry RFD). Then the foreign, dangerous, gentleman arrives from Eastern Europe giving it a Cold War feel. One of the heroes chasing him was even a Immigration and Naturalization agent, because the stranger is being investigated for a killing on a train somewhere in Europe. After the murder the killer stole the victim's identification.

Norma Eberhardt played Rachel Mayberry and Ray Stricklyn played her boyfriend Tim Hansen. These were a teenaged couple, which has been unfairly held against the movie. The oldest English hero in the book Dracula was Dr Seward at 29. Lucy Westnera turned 19 before she died, and Mina was roughly contemporaneous. Eberhardt played the part unusually cool and aloof, which fits some teenager's attempt to appear as an adult too early, and like Helen Chandler in the Bela Lugosi version, made her seem eerily like she was already a vampire. Stricklyn on the other hand seem liked another Tony Dow (Wally Cleaver).

Francis Lederer held the whole thing together, and was very impressive as the evil Count. He wore a modern dark suit, no tuxedo, and wore a black overcoat over his shoulders like a cape, and the slouched hat of a spy. He even physically resembled the character in the book to a large extent. Like Lugosi he played it without the whiskers or fangs, but he had dark wavy hair, unusually large looking eyes, and like the book he had cheeks that looked strong, but thin. He could be unctuously polite to someone's face, and in the amount of time for them to turn around look coldly indifferent behind their shoulder. Lederer was born in Prague Bohemia in the Austrian-Hungarian empire (now part of the Czech-Republic), and his accent was distinctly different from Lugosi, but fit the part just as well, without being an imitation meant for comical affect like George Hamilton and Leslie Nielson, or one that just turned out that way like Gary Oldman and Willem Dafoe.

The movie's emphasis on dangerous foreigners with stolen identities also seems relevent today.

I did not even realize this version of Dracula existed until I came across it on a movie rental site I subscribe to. It appears to be made on a modest budget and the effects are quite ho-hum for a vampire flick (also this is a 1958 movie). Francis Lederer plays the evil Count Dracula who murders a Transylvanian artist named Bellac and assumes his identity. He travels to a small town in California, and moves into the Mayberry household who thinks he is their cousin Bellac. Dracula then proceeds to stalk his victims, beginning with the family cat, a helpless blind woman, and a nosy Immigration official, before turning his attentions to his lovely young cousin, Rachel (Norma Eberhardt).

What the movie lacks in finesse it makes up for in the acting skills of Lederer and Eberhardt. Lederer's talents are not in the same league as Lugosi and Lee but he does bring a unique interpretation to the role of Dracula (for one he has more speaking parts than Lee did in his first Dracula movie). Lederer's Dracula is credibly menacing and manipulative, and he hardly bothers to conceal his evil intentions beneath a veneer of European gentility. Eberhardt does credibly in her role as the naive and altogether too trusting cousin and aspiring designer.

The atmosphere is suitably chilling in parts, and I especially appreciated the scenes between Lederer and the blind young woman. There is a neat touch in terms of cinematography in the scene where the blind young woman gets staked (with the blood portrayed in red for dramatic effect). Fans of Dracula movies might appreciate this lesser known version, and I'm glad I had the chance to watch it.

Return of Dracula, 1958 film

Two cars drive down a road, five men get out at a cemetery. It is 5:15 in the morning. They remove the top from a coffin as the sun rises. It is empty! Where did he go? Elsewhere a man departs for America and freedom. A steam train puffs away. Something awful happens! Next we see "Carleton California". A young boy looks for his cat. A whistle announces the arrival of the train; it is early. Cousin Belac is expected. He steps out of the dark to meet his relatives, Cora and Mickey Mayberry. Belac wants his freedom in America. Young Rachel wants to be a dress designer, or a nurse. Belac doesn't want a mirror in his room! What happened to their cat? Where did cousin Belac go! There is a new coffin in that cave. The top opens and we see the occupant. Later Rachel helps out at the parish house for the old and infirm. Blind Jenny has a premonition about death. She sleeps with an open window. What will enter?

The telephone rings with news about Jenny. [Note the product placement of `Type F' automobiles.] "She is gone." After Cora and Rachel return home a man from immigration, Mark Bryan, asks about cousin Belac Gordon. Where is his papers? Bryan lights a cigarette with his lighter. Bryan talks to another man. "He didn't suspect anything?" Later Belac visits the crypt and calls Jenny to life! "We have work to do." Jenny calls to Mr. Bryan, he walks away from the train platform and is attacked by a large white canine. The other investigator, Mr. Marland, talks to the coroner about recent deaths. Rachel talks to Belac. "Where did you get that pendant?" Why does Belac visit her room at night? Rachel had a strange dream. Marland visits the Doctor to talk about a Balkan legend. That night they will visit Jenny's crypt. Rachel visits for a Halloween party. Where is Belac? He casts no reflection in a mirror! [Not even his clothes?] Tim arrives to take Rachel to the Halloween party.

Rachel is warned about Belac. The authorities find Jenny's coffin empty. They will wait for her return, then act. Will Rachel walk to that dangerous cave? Can she escape in time? Tim finds her. Belac talks to influence them. Will Belac make a mistep? "He's gone." And so this anemic movie ends with the demise of two villains. This low-budget movie tells about culture in the late 1950s (to reflect the audience's expectations). It is neither as scary or funny as the 1932 "Dracula". Changes in culture affect your views. Ever notice this when seeing an old movie? The name of this family seems unintentionally funny now. So too the references to foreign oppression. Does this story remind you of "Shadow of a Doubt"? It was a clever idea to combine it with the old "Dracula" story.

Bram Stoker invented the idea of using an historic ruler from the 15th century as the basis for his vampire legend. Dracula was a contemporary of Richard III, the last Plantagenet king of England. The 1890s saw the worst depression of the 19th century. England was threatened by another foreign ruler, Kaiser Wilhelm. In the 1930s another German ruler threatened England. This defeat of a foreign ruler sent a comforting message to movie audiences. The year 1958 saw the Eisenhower recession, and troubles in Lebanon that threatened a war. Given the economic depression circa 2008 and foreign troubles, we should be in for more scary movies, such as those vampire films. Every vampire is a serial killer, but not all serial killers are vampires.

Saw this movie in a theater as a kid. Bought it for the nostalgia and was not disappointed. A bit corney, but a fun movie regardless.