12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Dracula in the Deep South, December 25, 2000
This review is from: Son of Dracula [VHS] (VHS Tape)
"Son of Dracula" (1943) has everything going for it, except the presence of Bela Lugosi. Instead, Universal Studios rejected the horror icon in favor of Lon Chaney Jr. - a major blunder that seriously damages a potentially fine film. Except for the Wolf Man, Chaney's limited talents were evident in his ineffectual portrayals of the Mummy and Frankenstein's monster. As Count Alucard/Dracula, Chaney lacks the charismatic evil and strong presence that Lugosi brought to the role. Director Robert Siodmak has created a moody, atmospheric chiller set in the Deep South, yet his admirable efforts are all but ruined by Chaney's miscasting. It's a shame, because "Son of Dracula" was intended to be a cut above most of Universal's horror programmers. Nevertheless, the film is worth a look for its effective supporting cast and production design.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Deep South setting very spooky, January 23, 2001
This review is from: Son of Dracula [VHS] (VHS Tape)
Son of Dracula is a very spooky movie with its setting in the Deep South amidst the swamps, cypress trees and moss.
The lighting was well done to give the movie that eerie feeling all the way through. It was truly breath taking to see the coffin rise from the swamp as the mist comes from it and transforms into Count Alucard as he stands atop it while it goes toward the bank.
Lon Chaney Jr. did a good job portraying the Count. People who say he didn't make a good Dracula should realize that he didn't get enough meaty lines in the story. He doesn't make an appearance until well into the movie, and it is even longer before he gets any substantial dialogue. Therefore, blame the script writers for not giving him enough good material to establish himself solidly at the start of the movie.
The only other complaint I have is the "Son" in the title. No reference is made to this, so it is misleading. The closest they come to this is saying that he is a descendant of the Dracula bloodline.
Overall, a well done movie with suspense, good supporting actors and a great ending when we see Alucard's coffin burning and the sun rising.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
"I see you marrying a corpse...living in a grave", March 3, 2003
This review is from: Son of Dracula [VHS] (VHS Tape)
After having read countless scathing reviews of this film over the past twenty years, I finally decided to purchase "Son of Dracula" just to see how terrible it really was (I'm a classic horror movie freak, so I end up buying them all anyway, regardless of quality). I was quite surprised to discover that SOD is actually one of the best of the Universal cycle of monster flicks from the 30s and 40s, and one of the very few movies from this time period with a genuine air of chilling menace about it ("The Mummy" and the original "Frankenstein" being two other stand out exceptions). Yes, I know this is a bold statement, but I stand by it after having watched SOD numerous times.
No, Lon Chaney Jr. was not the best choice of actors for the role of Dracula (he is credited as "Count Dracula", not "Alucard"...anyone who actually pays attention to the movie will discover that "Alucard" is a cover that Dracula is using while causing mischief in the deep south, and the "Son" part of the title derives from a misconception of the Doctor Lazlo character, who believes that Alucard is a descendent of the famous bloodsucker and not the vampire king himself). Anyway, back to Chaney's performance...as miscast as he was (in all of his "beefy", "beer bloated" glory), I still think he comes across as more DANGEROUS and more EVIL (and, in some ways, more lusting and sexual) than the quite frankly (forgive me) CORNY cliche of Bela Lugosi's interpretation of the character. Don't get me wrong, Chaney was definitely no Christopher Lee, but like Lee, he played his vampire character more in the vein of the original Stoker conception: he is a tough guy on a mission, with no regrets or guilt, no sense of inner torment over his condition (ala Gary Oldman in the 1992 Coppola version, and countless actors before and since)...he truly enjoys his exhalted position over the human cattle and has no qualms about killing them!
The plot in a nutshell: a southern heiress with an interest in the occult (played by the gorgeous Louise Allbritton) eagerly awaits the arrival of the mysterious Count Alucard, a man she has previously met on a vacation in Budapest, Hungary. She is interested in Alucard because she believes (quite rightly) that he can aid her in her black magic pursuits. Despite her intense interest in "Alucard", she is actually in love with her childhood sweetheart, Frank. When Alucard's luggage shows up on a train (sans the Count), Kay is in a tizzy...where could he be? So she goes to an old gypsy witch in the swamp (Queen Zimba, the local fortune teller), who tells her that the Count will indeed arrive...and that this is not a good thing! After croaking some creepy dialog (see the title of this review), Zimba is literally scared to death by a huge bat.
Meanwhile, the Count has already set up shop in a nearby swamp drainage tunnel (where he keeps his coffin), and he's been scoping out the town (he does away with Kay's rich old father, for reasons that make perfect sense later). The Count eventually hooks up with Kay in the swamp, and this meeting is the best scene in the film...Dracula's coffin surfaces in the swirling waters and oozes a fog that materializes in the form of the Count himself (who then rides the coffin to the shore to meet his woman). Kay is apparently under Dracula's spell, and they get married, making Dracula the defacto master of Dark Oaks Estate (a base from which he can suck the blood of the "young and virile race" of the Americans...his own homeland has been drained dry!). Kay's friends and family suspect that something is up, some of them think that she's insane, especially her lover, Frank (Robert Paige) and a prominent local businessman (played by Frank Craven), who also suspects that Alucard is something other than what he appears. Enter Doctor Lazlo (J. Edward Bromberg), a native Carpathian and vampire lore expert...
Frank confronts Alucard, a fight ensues, Frank fires bullets into Alucard but they go right through him and end up killing Kay. Frank is jailed, but Kay mysteriously re-appears, apparently still "alive"...and she has a plan: she does still indeed love Frank, and she has only been using Alucard to become immortal so that she can make Frank immortal also and be with him forever! Will he go along with it? Will Lazlo and company be able to save the day? Well, you'll just have to watch the damn movie!!!
This film features many well known Universal actors (including "scream queen" Evelyn Ankers, although she doesn't scream once here), but the real stars of the picture are all of the beautifully creepy, mist-choked, and moss laden swamp sets. The man-to-bat transformation scenes were also quite impressive for 1943.
All in all, a criminally underrated classic.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
