The first official sequel to Universal's Dracula film loses both director Tod Browning and star Bela Lugosi as well as the central character the latter played, Count Dracula (Universal obviously didn't have as much nous as Hammer and think up various ways of revivifying him for sequels). Despite the film's beginning just moments after the 1931 film ends and in the same location, the bulk of the plot concerns the crimes and travails of the titular character, Dracula's Daughter.
Countess Zaleska is not happy being a vampire and hopes that the death of her father will break her habit of going out after dark and sucking the blood from the necks of innocent victims. No such luck, as Dracula still controls her from beyond the grave and she goes through men and women at a pace. The existential situation of the Countess is the most intriguing feature of the film – she is like a sinner incapable of repentance or an addict unable to kick her addiction. In the course of seeking a cure for her behaviour/condition, she meets and falls badly for a psychiatrist, Dr Garth, but he is neither capable of reforming her nor interested in spending eternity as a member of the living death alongside her, so Zaleska is on a losing game. There is something moving and horrifying about her predicament and many people who aren't vampires will be able to identify with her inability to kick her addictions and avoid a terrible fate.
Whilst the main plot line is fairly successful, with many creepy moments, convincingly sick encounters and relationships and a fine performance by Gloria Holden as the Countess, the sub-plots in the film are mostly played for laughs, with Dr Garth and other characters' dialogues peppered with wise-cracks better suited to a Thin Man film than a Gothic horror. If the film had the courage of its convictions and concentrated on the existential malaise of its heroine, it would still hold up strong today. As it is, it looks like it was a missed opportunity at the time and is a curate's egg for us. But the good bits of the egg might well inspire the viewer.
Countess Zaleska is not happy being a vampire and hopes that the death of her father will break her habit of going out after dark and sucking the blood from the necks of innocent victims. No such luck, as Dracula still controls her from beyond the grave and she goes through men and women at a pace. The existential situation of the Countess is the most intriguing feature of the film – she is like a sinner incapable of repentance or an addict unable to kick her addiction. In the course of seeking a cure for her behaviour/condition, she meets and falls badly for a psychiatrist, Dr Garth, but he is neither capable of reforming her nor interested in spending eternity as a member of the living death alongside her, so Zaleska is on a losing game. There is something moving and horrifying about her predicament and many people who aren't vampires will be able to identify with her inability to kick her addictions and avoid a terrible fate.
Whilst the main plot line is fairly successful, with many creepy moments, convincingly sick encounters and relationships and a fine performance by Gloria Holden as the Countess, the sub-plots in the film are mostly played for laughs, with Dr Garth and other characters' dialogues peppered with wise-cracks better suited to a Thin Man film than a Gothic horror. If the film had the courage of its convictions and concentrated on the existential malaise of its heroine, it would still hold up strong today. As it is, it looks like it was a missed opportunity at the time and is a curate's egg for us. But the good bits of the egg might well inspire the viewer.