Dracula's Daughter (1936)

User Rating:

6.4/10   

Director:

Lambert Hillyer

Writers:

Bram Stoker (based on work by)
David O. Selznick (suggestion)

Release Date:

11 May 1936 (USA)

Genre:

Drama | Horror

Tagline:

Look out, she'll get you!

Plot:

Hungarian countess Marya Zaleska seeks the aid of a noted psychiatrist, in hopes of freeing herself of a mysterious evil influence.

Plot Keywords:

Corpse | Dracula | Murder | Scotland Yard | Curse

Cast

Otto Kruger	...	Jeffrey Garth
Gloria Holden	...	Countess Marya Zaleska - Dracula's Daughter
Marguerite Churchill	...	Janet
Edward Van Sloan	...	Prof. Von Helsing
Gilbert Emery	...	Sir Basil Humphrey
Irving Pichel	...	Sandor
Halliwell Hobbes	...	Hawkins (as Halliwell Hobbs)
Billy Bevan	...	Albert
Nan Grey	...	Lili
Hedda Hopper	...	Lady Esme Hammond
Claud Allister	...	Sir Aubrey (as Claude Allister)
Edgar Norton	...	Hobbs
E.E. Clive	...	Sergeant Wilkes

Also Known As:

Daughter of Dracula

Runtime:

71 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Black and White

Aspect Ratio:

1.37 : 1

Sound Mix:

Mono (Western Electric Noiseless Recording)

Certification:

Finland:K-7 (2004) | Canada:PG (Ontario) | Spain:13 | Argentina:13 | Australia:PG | UK:PG | USA:Approved (PCA #2019) | Sweden:7 | Germany:12

Company:

Universal Pictures

Trivia:

The last horror film produced under the supervision of Carl Laemmle.

Goofs:

Continuity: Edward Van Sloan's character was named "Van Helsing" in the original film of 'Dracula'. He plays the same character in this sequel, but he is now named "Von Helsing."

Quotes:

Lady Esme Hammond: Sherry, Marya?
Countess Marya Zaleska: Thank you, I never drink... wine.

Movie Connections:

Referenced in She's Alive! Creating the Bride of Frankenstein (1999)

Soundtrack:

Nocturne No.5 F Sharp Major, Op.15-2

Surprisingly original.

Being intimately familiar with modern day horror sequels, I expected this granddaddy (Grandmomma?) of horror sequels to follow the same routine: complete and total retread of the original's material with a significant drop in quality (a la Chainsaw Massacre). But to my surprise, these early horror sequels while not as good as the originals had admirable ambition and originality especially compared to today's horror sequels.

While Dracula was the tale of a man cursed to immortality fueled by a blood-lust, and ultimately ignoring any moral convictions in his continued survival; Dracula's Daughter follows a more tragic tale of his vampyric offspring afraid of both ending her existence and of continuing that existence.

Bela Lugosi's Dracula, while the villain, had a high level of sympathy due to his otherwordly charisma, and the charm of that film was the duality of wanting him to be stopped . . . and wanting to see him succeed. Immortality proved a curse. He's not necessarily evil, he's not exactly on the hero's path either, but you can't help but like the count.

Dracula's Daughter admirably draws a sharp contrast to that film, giving the title character a genuine desire to overcome her cursed heritage. She's not evil. She's not the protagonist . . . but she wants to be and is trying to be.

This sets up an interesting game as the fates play for Marya's future. On one hand, a servant seeking the infamous curse constantly pushes towards giving up these pure pursuits and taking the path of her father, while another character does genuinely try helping her with, sadly, an insufficient understanding of her real problem.

It does provoke a number of questions worth exploring. I wondered if Von Helsing would try to destroy Marya before learning her intentions, if the characters would try to help her, and if they couldn't help her find a way to tolerate her blood lust?

I guess it's appropriate that Dracula's Daughter can never escape the shadow of her father. Lugosi and Browning will forever come first in the minds of audiences before Holden and Hillyer. Even with that said, I still like Dracula's Daughter for finding its own identity and not retreading the film that came before it.

Modern horror sequels have neither a thought nor a question. Modern horror sequels are nothing more than empty shadows of their predecessors. I find it interesting that this was not always the case.