One thing I love about
the Universal Monsters sequels is the attention paid to continuity between
them. Both Bride of Frankenstein and
Dracula's Daughter begin where Frankenstein and Dracula ended. Yeah, there might be a bit of revisionist
history in the second chapters, but it's mostly disguised with adjacent scenes
we just didn't see the first time around.
For example, at the same time Van Helsing is staking Dracula in the
original movie, police are racing down the castle steps; we just don't see this
occurring until the sequel.
In Dracula's Daughter
(1936), the police presence, specifically that of Scotland Yard, is felt so
heavily that at times it's more criminal mystery than horror thriller. Sir Basil Humphrey (Gilbert Emery) basically
replaces the role of disbelieving family members that were featured in
Dracula. This depersonalizes the stakes (pun intended), even though the movie attempts to add a love triangle among a former student of
Van Helsing's, Jeffrey Garth (Otto Kruger), his assistant, Janet (Marguerite
Churchill) and the villain, Contessa Marya Zeleska (Gloria Holden), aka
"Dracula's Daughter."
Zeleska is not
literally Dracula's daughter.
Figuratively, she became his daughter when she suffered "the curse
of the Draculas," which I assume means became his blood slave. She may be the first reluctant vampire
character in movies in that she wants to be "free… free
forever." However, a burial
ceremony to destroy her master's body does not actually release her. She continues to be interested in alternative
cures that Garth offers, such as hypnosis.
But it seems mostly lip service as she continues to carry on her
"father's" wicked ways.
The genders are
reversed, but Zeleska's goal is the same: to have a partner with whom she can
spend eternal life. At her side is a
creepy looking guy named Sandor (Irving Pichel), who could be interpreted as
the real villain of the story. You get
the feeling that even if Zeleska could escape the darkness, Sandor would try to
prevent it… or kill her instead.
The locales are also reversed. Dracula begins in Transylvania and moves to
London. Dracula's Daughter begins in
London and moves to Transylvania.
Instead of literally carrying her victim with her for the climax,
Zeleska takes Janet. Her victim, Garth,
chases after them. It then becomes
somewhat of a hostage situation where one life is offered for another.
How much you enjoy
Dracula's Daughter may depend upon how much you like Holden in the role. Personally, I don't think she's as
charismatic as Bela Lugosi was as Dracula.
Soft spoken with a deep voice, her high cheekbones make her look more
like Cher than anyone else. She uses her
ring to mesmerize her victims, but it's her voice alone that almost lulled me
into a trance. It would be best to
distance her relationship with Dracula, but when she gives her interpretation
of lines like, "I never drink… wine," you're reminded this is an
inferior product.
There's the basis for a
great idea here. Before Garth
understands the true reason for Zeleska's torture, he likens her "obsession"
to that of an alcoholic and proposes a method to make her similarly fight her
will. You'd place an alcoholic in a room
with a bottle and not allow him/her to drink, but I'm not sure what Garth would
put in a room with Zeleska, a blood bag?
The movie, rightfully so, is more interested in the action and soon
abandons his practical efforts in favor of Zeleska's failures to go straight.
Van Helsing's lack of
participation in it all is curious. His
primary purpose is, for us, to state the obvious, and for the other characters,
to recap events from the first movie.
His commentary with Sir Basil and relationship with Garth is a bridge to
what's really happening, but his actual participation in events is
limited. When Garth charters a plane to
Transylvania, Van Helsing exclaims, "Stop him! He's going to his death!" Even when he joins at the end, it's only to
respond to a comment about how beautiful Zeleska's body is.
"She was beautiful
when she died… 100 years ago,"
says Van Helsing. Probably intended to
be serious, I laughed when he said that.
Likewise, at the beginning of the movie when someone asks how long
Dracula has been dead, I laughed when Van Helsing said, "About 500
years." Intentional or not, there's
more humor in Dracula's Daughter than in its predecessor. But there's less style. The sequel has none of the atmosphere of the
original, and it's particularly noticeable in what are supposed to be the exact
same settings, such as Dracula's Transylvania castle.
Compared to the other
sequel, Bride of Frankenstein, Dracula's Daughter… well, doesn't compare. The time between making the two Frankenstein
movies was shorter than that between the two Dracula movies, so maybe that has
something to do with the approach taken.
Dracula's Daughter seems to have established the pattern for the
multitude of Universal Monsters sequels that followed. I don't know that any of them could be
considered good movies, but a lot of them are fun. However, this one is not one of my favorites.
No comments:
Post a Comment