User reviews

There has been a debate raging for Universal Monster fans over the decades as to what's the better film -- "House of Frankenstein" or "House of Dracula"? For me, I may prefer HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN, but I certainly wouldn't count out an evening with this one, the final "serious" entry in Universal's classic monster series. It's still pretty good, though I feel its main problem is just being a victim of familiarity and nowhere else to really go at this stage. At least "Frankenstein" was a fresh idea at the time, while "Dracula" repeats the old formula again and reveals that our favorite cherished monsters had reached their limitations.

Dracula (John Carradine) arrives at the home of the kindly Dr. Edelmann (Onslow Stevens) to seek a cure from his vampirism. At the same time, the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney) shows up looking for release from his lycanthropy. Through a series of chaotic events, the warm hearted doctor turns into a Jekyll/Hyde madman and becomes intent on reviving the Frankenstein Monster (Glenn Strange). Throw in a pretty "hunchback" nurse and you've got what the ads curiously touted as "FIVE Monsters!"

What "House of Dracula" has going for it is more of that vintage Universal atmosphere and soothing music soundtrack, and a superb dual performance from Onslow Stevens as the scientist. John Carradine turns in another fine rendition of his suave Count Dracula, but Lon Chaney's werewolf is pretty much by the books at this point, although the end of the movie contains an interesting little twist for a change. Glenn Strange makes a very awesome-looking Frankenstein Monster, but unfortunately spends 99% of the film lying flat on his back with the exception of a few minor shots when he's up on his feet; some of his most active footage is swiped from BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN.

All things considered you could undoubtedly do a lot worse than "House of Dracula" for a nightly Monster Mash, but it's easy to see why Dracula, the Wolf Man and Frankenstein's Monster were retired after this chapter, and why they needed Abbott & Costello to resuscitate them three years later. **1/2 out of ****

House of Dracula is another of the series of all-star monster extravaganzas produced by Universal in the 40s.

This one deals with The Wolf Man (Lon Chaney Jr.) and Dracula (John Carradine) coming to scientist Onslow Stevens for a cure for what ails them. Along the way they find the Frankenstein Monster (Glenn Strange) and try to help him as well. Well, we all know that things will not go smoothly and the monsters will soon be running amok.

Carradine, playing Dracula for the second time, is quite effective in the role. He gives it his own interpretation and doesn't try to copy Bela Lugosi. Chaney gives a sympathetic performance as the doomed Lawrence Talbot. Stevens, in a rare leading role, also stands out as the doctor. The Frankenstein monster has little to do until the final minutes of the film.

As monster films go, this isn't one of the all-time greats, but on the other hand it does provide 67 minutes of solid entertainment.

House of Dracula works from the same basic premise as House of Frankenstein from the year before; namely that Universal's three most famous monsters; Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster and The Wolf Man are appearing in the movie together. Naturally, the film is rather messy therefore, but the fact that all three monsters are there is usually enough to ensure that the film's sixty seven minutes don't become boring. It's obvious that the idea of making another monster mash came into the writer's head before an actual plot did, as the yarn we're given isn't exactly without holes. The plot sees Count Dracula arrive at Dr. Edelman's home asking for a cure for his vampirism. Then, what can only be described as a coincidence, sees Lawrence Talbot, a.k.a. The Wolf Man turn up asking for a cure for his affliction! It turns out that Dracula is on the prowl for Edelman's daughter, but Talbot really is serious. When it turns out that he can't be stopped from turning into a wolf, The Wolf Man throws himself into the sea...where he ends up finding Frankenstein's Monster.

Overall, this film isn't as good as the earlier House of Frankenstein. The 1944 film put its plot together better than this entry in the series does, as the plot here doesn't give equal time to each Universal monster. Dracula's plot is the biggest at first, but soon fizzles out only to resurface at the end. The Wolf Man is the star of the show, but his story never really develops, and is essentially just another version of the plot he always finds himself in. Frankenstein's Monster is given the coldest hand, as he appears in the movie merely as an afterthought, and an obvious excuse to ensure that all three monsters appear in the movie. The story of the doctor who binds all three together is the most interesting, but this is a little disappointing as he isn't the reason why people will see this film. The acting is good enough, with John Carradine showing his sinister side and Lon Chaney Jr once again making sure that his character is bathed in tragedy. Glenn Strange is given nothing to do, and Onslow Stevens proves the real highlight as Dr Edelman. Overall, this film won't do much for anyone that isn't a fan of Universal horror; but as silly monster movies go, House of Dracula is worth seeing.

MORD39 RATING: **1/2 out of ****

HOUSE OF DRACULA is a small notch below the previous HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN, mostly because the novelty of the three monsters theme feels repetitive. Just the same, it's much fun and a fitting conclusion to the "serious" monster pictures in a beloved series.

John Carradine is capable again as Dracula, but Lon Chaney's Wolfman stint is really automatic by now. Once again, Glenn Strange is an impressive Frankenstein Monster, albeit a brief one for the last minute or two. The real attraction this time is Onslow Stevens in the role of a kindly sympathetic doctor who sets out to "cure" Dracula and the Wolfman, but ultimately becomes a sort of Jekyll/Hyde as a result of his efforts. Stevens is excellent in this film, and takes center stage.

Still, there is a feeling of "yesterday's leftovers" with the film. Stock footage is lifted again from GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN and BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, and there is a general aura around the proceedings which suggests that it was thrown together more hastily.

These negative comments in no way make for an unsatisfactory view, however...HOUSE OF DRACULA is the last of its line, and still an essential Universal Horror.

Count Dracula (John Carradine) and the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney Jr) seek a cure for their afflictions; meanwhile, a hunchbacked woman (Jane Adams), a mad scientist and Frankenstein's monster (Glenn Strange) have their own troubles.

Somebody at Universal thought it would be a good idea to combine Dracula, the Wolfman, Frankenstein's monster, a hunchback and basically a knockoff of Jekyll and Hyde. In theory, this sounds great -- why not pack the screen with monsters? More monsters, more fun. But actually doing it within the 67 minutes allotted and having a coherent plot... well, that is another matter entirely.

If you are watching the films in Universal's Dracula Legacy collection, this film comes after "Son of Dracula". It actually comes after "House of Frankenstein", but you would not know that from the way it is bundled. And it seems weird that Chaney shows up looking exactly like he did for his Dracula / Alucard role, only to return as Larry Talbot again. Mixing monsters and switching actors is confusing!

Then there is Dracula. Now, either you have Dracula wanting to be cured of his vampirism, which makes absolutely no sense, or the character is not actually Dracula but a baron as he claims in the beginning. If that is the case, it seems that the nobility are especially susceptible to becoming the undead. A pity.

To recap, if you want a variety of monsters running around a lab going crazy, this is a pretty good story. But if you actually want a film that makes sense, this probably is not the one for you -- it is just too packed with monsters to really develop a story. Overall, really fun but no depth. The story was probably written in 15 minutes.

This is the least of the Universal horror films featuring any of the "Big 3"==Frankenstein's monster, Dracula and the Wolfman. Despite John Carradine's Dracula being killed pretty thoroughly in the last film, he's back again. And, Frankenstein is here as well. However, what's totally new is the type of doctor they meet. This guy is interested in helping the monsters to become good respectable citizens and sets about ridding them of their evil ways. Of course, like always, the good intentioned doctor is a real idiot and he really is doing Dracula's evil bidding--as he wants Frankenstein revived so he can serve him in his plan for global evil. Sure. Whatever. Anyway, apart from the odd plot, there's really nothing new here. It's a decent film sure to please fans of the genre, but is about the most skipable monster movie Universal made featuring any of the Big 3.

This movies marks the final appearance for the famous classic horror characters; Dracula, The Frankenstein creature and The Wolf Man. Well yes, of course those characters would later appear in many other horror movies over the years, in many different forms and ways but this was the last official Universal Pictures horror movie with those classic monsters. Unless you also count "Bud Abbott Lou Costello Meet Frankenstein" but since that movie was a comedy I think its fair to say that this movie is the last in the series, that follows the movies; "Dracula", "Frankenstein", "Bride of Frankenstein", "Dracula's Daughter", "Son of Frankenstein", "The Wolf Man", "The Ghost of Frankenstein", "Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man", "Son of Dracula" and "House of Frankenstein".

Main problem is that the movie lacks any fresh ideas or one good central character. I'm still not sure who was supposed to be the main characters in this movie. It also lacks some good well known actors. Basically the only well known actors from the good old days in this movie are Lon Chaney Jr. and Lionel Atwill.

John Carradine once again reprises his role as Dracula and he is surprisingly better than he was in "House of Frankenstein". Glenn Strange also reprises his role as the Frankenstein monster once more but he doesn't have an awful lot to do in this movie. Lon Chaney Jr. perhaps plays his best Wolf Man role in this movie and his character gets the most satisfying ending of all the monster characters (Whether he dies or not, or gets cured finally am I not going to spoil for you.). The Wolf Man truly was a tragic character and Chaney Jr. perfectly captures that feeling in this movie.

It's too bad that the movie lacks in so many important things; a good story, well known classic horror actors, a good main character and any original moments. Still of course for the fans of the genre, this movie still remains perfectly watchable.

5/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

I enjoyed this more the second time around, because at first I was disappointed to watch how poorly the Universal monsters fared when compared to earlier outings. In fact, Dracula (John Carradine) does little but lust after the female assistant of the 'celebrated' doctor (Onslow Stevens) who's supposed to cure his vampirism; though Lon Chaney Jr., returning as The Wolf Man, changes a couple of times in the film, nothing ever comes of these - but, for once, we do get a happy ending for him here; the Frankenstein Monster (Glenn Strange) doesn't appear until half the film is over and, till the very last sequence, is strapped to an operating table (still, his final rampage and come-uppance, though partly lifted from THE GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN [1942], is effective enough).

The film, however, belongs to Onslow Stevens who manages both facets of the doctor's personality - the intellectual, rather cold scientist who finds logic even in the supernatural and, when infected with Dracula's blood, the prowling Hyde-like menace who re-activates the Frankenstein monster (whom he just happens to come across in a cave, by the way) for his sinister purposes...but these, needless to say, are thwarted by the nth stomping of the castle grounds by the angry villagers, led by a dignified Lionel Atwill and zombie-like Skelton Knaggs! Besides Stevens' 'monster', the film features a girl hunchback(!) - I remember laughing out loud at her introduction when I first watched the film but, thinking about it now, her presence does serve a purpose as Stevens' experiments are supposed to help cure her deformity (apparently, there ain't nothing this doctor can't fix!). Despite the general cheapness of the production, I was struck by the shadowy lighting, the music (some of it, admittedly, borrowed from earlier pictures) and the set design - elements which are always a pleasure to look out for in these Universal 'classics'.

This is the least successful Universal Horror film of them all. Even some of the B level films-The Invisible Agent for example-are put together better than this. It is way to similar to the prior (and weaker) entry of House Frankenstein. Worse there is not real joy seeing the rogue gallery in this film. The pace is quite slow and the much of the proceedings are very predictable.

I also do not really understand what the hell Dracula was playing at in this film; it is almost as if he wanted to get killed.

I checked Wikipedia over a dozen times to make sure I watched the Frankenstein movies in order and I still messed up twice. In my review of Abbott And Costello Meet Frankenstein I was confused about the Wolfman and Dracula knowing each other and that was because I was supposed to watch this first. Although they cross paths in this movie, they don't talk and are definitely not friends. Anyway, this movie is not very good. It starts with a doctor sleeping, fully clothed, in a chair in his giant castle at 5 am. Not bad enough? Well when the doctor is woken up by a stranger in his castle, he's not upset and just does what the stranger says. Still watching? Then the stranger tells him that he is Dracula and the doctor has almost no reaction at all. From that point on it gets even worse. The first time Chaney turns into the Wolfman, he just falls down and goes to sleep. The second time he is in a cave and the doctor goes in after him. Smart move. The Wolfman starts choking the doctor but changes back to human form even though the moon is still up. And how are there so many full moons? Then they find the Frankenstein monster and it gets even worse. An Abbott And Costello movie was the next logical step after this miserable mess. This movie is for hardcore fans only.

Dracula (John Carradine) visits Dr. Edelman (Onslow Stevens) who believes everything can be cured by science. He wants Edelamn to cure his vampirism--Edelman agrees. Then Lawrence Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr.) pops up looking for a cure for his turning into a werewolf. The Frankenstein monster is discovered too but doesn't really do anything.

Very ambitious plot for a Universal horror film from the 1940s. Trying to cure the monsters by science is actually an interesting idea. Also this movie has beautiful sets (LOVE the castle to doctor lives in), tons of atmosphere, is very well-directed (great use of shadows) and has pretty good special effects.

The acting is all good except for Carradine--he tries but I could never accept him as Dracula. Also Lionel Atwill pops in playing (as always) the chief of police. This is pretty much forgotten and derided as a stupid film but I think it's very good. It's also to last time the Universal monsters were done seriously--the next film was in 1948 in "Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein". It's a great film but the accent is more on comedy.

The only real flaw here is there's a LOT of plot for 67 minutes and some gaps in logic: Why does Dracula try to bite lovely Miliza (Martha O'Driscoll) when he's being cured? And why (and how) does the doctor get Frankenstin into his castle? Still these are small complaints. Recommended.

"House of Dracula" (Universal, 1945), directed by Erle C. Kenton, an immediate sequel to HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1944), rejoins the Universal monsters of The Wolf Man, Count Dracula and The Frankenstein Monster in another attempt for a cure of the eternal curse. But in spite of the title that would indicate a Dracula thriller, the house in question happens to be the residence of a scientist named Edelmann.

In the previous horror fest, Count Dracula (John Carradine) meets his doom after facing the rising sun; Lawrence Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr.) is shot and killed by a silver bullet; and the Monster (Glenn Strange), who carries the wounded mad scientist, Doctor Niemann (Boris Karloff), each come to their ends when pursued by torch-wielding villagers, forced into the forest and walking into and sinking slowly beneath a pool of quicksand. A fine climax, however, with this sequel, the story begins with a vampire bat changing into the form of Count Dracula coming to the residence of Doctor Franz Edelmann (Onslow Stevens) seeking a cure for his vampiric condition. That same night, a second visitor, Lawrence Talbot, appears (this time sporting a mustache), hoping also for a cure. With Dracula and Talbot alive and well, the screenwriters of this production have obviously exhausted themselves in obtaining an original story, thus, repeating themselves with some slight alterations as well as the lack of an explanation as to how these two victims of eternal doom have survived their demise. It is interesting that someone didn't think about adding Klaris, the living mummy, into this roaster, but since Lon Chaney Jr. was doing that, it would be impossible for him to perform as two monster characters into the same film. As with HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN, the Monster, whose preserved body has been found along with the skeleton remains of Doctor Niemann, is the least important of the three monsters, and once again, he is given very limited screen time. Like Niemann, Doctor Edelmann has a hunchback assistant, this time in the form of a woman, a nurse named Nina (Jane Adams). Edelman comes upon the logical reason for Dracula's undeath being more medical than supernatural, as well as theorizing Talbot's affliction being more physiology rather than the curse of a gypsy. While Edelmann is experimenting with the Monster, Dracula finds himself a new victim in Miliza Morelle (Martha O'Driscoll). After destroying Dracula by opening his casket during the sunrise, Edelmann, who had earlier received contaminated blood transformation from Dracula, gradually becomes insane in the manner of Jekyll and Hyde, committing a series of murders by night, and being his simple self by day.

Unlike the horror thrillers made by Universal in the 1930s, HOUSE OF Dracula plays more like a kiddie matinée, this being the least of the combined monster cycle that began with FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN (1943). Not that HOUSE OF Dracula is a bad movie, in fact, it's not very good either. It lacks originality, especially with its final minutes that appears to be rushed, along with the climax of the Monster's umpteenth demise lifted from the fadeout of THE GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN (1942). In spite of these clichés, HOUSE OF Dracula does contain some memorable moments, including the scene where Lawrence Talbot is placed in a Visaria jail where he awaits the rising of the full moon, and transforms into the wolf man and runs rapidly around his locked jail cell before he retreats in exhaustion, as witnessed by Edelmann and Inspector Holtz (Lionel Atwill). Another key scene later finds Talbot, out of desperation trying to avoid another horror in changing into a wolf man during the upcoming full moon, hurries to the edge of a cliff and leaps into the sea where the waves push him into a cave below lies the Frankenstein monster. John Carradine in his second go-round as Count Dracula, sporting top hat and mustache as in the previous film, makes do with his eerie performance. Onslow Stevens, who is not quite a household name in horror films as Boris Karloff or Bela Lugosi, does fine work with his latter transformation in the story from good to evil doctor. Lionel Atwill, who had appeared in every "Frankenstein" sequel since 1939, all in different screen characters, makes his final performance in the series.

Seen in the supporting cast are Ludwig Stossel as Zigfried, one of the murder victims; Skelton Knaggs as Steinmuhl, Zigfried's brother; and Joseph E. Bernard as Brahams. Knaggs plays an interesting interpretation as one of the crazed villagers, a role that could have been excellently played by Dwight Frye (Renfield in Dracula; Fritz in FRANKENSTEIN) had he not died in 1943. Besides the actors and special effects, HOUSE OF Dracula includes many dark scenes to give this particularly segment a "film noir" feel.

While "House of Dracula" was reportedly supposed to have ended the Universal monster horror cycle, Drac, Wolfie and Franky returned for one more encore in ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN (1948).

HOUSE OF Dracula, which runs at 67 minutes, is available for viewing on video cassette. It not only enjoyed frequent television revivals on commercial channels after the midnight hours during the 1960s and '70s, but had played on cable television's Sci-Fi Channe, American Movie Classics (2000-2002) and Turner Classic Movies (TCM premiere, October 3, 2012). Recommended viewing for campy horror film buffs. (*1/2)

Much of what is written here is useful, but I'd like to add a few comments. Interestingly for Universal horror fans, House of Dracula is the only film in the Frankenstein series that does not star Karloff or Lugosi. The absence of these two horror heavyweights makes the film seem more disjointed than other entries (though still fun.) (John Carradine, I think scores best, while Mr. Chaney, Jr., is merely repeating himself. House of D also introduces a female hunchback!) I wonder if Karloff and Lugosi are both absent because they were working on "The Body Snatcher," which was released the same year and is arguably Karloff's last great horror film.

Entertaining shocker in which a lot of Monsters of the Universal Pictures reunite for the last in the Universal series , it deals with Count Dracula : John Carradine and Wolf Man : Lon Chaney Jr go to Doctor Edellman house : Onslow Stevens to cure their illness , but there things go wrong . There Count Dracula falls for a beautiful nurse and takes place twisted scientific experiments . While the mad doctor carries out his dastardly deeeds by reviving and working on the creature Frankenstein finely portrayed by ex-cowboy Glenn Strange , while Boris Karloff had made immortal 15 years earlier .

By the time this contribution to Universal Horror series came out , Hollywod audiences were no longer content with a monster , or even two. As producers joined three monsters , a hunchback woman and adding a mad doctor should prove enough for even the most avid terror fans. An all-star-cast helps deeply this horror festival along . Producers also threw in every available actor with an important reputation in the genre such as John Carradine , Lon Chaney Jr , Onslow Stevens , and Frankenstein is finely acted by ex-cowboy Glenn Strange. Not surprisingly things fuse here , there and everywhere in more ways than one . Once again all the Universal monsters get together for the last in the Universal series before they meet Bud Abbot and Lou Costello and their hilarious terror movies mostly directed by Charles Barton, in which appear as guest stars many actors from House of Dracula, such as : Abbott and Costello meet Frankenstein, Abott and Costello versus Dr Jekill and Mr Hyde , Abbott and Costello against the Invisible Man, Abbot and Costello against Mummy , among others . The picture with an atmospheric cinematography in Black and White was professionally directed by Erle C Kenton who made innumerable Terror films for the Universal studios , such as : The Ghost of Frankenstein, House of Frankenstein and the Cat Creeps. Rating 6/10 . Passable and acceptable. Essential and indispensable seeing for Universal Monsters series fans . Well worth watching .

"Universal" studios could have made a better film in which to finish their stable of monster characters.

"House of Dracula" is a disappointment in many ways: Onslow Stevens acting a bit on the hammy side when he becomes a mad scientist (he is better when playing his character in a more benevolent manner), Glenn Strange has nothing to do other than destroy the laboratory, it's rather obvious that footage is used from previous horror films by the studios, Lionel Atwill shouldn't have bothered appearing in this film as he is clearly rather ill during filming (he died only months later), Lon Chaney Jnr should have had more screen time as the Wolf Man and the reduction in budget is there for all to see.

John Carradine makes another effective appearance as Count Dracula though and he wisely has a fair amount of screen time.

It's a bit disappointing that this film marks the last time we see the old Eastern European village set on the backlot.

It is a shame as the cast are capable, the characters are timeless and the Universal monster/horror films have mostly been entertaining. House of Dracula is not that bad and does have quite a few good things, but it was an example of a film that showed so much potential but didn't fully live up to it.

Starting with the good things, the sets are sumptuous and wonderfully Gothic, likewise with the costumes and there is great use of shadowy lighting. The music is very haunting, with inspired use of Beethoven's moonlight sonata, though it occasionally sounds as if it was borrowed from other films. Two scenes are quite effective, the Moonlight sonata scene, which was telling in its psychological eeriness, and the Wolf Man transformation scene. Some of the acting is good, Onslow Stevens sharing the acting honours as an, as said, Jekyll and Hyde character that he attacks with menace and pathos. Lon Chaney Jnr. once again gives a very deeply felt performance as Talbot/ Wolf Man, though not as good as he was in The Wolf Man and Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. Skelton Knaggs makes a creepy appearance albeit a brief one and Jane Addams is an enticing and touching Nina. Martha O' Driscoll is both attractive and sympathetic.

Not all the acting works on the other hand. John Carradine has the look, the suavity and visual eeriness for Dracula but not the sinister evil or aristocratic charm, he's somewhat too understated in the role. Glenn Strange has literally nothing to do and spends his entire window-dressing-like screen time looking confused as to where he was. The normally good Lionel Atwill is wasted and lacks energy. The photography has its moments but lacks refinement overall, a lot of the editing looking like it was done in haste. The used footage of Chaney in Ghost of Frankenstein and Boris Karloff in Bride of Frankenstein looked good, but that it was stock was obvious. The special effects are rather cheesy-looking, by today's standards and I imagine also for back then too, usually that's forgivable to me but not so much when the film is technically faulty elsewhere. The script is muddled as a result of trying to do too much, the direction is by-the-numbers and the characters are a case of nice to see them but little's done with them, that they don't share a scene together is a huge missed opportunity. It's the story that suffers the most however, the actual storyline is a tired one but it's also one that's too hurriedly paced to compensate for the too short running time as well as being over-plotted and underwritten. There are a number of plot strands but none of them really are explored, only Chaney's battle with his conscience to a degree resonates. Finally the ending is so abrupt and rushed that it feels like a great big anti-climax.

Overall, an ambitious effort in using characters from three different settings to incorporate them into one big story and a noble effort but comes up short. Not terrible, not great, mixed feelings more like. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Universal was known for strong production values on their products, even for their "B" pics. This entry, the last serious film in the talkie horror cycle had those elements, but they were rushed. The action was rushed. The music was rushed. Even though the score was stock music from several of the predecessor films, the themes were played way too fast this time. This is most evident during the chase scene where the whole village pursues Dr. Edelman through the cemetery back to his castle. The violinists must have had severe cramps after that sequence.

The last 5 minutes were even worse than the average serial chapter. Erle Kenton usually did much better as he did with House of F and Ghost in previous attempts. This was a bad imitation of Ford Beebe. It was just a collision of story and budget that was done on the cheap.

It seems like Universal was in a great hurry to get out of the horror business. This could have been a much better film with slowing down the pace (and music) to allow some of the flow to make sense.

There were some good scenes, for example when Baron Latos was seducing Nurse Morrell, the piano changing from Beethoven to Satan's music was well done. Carradine's overall performance as Dracula was quite good. It deserved to be in a better film.

House of Frankenstein was a much better film than House of Dracula simply for having a better pace. I wonder if anyone in the horror unit looked back at this last chapter with regret.

That said, the horror cycle was a pretty good ride. No other studio put out a similar product on a consistent basis, with the possible exception of SOME of the Lewton films at RKO. I still watch House of Dracula even with its shortcomings. It's like an old friend that comes over for a visit; even if he's not your BEST friend, you understand him and are comfortable with him. That's still not a bad thing.

Count Dracula and Larry Talbot (the Wolfman) turn up at Doctor Edelman's house asking for a cure. But they have to get in line behind hunchback nurse. Edelman has found a new sort of fungus with potential cure possibilities and the best place to grow it is in an old cave beneath the house. This just happens to be where the quicksand has deposited Frankenstein's monster. You just know that this is not going to end well.

There's a decent amount of drama but little action and no scares. Once again it is set in no place in particular with English and American accents all over the place (said 'place' is a village straight out the European dark ages)).

Worth watching only for nostalgic value.

House Of Dracula features John Carradine once again as the eternal count from Transylvania who is seeking out scientist Onslow Stevens who is reputed to be experimenting with things beyond the grasp of accepted science. Kind of like Dr. Frankenstein and along the way Stevens finds the body of the Frankenstein monster which he decides to tinker with in his spare time.

Not that he'll have much spare time because Lon Chaney, Jr. as Lawrence Talbot the famed Wolfman also comes knocking on Stevens's door looking for a cure as well. Chaney is all right of course except when the moon is full and he's not under lock and key.

As we see hanging around all this concentrated evil has its affect on Stevens. Who and what turns him to the dark side is what you watch the film for.

Fans of Universal's classic Gothic horror will be well pleased with House Of Dracula. Lionel Atwill is back as a police inspector with two functioning arms this time. And Stevens has a brace of beautiful nurses in Martha O'Driscoll and Jane Adams. Both Adams and O'Driscoll had modeling backgrounds and Adams's beauty shows through even though she plays a hunchback. Just the girl for J. Carrol Naish from the previous Universal all star monster flick House Of Frankenstein.

I know I was pleased with the film even though the cycle was running down some.

This is another Universal fun filled fright fest.Many people want to compare it to House Of Frankenstein.Even though it has similar cast and the same director it can stand on its own.(It does appear that Erle C Kenton directed most of the Universal horror films of the 40's).

The plot recap:Baron Latos appears at the home of Dr Eidlemann seeking a "cure" for his vampirism.Larry Talbot (who somehow survived House OF Frankenstein) also shows up at the good doctors door seeking a cure for his affliction.After a failed suicide attempt Talbot and the doctor find the Frankenstein monster. To complicate matters just before he bites the dust, Dracula infects the good doctor with his blood.The doctor becomes a bloodthirsty maniac at certain times.Where this leads to is something you'll have to see for your self.

Carradine actually gives a very good performance as Dracula. He isn't chewing up the scenery as he will in later roles. It is hard to repress giggles when he appears in a top hat though.The cape/cloak is traditional but the hat has to go. Where does the hat go when he changes into a bat...?

Onslow Stevens gives an excellent portrayal of the doctor. He's torn between his basic kindness and the increasing blood lust he is now prone to. This is a very underrated performance.Chaney brings even more life to the Wolf Man in his 4th appearance in that role.

The monster isn't given much to do this time.Just lay on the table until the end(some stock footage from the Ghost Of Frankenstein is used).At least in House Of Frankenstein he was up and around a bit.

Yes this does stick to the basic Universal pattern complete with the angry village mob running amok with torches.But it isn't a bad way to spend an hour and ten minutes.It gets a low 8.