Daughter of Dracula

Daughter of Dracula (1972)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

Luisa Karlstein (Britt Nichols) is called to the home of her dying mother who finally reveals the family secret. The secret that she has been hiding from her daughter is that they are a family a vampires. Soon Luisa is bitten by Count Karlstein (Howard Vernon) and before long more bodies begin to pile up.

Jess Franco's LA FILLE DE Dracula (aka Dracula'S DAUGHTER or DAUGHTER OF Dracula among others) isn't the best vampire film that the Spanish director did but there are enough interesting moments to make it worth watching if you're a fan of his. Obviously Franco calls for a very acquired taste and most people are going to hate his pictures with a passion. You either get them or you don't but there are a few that can be enjoyed by the more mainstream crowd but this here isn't one of them.

As is the case with a lot of the director's work, LA FILLE DE Dracula contains very little plot. In fact, you really can't make heads or tails out of a lot of it but this just lets the director build up at atmosphere, which is one of the high marks. I also thought the music score by Daniel White was extremely good and you've also got some great locations. Another plus is the beautiful Nichols who is very good in her role and we all know that the director knows how to film women. I also thought Vernon was fun in his part and Franco himself plays a small role.

There are several problems with this film including the pacing, which is certainly hit and miss. I'd also argue that a bit more of a story would have helped the picture because it does drag in spots. Finally, and perhaps most shockingly, the film really isn't as erotic as you'd hope and especially when you consider what VAMPYROS LESBOS was like. Still, if you're a fan of Franco you'll still want to check this out. Others should probably start somewhere else.

Jess Franco's Dracula's Daughter is a bit of a combination of genre styles that were popular in 1972. Its part lesbian vampire film, part giallo and part sexploitation. In fairness it isn't all that successful in any of those sub-genres. The reason I guess is a common one when it comes to Franco and that's that it seems to have been knocked together too quickly for its own good. You can't help but think that there's the basis of a decent film here but it ultimately doesn't add up to a great deal.

The vampire part of the story is never developed very clearly and there aren't any actual scary horror moments. In fact poor Howard Vernon plays Count Dracula but never even gets to get out of his coffin. I haven't really got any good idea why this is so but that's just the way it is. Similarly, the giallo thread is sort of there but at no point does Franco go to the trouble of generating any actual suspense (does he ever?) so it really doesn't add an awful lot and ultimately promises more than it delivers. While from a sexploitation perspective I can't say it was too erotic, the titillation is strictly forgettable. Sometimes Franco really needs a great leading lady like Soledad Miranda to make this kind of stuff work but he doesn't have anyone of that high calibre here unfortunately.

It's not a complete wash out though. There is some decent photography at times, and the locations are pretty nice. While the typical Franco weirdness is always sort of interesting to watch. This is not one of his better films. Having said that it sure isn't one of his worst either. I guess ultimately it's one that can only really be recommended to Franco fans; for everyone else, enter at your own risk.

Some actresses are able to somewhat save some bad movies with their mesmerizing beauty, but this lesbian soft-porn, clumsily masked as horror about Dracula, is so bad that it couldn't be saved even by sex scene between Jessica Alba and Charlize Theron. I could get over the fact that vampires in the movie don't have any issues with daylight, but if somebody told me that a scene in which camera slides down the naked body of a beautiful woman could be boring I would think he's crazy. If you are a fan of horror, Dracula or good soft-porn, avoid this misery in a wide arc, but if you want to watch five minutes of to blur zoomed tongue and a nipple this is the right movie for you.

3/10

Actually I can be very positive about this movie, since it's a Jesus Franco movie that I didn't hated watching for a change. Still, it's far from being a great movie but it at least is watchable and even has some good moments in it.

Best thing about this movie is that it manages to create a good atmosphere. It's honestly a good looking movie and especially all of the sex sequences are filmed very well. Yes, it's a Jesus Franco movie, so it of course features quite a lot of nudity and sex in it. This time it involves girls only, so prepare yourself for some steamy lesbian moments. I'm actually getting real tired of these lesbian undertones in vampire movies but it's done quite well in this movie, so I have simply nothing to complain about, in this case.

The story is being somewhat pleasant and easy to follow, which is not something you could say for every Jesus Franco movie. Haven't said that, it's nothing too solid or original really. Even it's title is incredible formulaic but oh well, at least it still sounds good in French.

And this goes for the dialog as well. It's all better sounding in French and lets the actors come across as if they knew what they were doing. Still it's very obvious that most of the actor's voices got dubbed because they were non-French speaking ones. But this at least isn't anything too distracting and I don't know, it sort of adds to the charm of these sort of movies a well.

I'm not sure about it though that there is plenty for the horror/vampire lovers to enjoy. It's a movie that is more about its atmosphere really and not so much about its blood or scares. If this sound appealing enough to you, this movie is still worth checking out.

Not a great movie by any means but by normal Jesus Franco standards, it's definitely still a good and watchable enough movie.

5/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

This is a Dracula sequel and it is very scary. If this film does not scary you know movie will. This movie has great acting. It also has a great story line. It also has great special effects. It also has great acting. It very scary. If you get a come a cross it see it. It is very scary. Britt Nichols is a great actress. Dracula (March 1931) is better. But still this is good horror movie. One of the scariest movies from the 70's. You will not want to see it alone. Dracula (1992) is better. This does not have same story line has Dracula's Daughter from 1936. Dracula's Daughter (1936) is better. This is a very scary movie. This movie is a must see.