House of Dracula
1945, US, Directed by Erle C Kenton
Black & White, Running Time: 64 minutes
DVD, Region 2, Universal, Video: 1.33:1, Audio: Mono
The trailer for this one followed almost exactly the same format as the previous year’s House of Frankenstein which, aside from hinting that the success of the 1944 movie had temporarily breathed a few hours extra life into the series, almost certainly proved that Universal had virtually no idea where to take horror at that time. Much of the film’s meagre running time revolves around the house of a doctor renowned for curing the incurable, a place where Dracula himself shows up hoping to rid himself of the bloodsucking curse, and also coincidentally Larry Talbot, who isn’t entirely happy that he spends many nights roaming moors in search of flesh rather than drinking beer down the local. Not only that but the doctor’s assistant is herself a hunchback waiting to be corrected as he perfects his medical procedures. Dracula goes through a series of blood transfusions every other night while Talbot has to wait for the doctor to grow a certain kind of plant whose vapours can soften the cranium bone, allowing careful manipulation that will theoretically permit remoulding thereby reducing pressure on areas that are causing the hormonal instability that in turn initiates physical transformation. The vampire however turns the tables on the doctor, reversing the blood transfusion one night and infecting the amiable man, causing a Jekyll-like alteration in his physical and mental make-up and creating a very new monster. This fresh abomination causes more havoc in Visaria than any of the others resulting in murder and a subsequent mob chase back to the house where a post-operation Talbot is almost implicated for the crime. As the doctor’s sanity deteriorates he reinvigorates the Frankenstein monster (having been found beneath the grounds in quicksand) with electricity bringing about one final climax of destructive mayhem.
It was nice to have many of the actors from the previous film return here; Carradine as the count, Glenn Strange as a barely used monster, Chaney as the wolf man of course, and even Lionel Atwill popping up as yet another figure of authority. The creepy Skelton Knaggs, notable for his eerie portrait of a mute sailor in Val Lewton’s Ghost Ship, also appears as one of the angry villagers. There’s no attempt to explain how Talbot and Dracula both return from their personal demises at the end of the last film but continuity is once again retained when it comes to the monster - this time found in quicksand underground, still with the skeletal remains of Niemann in his arms. It’s a real shame though that the creature has almost nothing to do except almost exactly the same as what his role entailed last time around: be found, be revived, destroy everything in the last couple of minutes. While the previous film was comparatively epic in its geographical scope this one limits the majority of action to the house with some occurrences taking place in the village. One aspect that I believe works quite well, and could have shaped an entire movie in its own right, is the metamorphosis of the doctor into a sort of human-vampire hybrid following Dracula’s malicious reverse transfusion. Probably taking influence from the Robert Louis Stevenson story this created one of the chilling images that I remember from childhood, the actual occurrence almost living up to that recollection. The transformed character is distinctly more evil than any of the famous monsters, most evident as he playfully torments Siegfried before killing him. The actor himself (Onslow Stevens) is also amazingly agile as he bounds through the sets in near athletic manner. As a footnote, the effect used to remove his reflection from the mirror is extremely well executed for the period.
Taking almost science fiction principles as explanatory factors as this film does perhaps this alone was evidence that Universal had no more faith in the unexplained supernatural. As a snapshot of a virtual madhouse in the middle of an alternate reality this movie almost works - it’s never boring at the very least - but that lack of innovation rears its head to hinder appreciation and considered as a finale to the Dracula/Frankenstein/Wolf Man series House of Dracula is slightly dissatisfying, then again perhaps it wasn’t quite the end… Now, I think I’m off to watch something in colour and widescreen.
I never really warmed to this one myself, but you did nail the positives here - namely the performance of Onslow Stevens. Without his presence I would be hard pressed to find anything good to say about this film. Mind you, I always liked the fact that poor old Larry Talbot finally got cured of his affliction.
Glad that you managed to slip in a reference to Skelton Knaggs - that guy certainly had one memorably ugly mug!
February 24th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
He did as well, plus a memorably sly sort of voice too. I suppose it was nice to see Talbot cured, unless the Abbott & Costello story chronologically followed the sequence of events here, in which case the doctor’s rather inventive theory must have proven wrong. Be interesting to see how the new Wolf Man remake - due to start shooting imminently - is going to turn out by the way. I’m certainly looking forward to it at the moment.
February 24th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
The new Wolf Man remake? There will be blood… (and lots of CGI transformations. A little lycanthropic sex. And more blood spurting all over the darned place, large yellow teeth and much rending of limbs from limb.)
I’m expecting not much will be left to the imagination. In short, none of the innocence of the original Universal monster films.
February 24th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I don’t mind as long as it’s a good movie - the thing is, that sort of innocence wouldn’t cut it nowadays so it has to be a bit more edgy, possibly more violent, and a little more libido wouldn’t go amiss either! I believe that Benicio del Toro is playing Larry Talbot with Anthony Hopkins as his father. It’s still a year or so away at the moment.
February 24th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
del Toro? Blimey, it’s a cross between Larry Talbot and Ollie Reed’s Leon Corledo.
However, times have indeed moved on - I’m not that naive (well, not much…), Hammer had their werewolf the product of the rape of a mute virgin wench by a looney, hirsute, imprisoned tramp who hadn’t seen soap in a generation (and he didn’t even wash first…yeeeuchhh!)
From ‘even a man that is pure at heart…’ to that in 20 years; gawd knows what faces us half a century later. After ‘Van Helsing’, my expectations are predictably low.
February 24th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Yes, if they go for that kind of format I think I’m giving up on Hollywood. Thing is though, I think the werewolf subgenre has always had a great potential that’s often missed so whenever such a movie is announced I’m pretty excited.
Curse of the Werewolf was indeed a world apart from the Universal films but of course it was very heavily censored in its day so it’s not like they really got away with too much. Problem is nowadays that there’s a tendency to aim for the lowest denominator as far as age is concerned in order to reap maximum returns, hence we often end up with PG-13 rated anaemic material instead of real terror (then there’s the other extreme with the current batch of ‘torture’ movies which has become tiresome real quick).
February 24th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
Cuts not withstanding, and they were relatively minor, ‘Curse’ was nonetheless considered pretty horrifying in it’s day and it was, of course, given an X certificate; different times, changing values.
I think you’re spot on and it will aim for the fattest sector of the market; we are either going to get a kind of tongue in cheek ‘Van Helsing’ / ‘Mask of Zorro’ hybrid, or a ‘Saw III’ slasher bloodfest. Either way, I’ll stay at home.
February 24th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
In Britain they had big problems with the censors when it came to Curse… Trevelyan (the BBFC secretary at the time) didn’t think it should have been shown even heavily censored - part of the problem was the potential offence caused to various action groups of the time. Details are not available on the BBFC site of the actual cuts nowadays but I’ve read figures suggesting at least one minute, possibly as much as three (bear in mind this was even after the BBFC had reviewed the script and suggested changes prior to shooting, something that was commonplace during the day). I saw the X certificate shown at an arthouse cinema about ten years ago and didn’t enjoy it - the cuts were noticeable. The MPAA weren’t nearly as harsh with it. Of course the film’s now restored and available courtesy of Universal in the US and a very nice edition it is.
But, I’ve digressed, let’s hope they surprise us with The Wolf Man - you never know. Then again, I’ve read that the screenplay is being rewritten by David Self, the guy who wrote The Haunting (the 1999 remake that is - AAARRRGGGHHHH…).
February 25th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Paul, just to try and clear this up (aka flog that dead horse), the cuts include; …heavy cuts to the repeated stabbing of the Marquis (reduced to one stab), the murder of the prostitute where scenes of biting and a shot of her dead body were completely removed, and the killing of the werewolf in the bell tower which saw shots of his screaming when the bells ring, a blood spurt from a gunshot, and a closeup of his blood-dripping face also removed. In addition the film was also cut to edit scenes of the servant girl waking in the dungeon, a shot of the Marquis picking a scab from his face and images of dead lambs.
When the BBFC passed it in ‘61 it was 88m 24s; Universal’s R1 DVD runs 92m 40s.
My point was that it was pretty much standard censorship for the day, not just for reasons of violence but hacking scenes which were deemed tasteless or salacious; I can’t imagine what would be deemed ‘tasteless’ today (in fact, I don’t even want to think about it…)
February 25th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
The problem today seems to be still one of potential offence to various people/groups - for example the pretty crass alteration (made by Warner UK rather than the BBFC) made to the soundtrack for Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut to prevent insult being taken by a resident Eastern religious group prevalent in the UK, plus they still have problems with violence to women of course (see the recent New York Ripper disc, although that’s a pretty extreme example!). And don’t mention those UK Tom & Jerry DVDs to me!
It’s funny but you listing the cuts to Curse… in that way makes it sound far nastier than it actually is watching it.
February 25th, 2008 at 7:29 pm