SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Derry Herrera Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

JLRVancouver In the aftermath of Count Dracula's 'murder' in London, a mysterious women, with an aversion to daylight appeals to a psychiatrist to save her from thralldom to a voice from beyond the grave. Although ostensibly taking place immediately after the Count's death in the late 1890s, "Dracula's Daughter" takes place in London in the 1930's. Gloria Holden is excellent as the tormented titular character, bringing a perfect mix of desperate humanity and Carpathian creepiness to the role. The psychiatrist (Otto Kruger) is played somewhat tongue-in-cheek, especially in his love-hate relationship with his assistant Janet (a very pretty Marguerite Churchill) and Edward Van Sloan returns as vampire hunter Professor Von Helsing. The story is very good and script clever, with a few sly innuendos (unusual in a post code movie). Although a direct sequel to an iconic horror film, "Dracula's Daughter" is much more of a psychological thriller, and very different from the Dracula themed 'monster movies' that followed. All in all, "Dracula's Daughter" is the most subtle of Dracula's cinematic children and good foggy, Gothic fun.

skybrick736 Give props to Lambert Hillyer and Garrett Fort for following up from the first Dracula with a well-planned sequel that takes place pretty much directly after the original. They pulled it off too only bringing back one central actor, Edward Von Sloan, who didn't exactly have the biggest role. The new stars include Otto Kruger, who was a strong lead and also Gloria Holden are new villain. The writing for Holden's character, Countess Zeleska aka Dracula's Daughter, was more sympathetic than ominous, which in my mind wasn't really the right portrayal to make. A darker female vixen would have been an extremely effective move and added a bit of an excitement factor that the film was missing.Another aspect of the film which I thought might have been played out a bit more was a backstory about the daughter and Dracula's relationship. Not having that connection is kind of a missing element of the story-line but not having one at all is probably better than if it was overdone. Dr. Garth himself was a well-developed witty character and interesting protagonist, the type we rarely see, which has doubts about the adversary. Dracula's Daughter has its pros and cons just like any other film but from as a classical horror film perspective it's still a viable watch.

TheLittleSongbird The best of the Universal Dracula films will always be the one from 1931 with Bela Lugosi, which is one of the best and most iconic Universal Studios horrors. But its follow-ups generally are worth a look; Son of Dracula despite Lon Chaney Jnr's miscast Dracula was much better than expected, being a good-looking film with a lot of atmosphere and at least two scenes among the best of any Universal Studios Gothic horror film but House of Dracula while watchable was disappointing apart from a couple of effective sequences, nice sets and a few good performances but did suffer mainly from having too many ideas and not enough time to explore them.Dracula's Daughter however is the best of them. Is it as good as the 1931 film? No, but it almost is. Two or three things do bring it down. The humour at the beginning with the cops was incredibly hokey and more overly-silly and misplaced than funny. Otto Kruger is an unappealingly stiff male lead, Garth has some very abrupt decision-making that Kruger overdoes to the point it gets annoying. And while the banter between him and Marguerite Churchill's Janet was very enjoyable and witty there was a little too much of it, it could have taken up less of the film and the film could have focused more on Von Helsing. Personal opinion of course.On the other hand, Dracula's Daughter has great production values. The costumes and sets are sumptuous and splendidly Gothic and the film's beautifully photographed too. The music score, actually sounding original and not stock, compliments the mood very well and has to be one of the eeriest of any of the music scores in the Universal horrors. Dracula's Daughter is wittily scripted as just as I appreciated the film noir-ish-like direction of Son of Dracula I also appreciated the sombre, moody approach that the direction in Dracula's daughter took. The story, apart from the hokey start, is fun and atmospheric, there is a real eeriness but a poignant edge too. Of individual scenes the scene with the Countess Zaleska and Lilli is infamous and for a reason. Apart from Kruger the acting is good, Marguerite Churchill is amusing and Edward Van Sloan once again brings class to Von Helsing but the most memorable turns are from Irving Pichel and especially Gloria Holden. Pichel is effectively sinister especially towards the end while Holden is unforgettable in the title, subtly creepy but somewhat tragic.All in all, not as good as the 1931 film but of the Dracula sequels Universal made to me Dracula's Daughter's the best one. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Rainey Dawn This is a wonderful addition to any vampire collection. This one is fun to watch - it has a bit of humor mixed in with the horror (although I would not call it comedy-horror). Gloria Holden is perfect for the role as Contessa Marya Zeleska (Dracula's Daughter) she has the right look for the role. And Contessa's very strange assistant Sandor (Irving Pichel) is about as scary as she is.One reviewer has mentioned a hit of Lesbianism within the film - and I do think that is possible but I also wonder if it is a hint at "the blood of a young female virgin" - either way this film will have you wondering what the writer had in mind. ---> Once you see the film you will understand my meaning.8/10