| Son of Dracula | |
|---|---|
 Theatrical release poster | |
| Directed by | Robert Siodmak |
| Screenplay by | Eric Taylor[1] |
| Story by | Curt Siodmak[1] |
| Produced by | Ford Beebe[1] |
| Starring | |
| Cinematography | George Robinson[1] |
| Edited by | Saul A. Goodkind |
Production company | |
| Distributed by | Universal Pictures Company, Inc.[1][2] |
Release dates |
|
Running time | 78 minutes[1] |
| Country | United States[2] |
| Language | English[2] |
Son of Dracula is a 1943 Americanhorror film directed byRobert Siodmak with a screenplay based on an original story by his brotherCurt Siodmak. The film starsLon Chaney Jr.,Louise Allbritton,Robert Paige,Evelyn Ankers, andFrank Craven. The film is set in the United States, where Count Alucard (Chaney Jr.) has just taken up residence. Katherine Caldwell (Allbritton), a student of the occult, becomes fascinated by Alucard and eventually marries him. Katherine begins to look and act strangely, leading her former romantic partner Frank Stanley (Paige) to suspect that something has happened to her. He gets help from Dr. Brewster (Craven) and psychologist Laszlo (J. Edward Bromberg) who come to the conclusion that Alucard is a vampire.
The film is the third inUniversal'sDracula film series followingDracula's Daughter (1936). The film was made under different circumstances than the previous two entries in the series with a new chairman of the Board working at Universal and several horror sequels being made since the success of the filmSon of Frankenstein (1939). The film was initially being written by Curt Siodmak who was later replaced byEric Taylor. Filming began on January 7, 1943, and concluded on February 2. Few documents related to the film's production survive from studio files or trade reports.
Son of Dracula was held back from release for about six months before its premiere in the United States, with the earliest known release date being on October 20, 1943, at Cine Olimpia in Mexico City. On its initial release, the trade magazineBoxoffice declaredSon of Dracula as a hit in the United States where its sales were 23% above average. Initial reception to the film was described as "varied" by film historian Gary Rhodes.
Count Alucard is invited by Katherine Caldwell to the United States. Caldwell is one of the daughters ofNew Orleans plantation owner Colonel Caldwell. Shortly after his arrival, the Colonel dies of apparent heart failure and leaves his wealth to his two daughters. Claire receives all his money and Katherine hisestate "Dark Oaks". Katherine has been secretly seeing Alucard and the two are quickly married. Her former long-time fiancé Frank Stanley confronts the couple and tries to shoot Alucard. The bullets pass through the Count's body and hit Katherine. Assuming she is dead, a shocked Frank runs off to tell Dr. Brewster what has happened. On the doctor's arrival, he is greeted by Alucard and a living Katherine. The couple instruct him that they will be devoting their days to scientific research and only welcome visitors at night. Frank goes on to the police and confesses to the murder of Katherine. Brewster tries to convince the Sheriff that he saw Katherine alive, but the Sheriff insists on searching Dark Oaks. He finds Katherine's dead body and has her transferred to the morgue. Frank is charged with murder and put in jail.
Meanwhile, Hungarian Professor Lazlo arrives at Brewster's house. Brewster has noticed that "Alucard" is "Dracula" spelled backwards, while Lazlo suspects vampirism and says that Alucard could be Count Dracula himself. While they are talking Alucard appears and tries to attack Dr. Brewster but Professor Lazlo drives him away with across. A local boy brought to Brewster's house confirms this suspicion—there are bite marks on his neck. Katherine sneaks into Frank's cell and explains that she only married Alucard to obtain immortality and wants to share it with Frank, her true love. He is initially repulsed by her idea, but then yields to her. After she explains that she has already drunk some of his blood, she advises him on how to destroy Alucard. He breaks out of prison, seeks out Alucard's hiding place and burns his coffin. Without his daytime sanctuary, Alucard is destroyed when the sun rises. Brewster, Lazlo, and the Sheriff arrive at the scene to find Alucard's remains.
Meanwhile, Frank stumbles into the playroom where Katherine said she would be. He finds her coffin and gazes down at her lifeless body. Knowing he must kill the love of his life, Frank takes off his ring and puts it on Katherine's left ring finger. Once Brewster and the others reach the room, they see Frank appear at the door. He steps back allowing them to follow. As they enter the room, they see Katherine's burning coffin. They all stare, speechlessly, while Frank mourns the loss of his love.
Cast adapted from the bookUniversal Horrors:[1]
Son of Dracula was the third Dracula film produced by Universal, following the 1936 filmDracula's Daughter.[2] Within three weeks of the premier ofTod Browning'sDracula (1931), Universal presented three titles for follow-ups to the Hays Office. These includedThe Modern Dracula,The Return of Dracula andThe Son of Dracula.[4] No notes exist regarding the possible story content of any for these films.[4]Son of Dracula was prepared under different standards at Universal than the previous two films. The company had only restarted production on horror films in 1938 with the filmSon of Frankenstein (1939) and Universal's Chairman of the BoardJ. Cheever Cowdin had been heavily involved in the formation of the company.[5] Profits at Universal by 1941 has been higher than they had been in 1940 while a double bill of bothDracula andFrankenstein (1931) in early 1942 was declared to have "staggeringly good business" in theMotion Picture Herald.[6] Following these events, theDaily Variety announced on June 5 that two new horror films were announced withLon Chaney Jr.:Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943) andSon of Dracula.[7]
Curt Siodmak was commissioned to write a script for the film in May 1942.[8] By June 8, theLos Angeles Times announced that Curt Siodmak was still writing the screenplay.[9] Curt Siodmak's previous work was deeply rooted in horror and science fiction, from the original novel and screenplay forF.P.1 (1932) and screenplays in Hollywood forBlack Friday (1940),The Invisible Man Returns (1940),The Ape (1940),The Wolf Man (1941), andInvisible Agent (1942).[9] On July 24, theMotion Picture Herald announced that Universal had purchased Siodmak's finished draft of the script.[10] TheDaily Variety noted thatEric Taylor was given the task of writing the final script.[10] Taylor had worked previously onBlack Friday with Siodmak as well as onPhantom of the Opera (1943) andThe Ghost of Frankenstein.[11] In a 1984 interview with Tom Weaver, Curt Siodmak said that after his brotherRobert Siodmak was hired as the film's director, he made his brother leave the project.[8][11] Curt explained that the two "had a sibling rivalry. When we were in Germany, Robert had a magazine and when I wrote for it, I had to change my name. He only wanted one Siodmak around. This lasted 71 years, until he died".[8] In his book onSon of Dracula's production history, Gary D. Rhodes suggested that Curt might have been wrong about this specific situation as there was no indication that Robert was hired as the director when Taylor was hired for the script.[11] Weaver suggested that the film took place outside the universe ofDracula (1931) andDracula's Daughter (1936).[12] Weaver noted that inSon of Dracula, Prof. Lazlo states thatCount Dracula was destroyed in the 19th century making it not follow the story of the two previously mentioned films.[13] Weaver also highlighted a pressbook article that stated that "althoughSon of Dracula is not a 'continuation' of [the 1931Dracula], it is based mainly on the same ghoulish legend of the vampire".[13]
Outside of Chaney, Louise Allbritton was cast as Katherine with her role being announced by Universal on January 7. This date lead to Rhodes suggesting that she was cast at the very last minute.[14] Based on press accounts,Evelyn Ankers was cast as Claire before most actors other than Chaney.[14] Ankers had previously acted in other Universal features includingHold That Ghost (1941),The Wolf Man,The Ghost of Frankenstein,Captive Wild Woman (1943) andThe Mad Ghoul (1943).[15] Universal announced thatFrank Craven andJ. Edward Bromberg had been cast on January 12, 1943.[16]
In July 1942 the initial announcements for production was set to start in September.[9] TheHollywood Reporter later announced in December that production would start on January 4, 1943.[17] To meet this deadline, Universal sent a new draft of the script to theProduction Code Administration (PCA) on December 29 with a script titledDestiny for approval.[17] The response dated December 31 stated that this current script would not be approved by the PCA, leading to another script sent on January 4, 1943, which delayed the films production.[18] Production began onSon of Dracula on January 7.[2][18]
George Waggner was originally set to be the associate producer on the film, but became too sidetracked byPhantom of the Opera.[7][8] He was replaced withFord Beebe in mid-January.[8][18] Beebe had previously co-directed the film serialsFlash Gordon's Trip to Mars (1938),Buck Rogers (1939),The Phantom Creeps (1939),Flash Gordon Conquers the Universe (1940), as well as feature films such asNight Monster (1942).[19] He would also be the film'ssecond unit director.[19] A casting change was made on set, asAlan Curtis originally had the role of Frank but was replaced byRobert Paige after Curtis suffered a knee injury while filming the final scenes ofFlesh and Fantasy (1943).[20] According to Rhodes, few details about the production ofSon of Dracula survive in the form of studio files or trade reports.[21] Production on the film ended on February 2.[22]
Robert Siodmak, then on a $150 a week contract, said he was reluctant to take the film; he called the script "terrible—it had been knocked together in a few days". He said that he was persuaded to take the job by his wife, who said if he showed he was "a little bit better" than Universal's other directors, it would impress the studio. Three days into shooting, he was offered a seven-year contract. He commented: "We did a lot of rewriting and the result wasn't bad. It wasn't good but some scenes have a certain quality".[23]
The film was edited by Saul A. Goodkind.[1][24] Goodkind had worked with Beebe as an editor onFlash Gordon andFlash Gordon's Trip to Mars. Rhodes commented again that little is known about the post-production of the film; he noted that only minor changes in dialogue beyond what is written in the final shooting script are present in the finished film.[24]
Son of Dracula was held back from release for about six months before its premiere in the United States.[25] TheMotion Picture Herald had the film listed as being among the 162 features Hollywood Studios had yet to assign a release date in their February 27, 1943, issue.[25] Discussing the film's release, Robert J. Kiss hypothesized that their delay was related towar films that generally needed to be accommodated into release to retain their topicality, as the United States had entered intoWorld War II.[26] Prior to its release in the United States, the film was released at Cine Olimpia inMexico City on October 20, 1943. It was released with a Spanish-language dub asEl hijo de Dracula on the top half of a double feature withCaptive Wild Woman. Another screening took place in Canada on November 1, 1943, for a three-day run at the Capitol Theatre inBrandon, Manitoba.[27]
Son of Dracula andThe Mad Ghoul had been put into late night midnight screenings on October 30 in small towns in cities in the United States.[3] For instance, it was screened at the Tivoli Theatre inMaryville, Missouri, and the Parks Theatre inCedar City, Utah.[28] Most trade presses declared the screening at the Rialto in New York City on November 5 as the premiere, although the theatre did not bill the engagement as such.[29] At the Rialto, the film was held over from its initial two week booking into a fourth week, with the film grossing $11,000 in its first week.[29] In the November 11, 1944, issue of the trade magazineBoxoffice, a report showed the first-run performances of 336 features released between the third quarter of 1943 and mid-year 1944 from 22 major American cities. Ticket sales forSon of Dracula were 23% above average sales and declared a hit by the publication. It was Universal's best-performing film in either the horror or science fiction genres during this period. In comparison, Universal'sJungle Woman (1944) andThe Invisible Man's Revenge (1944) performed 14% and 13% above average respectively. Meanwhile,The Mummy's Ghost (1943) andThe Mad Ghoul (1944) were 5% above average and 2% below average respectively. Comparing the film to non-Universal outings in the genre, the film did not do as well as 20th Century Fox'sThe Lodger (1944) orParamount Pictures'The Uninvited (1944), had the same average asRKO'sThe Ghost Ship (1943), and beat Columbia'sThe Return of the Vampire.[30] Outside of large cities, bookings forSon of Dracula lasted for two or three days which was the standard practice of the period.[31]
Son of Dracula was first reissued theatrically in 1948.[32] In August 1951,Realart Pictures releasedSon of Dracula as parts of its "7 Days of Horror" package, which featured 14 Universal films over the course of a week.[33] The film was also part ofScreen Gems'Shock! package of 52 pre-1948 Universal feature films released to television in October 1957.[34] It was first shown on television in 1957; by October 1958,Son of Dracula has played on television stations across America.[32][34]Son of Dracula was first released onVHS andBetamax in 1988.[32] It was released on DVD as part of theDracula: The Legacy Collection and theMonster Legacy Collection in April 2004 and on Blu-ray on May 16, 2017, as part of theDracula: Complete Legacy Collection set.[35][36]
Rhodes declared that initial critical reception toSon of Dracula was "varied".[37] From contemporary reviews,The Hollywood Reporter declared thatSon of Dracula was "a topline entry" as a horror film as it was "well made" with "intelligent direction by Robert Siodmak" and that "Chaney's Dracula is an outstanding job, accomplished without the gobs of makeup with which he is generally smeared".[38] Irene Thirer ofThe New York Post ranked the film as "Fair to good", finding it "is neatly turned out [...] and is certainly guaranteed for goose-pimples—and we might add, laughs".[39]A. H. Weiler ofThe New York Times found the film as "unintentionally funny as it is chilling" and concluded it a "pretty pallid offering".[39] A review inHarrison's Reports noted thatSon of Dracula was "extremely weird, fantastic, and morbid, but because the theme has been done many times, it fails to attain the terrifying impact of the original".[39]
In their bookUniversal Horrors, Weaver, Michael Brunas and John Brunas stated thatSon of Dracula is "often lumped together with the rest of the Universal monster pictures of the '40s in the early years of horror scholarship, it has incrementally been seen as the product of a more sophisticated mindset" and in the canon of Robert Siodmak's career,Son of Dracula was "still regarded as a footnote, a stepping stone to his later highly regardedfilm noir works".[40] Bob Mastrangelo ofAllMovie referred to the film as "strictly minor-league, harmless entertainment that never reaches its potential", finding Chaney was "not doing a very good job" but that "the problems withSon of Dracula are beyond Chaney, as the script never really takes advantage of the juicy potential of the story and lacks the dark humor and beautiful atmospherics that make the best Universal horror films so timeless".[41] Sean Axmaker wrote inThe Seattle Times thatSon of Dracula was a "moody minor horror gem" that was held back by "clumsy antics of the skeptical cops and the plodding exposition spouted by an old Carpathian doctor".[42]
In an interview withStarlog magazine in 1990, Curt Siodmak reflected onSon of Dracula stating that the film "became a classic through Robert [Siodmak]'s handling of light and shadow. He was wonderful on mood, characterization, atmosphere, the psychology. He could make marvelous scenes. But hecouldn't write".[43]
