Son of Dracula - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Son of Dracula Reviews

Page 1 of 7
½ August 17, 2016
Kay was the definition of the word "BITCH!" Lon Chaney Jr was an okay version of Dracula.
April 7, 2016
If you like good horror movie. See this one. It is a classic
½ February 8, 2016
One of the more well-made Universal monster pictures of the 40s. Lon Chaney Jr. certainly isn't bad as Dracula, as long as he doesn't speak.
November 8, 2015
starts off solid with a bit of mystery but falls flat and is real boring in parts ending is solid
½ August 18, 2015
Very nice story. The horror aspects of it are played down, even for a classic of its time, but the story is so intriguing with a great payoff that it's well a worth a watch.
½ April 29, 2015
The second sequel to Dracula has a hard time taking off. It's not Chaney's most memorable role, or a great Dracula. The plot is some decent bits, but it drags on for most of the time. The characters are too recycled.
½ February 24, 2015
This version of the Dracula story is slow moving and is packed with vampire clichés. The acting is bad and the story is strange. For some reason they moved Dracula to the American south and put him in a southern plantation. They put this movie on the second disk of the Dracula Legacy Collection of DVD's. It's not a well made DVD. It makes it hard to watch the first part of the movie. In the movie Dracula always appears first as a mist or a bat. Although the movie is title Son of Dracula in the movie they imply the vampire is Dracula and uses the name Alucard to hide his identity. It's clever but all the character's in the movie realize almost immediately that it's Dracula spelled backwards.
½ November 9, 2014
Kind of decent, despite being a part of one of my least favorite series in the Universal Monster catalog, and the completely misguided casting of Lon Chaney, Jr. as Dracula's son Count Alucard (which is Dracula spelled backwards). A vampire, especially one in the Dracula vein, needs to be a little more hypnotic and somewhat alluring...Chaney is not these things. He was great as the Wolf Man, and kind of okay as Frankenstein's Monster (at least better than Lugosi was)....but as a Vampire he is dull and odd. Still...the movie has the same atmosphere and style that I love to enjoy around Halloween time. Script is weak, the casting of the lead is weak....but it muddles through a bit.
Super Reviewer
September 15, 2014
Sucking out whatever blood remained in the inspired and inspiring original, this oftentimes silly creature feature turns a Gothic classic into classic Southern-fried camp. Of course, when the antagonists name - Count Alucard - is Dracula spelled backwards, you know youre in trouble. The film doesn't spool out but one reel before gifting audiences with the following line of dialogue: "There's no magic in dried lizards and dead chickens." It's an unfortunate line spoken by an unfortunate actor. Bestowing doltish supporting roles on a third tier HWood cast doesn't help matters either.

In this unrated continuation of Universals Dracula series, a mysterious count (Lon Chaney, Jr.) finds his way from Budapest to the swamps of the Deep South and finds himself fighting a medical doctor, a university professor, a jilted fiancé and the woman he loves.

The worst part of this flick ends up to be the lead performance. In taking over the role that his father was suppose to make famous before cancer took him, humdrum vampire Lon Chaney, Jr. brings about as much terror to the proceedings as fuzzy Muppet Count Von Count on Sesame Street. Oh, his tenure as a werewolf shows that he's capable of such range but there's none of that evident in this monstrously unscary Dracula follow-up. Robert Siodmak, who directed undisputed horror classic The Wolf Man in 1940, brings a great deal of atmosphere to the photography but not so much to the script. Rather than the sequel that Dracula deserves, he turns out some vamped up voodoo phooey. J. Edward Bromberg even sports an Eastern European accent in his thankless role as Professor Lazlo, a discount bin Van Helsing.

Bottom line: Slow Count
June 23, 2014
Beautiful black and white cinematography, entertaining script and the memorable first 'man to bat' transformation onscreen ever, son of dracula is perhaps the best sequel of the dracula movies.
December 29, 2013
This somber film is better than the first two "DRACULA" films. Irrational plot twists bog down what could have been a great vampire film. Lon Chaney Jr 's Count lacks the brains to dispatch a Van Helsing imitation and a country doctor ? Get outta here.
½ December 18, 2013
After the wonderful Dracula's Daughter, this sequel seemed pretty weak. The plot was mostly boring, but what I disliked most was Lon Chaney Jr. as Dracula. The guy has a strong American accent and seems a bit chubby, even full of life, which makes him seem like everything except a European walking predatory corpse. The good thing about this title is how it introduced many concepts into the vampire genre, including the creature's mist-like form and the lethality of burning it's grave, thus preventing it from hibernating during the day.
October 22, 2013
Lon Chaney Jr. makes a great wolfman, but not a very good Dracula. I particularly like him as the wolfman in ABBOTT & COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN.
August 9, 2013
1931's Dracula Is One Of My Favorite Films.
May 1, 2013
Robert Siodmak, a German emigre who later directed a lot of great films noir, helmed this entry in Universal's series of monster films. As you would expect, he drapes the film in shadows and there are a few genuinely creepy scenes (Dracula glides across a pond, his bride sits up dead in her bed). But this is still a B picture and Lon Chaney Jr., better known as the Wolf Man, makes for a less than urbane Count (but fortunately the script doesn't require him too talk much). As these things go, this is much less campy than later entries would be (Siodmak plays it straight) and it actually ends up being coherent -- but if Dracula can't be hurt by bullets, why should fire hurt him?
½ April 16, 2013
abrupt Lon Chaney is miscast as Dracula, and in a big way. It has been impossible for me to ignore upon every viewing. Movies like this are nearly void of fun. The scares, yeah, i expect the scares to be scarce. But when the fun is also hard to come by it makes for an unpleasant viewing experience. I have more fun watching movies that are all the way bad (Ed Wood) than movies like Son of Dracula.
½ February 2, 2013
A rich southern belle that is obsessed with the occult falls under the influence of the mysterious Count Alucard after visiting Budapest. Returning home, the two are quickly married and take over the family estate, but it would seem that Katherine has her own secret agenda for the Count! Eerie and atmospheric, SON OF DRACULA succeeds most with its incredible special effects, which take a huge leap forward from the previous films in the series. Here, Dracula transforms into a bat and a cloud of mist right before our very eyes! The fog-laden swamps of the Louisiana bayou also serve as a fine change of locale from London, giving the vampire reign over a brand new land. Director Robert Siodmak does a fine job here, with early elements of the Film Noir style seeping into the shadowy crime drama found in brother Curt's script. Lon Chaney Jr.'s performance as Dracula is as lifeless as the character he portrays. He does not capture the sophisticated aristocrat, but rather an oafish brute. Louise Allbritton, on the other hand, is a much more compelling lead, both a stark beauty and a manipulative con. SON OF DRACULA is a fitting sequel to Lugosi's original that is sure to impress fans of the classics!

-Carl Manes
I Like Horror Movies
½ January 16, 2013
Robert Siodmak made a great looking film, which I found engaging even if Lon Chaney Jr. doesn't really bother to try to sound as if he's ever even BEEN to Europe, much less is a Transylvanian.

Worth a look, give it a rental.
December 20, 2012
ok movie, not better than the first dracula, it wasn't that scary and I don't want to see it again, it starred Lon Chaney Jr, he played a good part, I didn't think it was a good film expected better
Page 1 of 7