Vous voulez voir cette page en français ? Cliquez ici.

Have one to sell? Sell yours here
House of Dracula
 
See larger image
 

House of Dracula

Onslow Stevens , John Carradine , Erle C. Kenton    Unrated   VHS Tape
3.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (23 customer reviews)

Available from these sellers.



Product Details


Tag this product

 (What's this?)
Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items.
Your tags: Add your first tag
 

 

Customer Reviews

23 Reviews
5 star:
 (4)
4 star:
 (6)
3 star:
 (6)
2 star:
 (6)
1 star:
 (1)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
3.3 out of 5 stars (23 customer reviews)
 
 
 
 
Share your thoughts with other customers:
Most helpful customer reviews

4.0 out of 5 stars A Last Bite, July 22 2000
By 
N. A. Parry - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: House of Dracula (VHS Tape)
This is how Universal's original horror series ended back in 1945. This was the year that horror fell out of favour with the cinema going public. The story is actually an improvement on 'House of Frankenstein', in that it IS actually a story and not just a series of set-pieces as it was before. John Carradine is back, thankfully turning in amore restrained performance than in his last effort - and despite being killed previously, Larry Talbot's newly 'tached wolfman returns. The mad doctor is Doctor Edelman, exceptionally played by Onslow Stevens. As previous reviews have said, this is no classic, but it is good fun. The main disappointment is that, once again, Glenn Strange's Frankenstein monster is given virtually nothing to do. Even the inevitable fiery climax is taken from 'Ghost of Frankenstin', which featured Lon Chaney as the monster! Strange's creature has more on-screen time in 'Abbott and Costello meets Frankenstein' made in 1948, a film which also sees Bela Lugosi rightfully playing Dracula for his second and, sadly, final time.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3.0 out of 5 stars It Stunk but I loved it., May 4 2004
By 
Brian J Hay (Sarnia, Ontario Canada) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: House of Dracula (VHS Tape)
The late sequels in Universal Studios Monster line up were turkeys. As a rule the later the sequel, the bigger the turkey that came out. We all know that. We know it every time we rent one of them and we know it before buying any of them. But, they're fun to watch. They're so bad they're beautiful (or something like that). But, when you pull out the last of the sequels you do it knowing it should be something that "gobble, gobbles" its way around the yard a time or ten. Let's qualify this. Abbott and Costello's outing with Universal's group of "creepies" wasn't really a sequel. For one thing it didn't have any continuity with the rest of the pictures (not that some of the sequels did either). Unlike the sequels it was played for laughs, deliberately that is; some of the sequels had plenty of laughs but most of them weren't intentional. It was also a pretty good film. The later sequels weren't good films. House of Dracula was the last of the real sequels and only one thing can be said about it.

The film is utterly ridiculous. It features a bad script, bad acting and some lousy effects. The "plot" (use this term very loosely) has more holes than a strainer. The only iota of continuity is with Edelman's discovery of the Monster. Then he ends up doing so little all you can do is wonder why the character was used at all. Dracula and the Werewolf are just around and well, despite having been "killed" before. No explanation is ever given. Writer Edward T Lowe Jr. couldn't think of any reasonable ways to kill off the heavies so they lead themselves to their executions (though to be fair Lowe may not have been given much choice; his name appears on the credits of some much better films). Dracula's finish is particularly dumb. As the Count John Carradine turns in what has to be the best performance from any of the cast. He manages a fair degree of subtlety and avoids excesses even when the script(?) creates them. Unfortunately, the character he was given to play was a moron. When Dracula succeeded in getting himself killed all I could wonder was how he'd survived two days as one of the undead let alone five hundred years. Lon Chaney, reprising his role as the Wolfman fares even worse. As always he delivers his performance with conviction and feeling. This script kills him though. Any time he succeeds in creating sympathy for the character there's a line that nobody could deliver (not sober anyway) that follows. It's too bad. He was a better actor than that. It's no wonder he walked through a lot of his pictures drunk. The rest of this cast fares even worse. Onslow Stevens is reasonably palatable (if annoyingly patronizing) when his character is good. His "bad" state comes across like a pantomime that wouldn't have been convincing in a silent film. It's amazing the producers didn't decide to send him right over the top with shaving cream foaming from his mouth or something like that. The pair of women here play their parts as if made of wood. To be fair that's about all they were given to work with. Some of dialogue the "beautiful" assistant (Martha O'Driscoll) had would have made Lawrence Olivier struggle for credibility. Ultimately she's only believable when she's hypnotized; then she's supposed to act like a piece of cardboard. As the disfigured assistant the lovely Jane Adams could have been great. She captures the kindness and humility of the tragic "Nina" well. She wasn't given anything to work with either. As a result her character has the emotional range of a kazoo.

The special effects range between fair and lousy. Most of them had been used before (and with better execution). Chaney's transformation from man to beast is solid but that's where quality ends. The animated transformation from bat to human or vice versa is one example. In other features (such as "Son of Dracula" three years earlier) the effect was obvious, but not bad. In this film the effect is so shoddy the producers may just as well have used a bat from a "Looney Tunes" feature. The sequences with the bat are even worse. In at least one of them the wires are visible. Flashbacks involving the monster are pathetic. Most are from other films (featuring other actors in the role) and it shows. Karloff and Strange didn't even walk the same way when portraying the creature. Where maintaining credibility is concerned this film emerges as a lesson in how to shoot yourself in the foot, several times.

It is fun to watch though, so much so that it's impossible to hate or even dislike it. In fact, it's hard not to love it. The transfer to DVD is stellar. The print used appears to be in good shape which is good. Sound and picture quality were, by the 1940's, very good. Granted, the tracks were mono but recording technology had already reached a level which still stands well today. Photography had reached a similar plateau. Some of what's in this film is excellent. The sets are spooky in a way only the old classics managed. The lighting which was an art form unto itself in black and white films is great. It's due to this that this film manages to remain spooky despite its absurdity.

The bottom line: it stunk but I loved it.

This text refers to the DVD transfer in the Legacy Collection

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars The Final Monster party at Universal!, Sep 28 2002
By 
Christian Lehrer "Christian Lehrer" (Bay Point, CA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: House of Dracula (VHS Tape)
House of Dracula is an enjoyable classic monster film. Onslow Stevens is quite good as the compassionate, but mis-guided scientist who trys to "cure" Dracula, the Wolf Man and The Frankenstein Monster as well as his lovely, but Hunchedbacked, assistant, the ravishing Jane Adams. Quite an ambitious agenda for one film! The results are mixed, Dracula can't stop preying on pretty nurses and is dispatched by the good doctor. However Dracula, played very well by John Carradine, reverses a transfusion and curses the doctor with some of his blood. The doctor performs an operation and cures Lon Chaney Jr. of the Werewolf curse. Tragically, Dracula's blood turns the good doctor to evil and he revives the Frankenstein Monster and kills his pretty nurse before he is gunned down by the now ex-Wolfman. Lionel Atwill (always a welcome addition to these films!) is electrocuted by Frankenstein before the monster is consumed in the flames of the laboratory. This movie whatever its faults certainly doesn't drag!! All this and more happens in a brisk 70 minutes. What I don't understand is why Universal hasn't released "House of Dracula" on DVD with its other classic monster films? I have the VHS tape above as well as the Laserdisc release of 1995. Both show a print that is quite well preserved. So where is the DVD Universal???????? I would like to complete my collection~and get a few more as gifts!! My brother and I watched these as kids growing up, far better than the often sexually explicit "Slasher Flicks" that today's pre-teens are watching!! When our parents were that age movies like "House of Dracula" were what they watched at the Saturday afternoon Matinee. I am sure they would also love to see it again as well. I can only hope that Universal "digs it up", before the next full moon or at least in the near future for a DVD release!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
Want to see more reviews on this item?
 Go to Amazon.com to see all 33 reviews  3.4 out of 5 stars 
 
 
Most recent customer reviews











Only search this product's reviews



Listmania!

Create a Listmania! list

Look for similar items by category


Look for similar items by subject






i.e., each video must be in subject 1 AND subject 2 AND ...

Feedback