Son of Dracula (1943)

Date	User	Rating
Sep 12, 2022	PetrosTser	50 _19th
A step down in the franchise. Dracula, going by the ridiculous nickname Alucard and weakly portrayed by the far from menacing Lon Chaney Jr., is an extra in his own movie. Thus, "Son Of Dracula" works best when Frank and Doctor Brewster are at the forefront and is given color by the former's unraveling and the latter's search for the truth. The twist is decent, Siodmak strikes up notable atmosphere here and there, and the effects are a mixed bag (the mist's pretty cool, the bat still sucks).
Aug 29, 2022	MadMan	73 _23rd
Moves a bit slow, yet has some good visuals and has it's own quality moments. The swamp scene where Dracula floats towards Katherine is utterly fantastic.
Oct 29, 2021	deep_green	65 _50th
Chaney Jr. is completely unremarkable as the vampire, and it's kind of a rehash of the Browning film. But it's well directed by Siodmak and features some gorgeous photography and set design. Worth a watch.
Sep 17, 2021	INDYATMN	70 _24th
Other than more special efx shots of turning into bat&mist & a great coffin hiding place under swamp water (which he contrivedly gives up for no reason), this miscast Dracula engages in too many pedestrian actions (doing his own shoveling, getting legally married) to be impressive/compelling in any way. About 2/3rds of the way in, he’s even more undercut as we discover he’s a dupe for a mortal even more nefarious than he. Still, I have to credit the twist & attempt to do something different.
Jun 06, 2021	ribcage	60 _38th
Son of Dracula sees the Universal Monster series cementing itself into programmer status. I'm continuing to enjoy myself, but we've moved from spooky, shadowy classics to exhilarating camp to films that conjures nostalgia to being a kid watching black and white horror films on PBS at 10pm. Son of Dracula: gateway drug.
Oct 27, 2020	BillyShears	60 _34th
Finally, Dracula hits the United States slinking around the southern swamps. A vampire running amok a plantation is a breath of fresh air, all the racism you can sink your fangs into. Lon Chaney Jr kinda sucks (pun intended)
Sep 27, 2020	tonydal	70 _40th
I almost didn't notice that that was Junior in the title role...almost (so kudos to Siodmak for his valiant attempts at salvaging a miscasting). And let's just hope that this was the very first movie to ever come up with that "Alucard" thing (otherwise they've got no excuse at all). Anyway, lots of nice Expressionist touches in the direction.
Aug 19, 2020	TheDiceman	40 _19th
Passes the time.
Sep 22, 2019	oskarhu	73 _28th
Liked the effects and the cinematography but otherwise quite uninteresting.
Feb 28, 2019	PUNQ	50 _78th
I always enjoy Universal horror movies, regardless of how cheesy they seem at times. They kept rowing and rowing to try and make Son of Dracula (1943) make sense, which was the most humorous thing about it. Next to Lon Chaney Jr. trying to be the elegant Dracula. Nah, he's better off playing more monstrous monsters. Still there's nothing like the feel of these old creepers.
Jun 18, 2017	hotsake	40 _20th
Lon Chaney Jr. is indeed one of the worst Dracula's ever. The film itself was pretty decent with lots of effects shots. Overall the film is pretty average bogged down with bland acting and a very miscast Lon Chaney Jr.
May 20, 2017	tipar822	70 _90th
Very good for a 43 film.
May 01, 2014	glm01	69 _37th
68.500
Oct 12, 2013	PeaceAnarchy	78 _54th
It's actually a bit better than both Dracula and Dracula's Daughter, less reliant on winks at the audience and more on a creepy atmosphere. Both the script and the visuals help it out there. It also has a well done ending, certainly better than the first two films. The acting is a bit weak, though.
Nov 04, 2012	JooJoo	2 _16th
Lon Chaney Jr. = worst Dracula ever.
Oct 25, 2012	Kowry	40 _93rd
Lon Chaney Jr., whom I often like, is maybe the most unconvincing Dracula ever. It's a pretty dull film in other aspects, too, although not badly made. There are some effective scenes here, though, and the plot takes some unexpected turns.
Aug 28, 2012	mightysparks	50 _39th
All these damn 40s Dracula/Mummy/Wolfman films are the same. Just dull. I do like Lon Chaney Jr, but he was a pretty lame Dracula.
Feb 29, 2012	Luna6ix	57 _12th
Lon Chaney Jr. is a complete bore and he makes a horrible Dracula, which is actually interesting because I dug him as The Wolf Man, even if said movie was also pretty crappy. The only thing worth it in this one is the end scene where Dracula is killed, that was decent.
Dec 11, 2011	jodamico	74 _39th
It's uneven, but they do a lot of really striking and eerie things with Dracula - the mist effect never ceases to be creepy. It all builds up to a strong and sad conclusion.
Feb 11, 2011	Bavafreak	90 _82nd
Chaney is badly miscast, but if you can get past that, this emerges as one of the best Universals of the period. Stylishly directed and photographed, with a memorably melancholy air.
Feb 20, 2009	chemical404	45 _31st
Worst thing in this film is Lon Chaney Jr.. I know he isn't a bad actor, because he was great in the Wolf Man, but he looks more like a whimp librarian type here, than count Alucard. The movie also suffers from over-melodramatisation. At least i enjoyed character and beauty of Louise Allbritton.
Aug 14, 2007	teknicolor	50 _37th
Crazy lady dupes Drac to get immortality and have her human lover kill Drac before making him a vampire. Morbid, indeed.

Average Percentile 37.39% from 147 Ratings