I don't usually like the old Universal horror movies. This one outshines most in my book. I thought the Nina character added alot. She was so much more interesting than the usual Igor character. Much more depth. Who would have thought that John Carradine could complete with Bela Lugosi as Dracula? The plot moved right along. This movie impressed me.
shareThis was the best Universal monster film. The plot tied perfectly with the 3 monsters and Carradine was the most frightening vampire ever. The 2nd best Universal film was probably Draculas Daughter
shareReally? I've always considered this a throw-away film made at the point when Universal was just going through the motions and churning out horror films on a timetable. The first word that comes to mind when I think of House of Dracula is "formulaic." That doesn't mean it's without redeeming features, but I'd list it awfully far down any list I made of the best of the Universal Studios horror films of the '30s, '40s, and '50s.
Perhaps I'll rewatch the film?
Yes I think you need to rewatch this
shareI'm 21 minutes in, and it's about what I remember. On the same day, both Dracula and the Wolfman show up at the door of a doctor asking to be cured. Lo and behold, they stumble upon the Frankenstein monster in a cave beneath the doctor's home the very next day...
Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a bad movie, but it's not up there with the better-made Universal horror films. The Bride of Frankenstein is the best one, in my opinion, followed closely by Dracula. The only other films in the series that I think are better than your average b-movie popcorn fare are Werewolf of London, The Mummy, Frankenstein, and Son of Frankenstein.
I can't believe I actually made you rewatch this bore of a movie. I was kidding. This entry in the Universal series was just awful. Please for your own sakes, shut this movie off
sharelol I don't mind. I have them all on my hard drive, and they're fun to revisit from time to time.
shareThey should have used a similar plot in this film to the one of Abbott and Costello meet Frankenstein. At least in that one, all 3 monsters interacted with each other. They really screwed up both House films
shareIt's not the best one but I do enjoy it. I liked Larry getting cured. But yeah, Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, Dracula, The Wolf Man, and Frankenstein meets the Wolf Man are all much better movies. Heck, I think Son of Dracula and Ghost of Frankenstein are better than this one. I didn't care as much for Son of Frankenstein. But I am biased since I watched Ghost of Frankenstein as a kid and didn't see Son of Frankenstein til I was an adult.
shareIn NY as a kid in the late 70s and 80s, Son of Frankenstein would be shown from time to time. However Ghost of Frankenstein and House of Dracula were never shown for whatever reason. House of Frankenstein and Frankenstein meets the Wolf man were on a lot. Son of Dracula and Draculas Daughter also were never shown. Until the legacy DVDs came out in 2006, I never seen them. Even TCM in the 90s and early 2000s never showed these films
shareIt's not the best Universal horror film by a country mile, BUT the makers of the movie were aware that this was the end of the line for the classic Universal Monsters when they made it, so there's both homages to what came before mixed in with using scientific explanations for Dracula's vampirism and Lawrence Talbot's lycanthropy that brought something new to the mix. Add Onslow Stevens' Dr. Edelmann who doesn't start out as insane, and the hunchback assistant being an otherwise pleasant and attractive woman and this manages to justify it's existence as a movie. It and HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN make a nicely contrasting pair: HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN is a thrill ride, and HOUSE OF DRACULA is a low key mood piece.
shareI agree, it was mediocre and very forgettable. Carradine is no Drac. Very many better than this.
share