Le Retour de Dracula

Plot-- A European vampire travels to America for fresh feeding grounds. While there he impersonates the relative of an average American family. In the process, he's drawn to the family's spirited daughter who's his assumed cousin. So what will happen now that the suburbanites have a new blood(y) relative with very strange habits.

Pretty good little programmer that benefits from interesting premise. Actor Lederer has a strong physical presence but unfortunately doesn't exude the evil of a Lee or Lugosi. Nor, for that matter, does he appear to be trying that hard. Thus his vampire is more a presence than evil. In my little book, it's really actress Eberhardt's charm and expressive range that carries the story. She gets the most screen time, while projecting personality into a rather fuzzily written ingénue part. The location photography of an average American neighborhood lends a touch of realism and is certainly a long way from the usual murky hilltop castle. But note that except for the brief scenes in the cavern, there's little spooky shadow to create mood. But then it's hard to work pervasive shadow into well-lit suburbia. So I guess Dracula needs his castle. Nonetheless, the lack of spooky lighting undercuts a needed mood of evil menace. Also, what's with that color flash of gory blood in an otherwise b&w flick. It's a needlessly disruptive effect that simply calls attention to the fact that this is a movie of uneven effects. Happily, the flick does manage to avoid the hokey, the usual pitfall of cheap horror productions. All in all, however, the 73-minutes may be imaginative but still fails to rise above programmer level.

I picked up The Return of Dracula on a whim for $5 at The Warehouse, expecting it to be a silly old B-movie. What a surprise I got.

I usually can't stand vampire movies (George Romero's Martin is my idea of a really good one), but this is one of the best I've seen. Visually, it's stylish and atmospheric. The script is above average. The music is effective, if a little pompous and overbearing at times. What makes the movie really click, though, is Francis Lederer as Dracula. His portrayal of fangface is as good as any I've ever seen.

The rest of the cast are competent, which makes them well above average for this sort of thing. The famed colour insert was present in my cheapo copy, which made up for the somewhat dodgy sound quality. Some of the scare scenes hold up quite well even 40+ years on. I'd recommend Return of Dracula highly to anyone who enjoys classy old B&W horror.

Not a bad Dracula updated adaptation as a man readying for a journey in Romania is killed and his identity stolen(seems to have been a problem even then). He moves in with his "family' only to start wreaking havoc in a small Californian town. The small town atmosphere is carried off fairly nicely in large part to the small town characterizations from the cast - most of whom were either character actors or unknowns at the time. Exception is Francis Lederer as the vampire with a very thick accent, but actually he gives some credibility to the role of the brooding, oft charming, malignant force cast into the lives of these newly found innocents. John Wengraf plays the Van Helsing type and is interesting when on screen yet the part is way too underdeveloped. There is not much for plot here to be honest and the story quickly wraps up in the last third, but director Paul Landres has competence(and a whole television episode list as his resume)and creates some effective scenes. The scene where Rachel is "dreaming" of seeing the vampire in her boudoir and then is wakened quickly by her brother even gave me a bit of a jolt. The acting is okay but pedestrian, and there is not much here in terms of great sets or effects. Nonetheless The Return of Dracula is a nice little film with a different twist to Dracula lore that I found interestingly conceived.

One almost expects Ward, June, Wally and the Beav to visit too...Yes, this is an underrated masterpiece. "What? What did you say?" In the main title Dracula is shown standing still behind a three-stick candle...the "scene" reminds me of an icon in a Byzantine Catholic or Orthodox church...and what happens when Jennie is staked...Cousin Bellac temporarily reels and almost faints...reminds me of "Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers you do unto me"...and that line, "You will arise reborn in ME!"...there's a discernible anti-theology here and I hope whoever was responsible for it didn't believe it. But I'd not be surprised if there were a cult-especially in CA-which worships Dracula. The most chilling scene in the film is the scene in which Rachel is primping at the downstairs mirror, but-to me-the most chilling line of dialogue is the interchange between the pastor and Cousin Bellac concerning Rachel's charm, when Cousin Bellac says, "Why yes...I daresay she'd even charm the devil himself." Lederer-may he rest in peace-may have hated this film, but he turned in a truly great performance. Pity this film is so little credited.

I first saw this film when it was originally released in 1958 and it literally scared the hell out of me. Once I got significantly older and happened to see it available on video, I purchased it for old times sake. I was pleasantly surprised to see that it had lost not one iota of it's power! The casting of the suave Francis Lederer in the title role was a master stroke. It indeed does bring back memories of the superb "Shadow of a Doubt". Although a low budget entry, it still causes uneasiness to its viewers. Gerald Fried's eerie score is a plus too. It was largely overshadowed in 1958 by the "Horror of Dracula" (also a fine film as any Draculaphile would agree) but it deserves to be recognized as the fine chiller it is. i heartily recommend it to any fan of good thrillers.