It is a shame as the cast are capable, the characters are timeless and the Universal monster/horror films have mostly been entertaining. House of Dracula is not that bad and does have quite a few good things, but it was an example of a film that showed so much potential but didn't fully live up to it.
Starting with the good things, the sets are sumptuous and wonderfully Gothic, likewise with the costumes and there is great use of shadowy lighting. The music is very haunting, with inspired use of Beethoven's moonlight sonata, though it occasionally sounds as if it was borrowed from other films. Two scenes are quite effective, the Moonlight sonata scene, which was telling in its psychological eeriness, and the Wolf Man transformation scene. Some of the acting is good, Onslow Stevens sharing the acting honours as an, as said, Jekyll and Hyde character that he attacks with menace and pathos. Lon Chaney Jnr. once again gives a very deeply felt performance as Talbot/ Wolf Man, though not as good as he was in The Wolf Man and Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. Skelton Knaggs makes a creepy appearance albeit a brief one and Jane Addams is an enticing and touching Nina. Martha O' Driscoll is both attractive and sympathetic.
Not all the acting works on the other hand. John Carradine has the look, the suavity and visual eeriness for Dracula but not the sinister evil or aristocratic charm, he's somewhat too understated in the role. Glenn Strange has literally nothing to do and spends his entire window-dressing-like screen time looking confused as to where he was. The normally good Lionel Atwill is wasted and lacks energy. The photography has its moments but lacks refinement overall, a lot of the editing looking like it was done in haste. The used footage of Chaney in Ghost of Frankenstein and Boris Karloff in Bride of Frankenstein looked good, but that it was stock was obvious. The special effects are rather cheesy-looking, by today's standards and I imagine also for back then too, usually that's forgivable to me but not so much when the film is technically faulty elsewhere. The script is muddled as a result of trying to do too much, the direction is by-the-numbers and the characters are a case of nice to see them but little's done with them, that they don't share a scene together is a huge missed opportunity. It's the story that suffers the most however, the actual storyline is a tired one but it's also one that's too hurriedly paced to compensate for the too short running time as well as being over-plotted and underwritten. There are a number of plot strands but none of them really are explored, only Chaney's battle with his conscience to a degree resonates. Finally the ending is so abrupt and rushed that it feels like a great big anti-climax.
Overall, an ambitious effort in using characters from three different settings to incorporate them into one big story and a noble effort but comes up short. Not terrible, not great, mixed feelings more like. 5/10 Bethany Cox
Starting with the good things, the sets are sumptuous and wonderfully Gothic, likewise with the costumes and there is great use of shadowy lighting. The music is very haunting, with inspired use of Beethoven's moonlight sonata, though it occasionally sounds as if it was borrowed from other films. Two scenes are quite effective, the Moonlight sonata scene, which was telling in its psychological eeriness, and the Wolf Man transformation scene. Some of the acting is good, Onslow Stevens sharing the acting honours as an, as said, Jekyll and Hyde character that he attacks with menace and pathos. Lon Chaney Jnr. once again gives a very deeply felt performance as Talbot/ Wolf Man, though not as good as he was in The Wolf Man and Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. Skelton Knaggs makes a creepy appearance albeit a brief one and Jane Addams is an enticing and touching Nina. Martha O' Driscoll is both attractive and sympathetic.
Not all the acting works on the other hand. John Carradine has the look, the suavity and visual eeriness for Dracula but not the sinister evil or aristocratic charm, he's somewhat too understated in the role. Glenn Strange has literally nothing to do and spends his entire window-dressing-like screen time looking confused as to where he was. The normally good Lionel Atwill is wasted and lacks energy. The photography has its moments but lacks refinement overall, a lot of the editing looking like it was done in haste. The used footage of Chaney in Ghost of Frankenstein and Boris Karloff in Bride of Frankenstein looked good, but that it was stock was obvious. The special effects are rather cheesy-looking, by today's standards and I imagine also for back then too, usually that's forgivable to me but not so much when the film is technically faulty elsewhere. The script is muddled as a result of trying to do too much, the direction is by-the-numbers and the characters are a case of nice to see them but little's done with them, that they don't share a scene together is a huge missed opportunity. It's the story that suffers the most however, the actual storyline is a tired one but it's also one that's too hurriedly paced to compensate for the too short running time as well as being over-plotted and underwritten. There are a number of plot strands but none of them really are explored, only Chaney's battle with his conscience to a degree resonates. Finally the ending is so abrupt and rushed that it feels like a great big anti-climax.
Overall, an ambitious effort in using characters from three different settings to incorporate them into one big story and a noble effort but comes up short. Not terrible, not great, mixed feelings more like. 5/10 Bethany Cox