Plenty to Like, Plenty to Dislike

Fantastic!

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

This picture has all of the creepy atmospherics and moody feel of the original 1931 "Dracula", even if Bela Lugosi is a completely different character wearing the vampire cape. I thought this was fairly well done for a Columbia flick, a company that didn't have the experience of producing the type of horror films that established Universal. Joining Lugosi, actor Matt Willis portrays a Wolf Man character, and because I've mentioned it in other reviews, I'll give credit to Columbia here for keeping their budget in line by not bringing in Lon Chaney for the Wolf Man gig. Not that I wouldn't have loved to see him here, but if you need a hairy guy, why not get anyone else who can do the same job at half the price. Seems logical to me.Actually, Lugosi gets to portray two characters here, a scientist by the name of Dr. Hugo Bruckner, summoned to investigate a potential vampire related death, and that of Armand Tesla, who received an iron stake to the heart in an opening scene to potentially eliminate the scourge of vampirism in 1918 England. Revived following a German air raid during World War II when a bomb destroys Priory Cemetery, Tesla once again enjoys the dark of night when an unwitting grave yard worker removes the stake from his chest. I'm fairly up on my vampire lore and have never come across this type of dead vampire reversal, but what the heck, it works for the story if you don't think about it too much. It was actually a pretty nifty idea.The only thing I will quibble about is that scene the morning after Lady Jane Aisley (Frieda Inescort) and Sir Frederick Fleet (Miles Mander) visit the hotel room where Bruckner/Tesla is staying, only to find him missing. Lady Jane speaks to Nicki Saunders (Nina Foch) who was bitten by Tesla in an earlier scene, but the fang marks on her neck were gone! Come on, attention to detail Columbia! How'd they miss that? Better yet, how did Lugosi miss it? An unforced error if ever I saw one.

Released on the heels of Universal's first monster-rally movie, "Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" (1943), as well as the third film in the studio's Dracula series, "Son of Dracula" (1943), Columbia decided to make its own monster rally, which could've appropriately been titled, "Dracula Meets the Wolf Man." Adding to the studio and character crossovers, Bela Lugosi, the vampire of this film, "The Return of the Vampire," played the Frankenstein monster in "Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man," and the Wolf Man from that film played Dracula in "Son of Dracula." Additionally, director Lew Landers had directed the classic Universal horror film "The Raven," which starred Lugosi. At this point of B-production shockers of the 1940s, no studio was making vampire pictures that had really anything to do with Bram Stoker's novel "Dracula," though, and most of them are a far cry from the classic 1930s Universal monster movies, which began with Lugosi's "Dracula" (1931). Columbia's "The Return of the Vampire" is better in some ways than some of the contemporary Universal shockers, though.There are some interesting details for those who follow the genre. Lugosi's face isn't revealed until 23 minutes in--building up suspense in the meantime. In the first scene, we mostly just see his shadow (Stoker's Dracula casts no shadows. "Nosferatu" (1922) added shadows.). The vampire bites a child--something Dracula never did, although the female vampires would (although in film, Hammer's 1958 "Dracula" may've been the first to show one of the female vampires attacking children). The vampire is resurrected by the stake being removed from his heart. Perhaps, Universal wanted to pay Columbia back a bit for their borrowing from Universal's monster movies, and that's why they use this trick to bring Dracula back in the next year's "House of Frankenstein."I like that the second Van Helsing-type doctor, after her originally being a skeptic, is a woman this time. It's possibly the first time a leading actress wasn't a vamp or a victim in a vampire film. I'm less fond of seeing a werewolf fight with his fists and barely escape a scrape with two men, or to see him die from what one assumes is a normal bullet. But, at least, he wrestles with his good human nature and his evil wolfman enslavement, and he's the one who ultimately defeats the vampire, so it's a satisfying monster- rally finish. Plus, this vampire is triply strong; literally, it, apparently, takes three of his usual weaknesses--stakes to the heart, crosses, sunlight--to finish him off.Stylistically, there's a big emphasis on fog. It even follows the vampire inside, and it's constantly spread throughout the frequent graveyard scenes. They use an upward-tilted light to shine in Lugosi's face--reminiscent of Karl Freund's highlighting of Lugosi's eyes in the 1931 "Dracula." The narration is all over the place--beginning with a title card that introduces the milieu, followed by a voice-over that describes the story as based on the notes of a guy who dies after about 15 minutes into the film, which begs the question of who's narrating the rest of the movie. There's also a vampire book, as there had been in other vampire films, such as "Nosferatu," "Vampyr" (1932) and "Son of Dracula." The narrative begins with scientists, but turns to a religious surprise in the final act. There's a constant flow of believers in and skeptics of vampires, with characters changing roles, until, in the final shot, a character turns to the camera and breaks the fourth wall, asking, whether we believe in vampires.Here, vampirism becomes an allegory for German invasion, which is an interesting turn from Stoker's rather xenophobic novel about a foreigner stealing Englishwomen. The film begins with the swift killing of the vampire, coinciding with the end of WWI in 1918. He's resurrected after the Nazis of WW2 bomb the graveyard, among other things, digging up his coffin from its burial. I suppose, then, that when the character at the end turns to the camera, he's asking whether we believe Germans are vampires.(Mirror Note: A small mirror is used to confirm the vampire. Interestingly, the mirror shot shows the vampire's clothes, while not the reflection of his face. Most other movies are content with the confusion of whether vampire's clothes are also vampiric. Not so here.)

It's good to see this entry in Columbia's horror catalog has now surfaced on an excellent Columbia DVD. Admittedly, I didn't expect a great deal of a movie directed by Lew Landers, but this one is very professionally handled by Mr. Landers, assisted by moody photography (including some great special effects work), atmospheric sets, and an intriguing script which doesn't mind breaking some of the rules laid down by Universal's horror specialists. As expected, Bela Lugosi plays the vampire as to the manner born and receives excellent assistance from a first-rate support cast including Nina Foch and Frieda Inescort. (Incidentally, "Foch" is pronounced "Fawsh", and it rhymes with Porsche, the luxury motor car).

Very interesting horror movie from Columbia with a WW2 backdrop. Nazi bombing has unearthed the coffin of vampire Armand Tesla (Bela Lugosi). Two bumbling gravediggers remove the stake from Tesla's body, freeing the vampire to once again terrorize London. The vampire here has a werewolf sidekick. Actually, more like a weredog as he resembles some kind of terrier more than a wolf. He even growls and barks like a dog.The cast is very good. Lugosi is Lugosi, of course. Classy Frieda Inescort is excellent as Lady Jane Ainsley, a rare case in the '40s where a woman gets to be the primary vampire hunter. This is the first full-length movie for Nina Foch, soon to become Columbia's B movie queen, For some reason Matt Willis talks normal as a human but in werewolf form he channels Henry Hull. Miles Mander is very good as the skeptical Scotland Yard inspector.Columbia didn't make many horror films in the '40s and this is probably the best of the few. But it does seem to be missing something. While I do like the foggy streets and spooky graveyard, for the most part it's lacking that atmosphere the Universal horrors had in spades. Still, it's very entertaining and unique for the period. The ending is terrific.