The Return of Dracula

Count Dracula flees Europe and poses as a suburban California family’s Hungarian cousin.

The Return of Dracula is notable as one of the only (if not the only) vampire films made in the 1950s that is also set in present day (e.g. the 1950s). It’s ironic, especially considering the repressed sexuality of the 50s echoes back to the repressed sexuality of Victorian era when Dracula author Bram Stoker penned his novel.

That said, The Return of Dracula has little else to recommend it. While the opening is promising enough, the film goes downhill quick. The acting is universally poor, with the exception of John Wengraf, who shows some promise as a would-be Van Helsing. Francis Lederer’s Dracula is mostly passable, with a few bright moments, but just as many bad ones, some of which are almost laughable.

The script by Pat Fielder veers between camp, suspense, and horror; sometimes even within a single scene. Fielder can’t seem to decide if his Dracula is a vampiric monster, creepy stranger, or invisible man, and director Paul Landres seems equally confused.

Mercifully, the 77-minute running time means it’s all over quick, with a somewhat abrupt ending that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense considering Dracula can turn into a bat, but I guess that’s just par for the course considering the film.