Return of the Vampire (1943)



The story behind this particular entry in Lugosi's filmography continues to fascinate me. Whereas "Bela Lugosi" and "Dracula" have been synonymous in American culture since 1931, we see a long history of film studios avoiding pairing the two together. Films like The Devil Bat, The Death Kiss, and maybe even The Human Monster, profited from having Lugosi's name attached to film titles that maybe...just maybe...suggested he'd be playing a vampire. Heck, "Spooks Run Wild" was nearly entitled "On the Trail of The Vampire".

And while it probably would have been easier to have Bela running around in a cape biting people in those films (and it would have earned more money too), they never took that route. Mark of the Vampire (1935) is the only film between 1931's Dracula and this film to cast Bela as a vampire, and that film utterly sabotages its own ending in order to prove to the copyright lawyers that this wasn't a real vampire, and therefore wasn't an infringement upon Dracula. In fact, I'd need to do more research to be certain, but I'm relatively sure there are zero films about vampires made in America between Mark of the Vampire and this film, with or without Bela in them. The Vampire Bat (1933) had townspeople suspecting the presence of a vampire, but (spoiler alert) there ultimately isn't one. Studios seemed that afraid of infringing upon Universal, or the Stoker Estate, or likely both.

So how do you explain this little outlier, care of Columbia Pictures? It's right there in the title -- Bela is back playing Dracula (but we're not going to call him Dracula). Heck, we've even got a Wolfman in this film. If Columbia got away with it (and it seems they did), why didn't any other company make the attempt?

Unfortunately, it all comes a decade too late. Whereas Bela was still in his prime in 1935, age and morphine have caught up with him badly by this point. He's simply too old and frail to be playing Dracula anymore. He manages to pull off two of the most important scenes beautifully, but he's utterly old and awkward in most of his other scenes. He simply fails to cast the spell this time around, even while the writing, the lighting, the cinematography, and his fellow actors all do their best to make this film a Lugosi masterpiece.


Plot (0-5 points): It has its problems, to be sure, but it's a far deeper, far more character-driven script than the original Dracula, and it's far superior to Mark of the Vampire. This is, by far, the best written Lugosi Dracula film, especially with a brilliant and courageous aging heroine as our unexpected lead, as well as the sympathetic werewolf servant seeking redemption, which has heavy undertones of a recovering drug addict's journey. Powerful stuff, even when there are certain minor points and details that don't quite add up. 4/5

Atmosphere (0-5 points): The lighting and cinematography are every bit as good as anything you'd find in a Universal film, but the one element that holds this film back is its sets. The space and arrangements are wrong -- often too crowded, too spacious, too simple, too busy, too dark, or too light. It's really the only reason this doesn't feel like a Universal picture. 4/5

Other Actors (0-3 points): Frieda Inescort plays an impressively strong independent heroine in an era long before such things were ever heard of, and Nina Foch plays a bewitching bride of Dracula. Matt Willis plays an awkward recovering henchman, but it somehow works and manages to make him feel more genuine. Everyone else does a perfectly adequate job. No weaknesses in the cast. 2.5/3

The Lugosi Factor (0-10 points): Like I said above, he just doesn't have it anymore. What Lugosi brought to Dracula was a supreme confidence and a forbidden sexuality, neither of which belong to the Bela Lugosi of 1943. He is still graceful at times, but he doesn't fit the role in most scenes. A true shame to see. 6/10

Overall: If Universal ever tries to reboot the Dracula franchise again (and, let's be honest; they will) this is such a strong "Return" script, even for modern audiences. All it needs is someone who can channel 1931 Lugosi better than 1943 Lugosi. 16.5/23

Return Of The Vampire was well made but it's true Bela was not at his best, though some of the others are.

Voodoo Man bothered me in a lot of ways. Not one I would look at again. Compared with something truly well done like I Walked With A Zombie I wouldn't mind if all prints were lost.

Not that it really matters but... don't be too generous.

I Walked With A Zombie was released the year before (1943).

I wish Lewton or Tourneur had a healthy Bela for some of those later films they did with Boris Karlof. Nothing really compares to most of those RKO movies however (well, except Universal and Hammer sometimes).

Return of the Ape Man (1944)



Bela's final film for Monogram should make for a celebration, except that his career truly crawls to a halt after this. Again, I attribute this to the amount of pain he is in and the increased use of morphine that inevitably comes with it. Take this film, for example. In the beginning, Bela suddenly looks younger and stronger again. Then, by the end, he's an ailing old man once again, and it isn't acting.

Why is The Return of the Ape Man not an actual sequel to The Ape Man? One obvious possibility is that Bela no longer had the physical stamina to play a lumbering, physically active monster. Monogram wanted to continue to capitalize on Bela's star power, but all he was physically in a position to do was play a mad scientist who lounged about at Bridge Parties and then looked maniacal while holding an electric switch.

It's really not a surprise that Monogram didn't renew their contract with Bela after this film. Poor guy. In fact, if you consider how many of the cast and crew here are the same as on Voodoo Man, as well as the sparseness of the sets, I wonder if Monogram didn't rush this picture right after Voodoo Man in order to get Bela on camera one last time while he was still physically able to play a role. All along, the film scholars have assumed movie studios simply didn't want Bela anymore in an age in which his name and likeness were still everywhere in American culture. I suspect, instead, that one movie company after another found his pain and morphine usage impossible to work with. His first respite from acting in 1936-1938 correlated to his visibly aging drastically (presumably due to the pain and morphine), and the next respite that's coming pretty much right now seems to correlate as well.

As for the film itself...

Plot (0-5 points): Half-considered and silly. This really does feel like something a desperate writer generated in a single night. When The Ape Man begins attacking the people from his "previous life," there is potential for great drama and psychological exploration, but the script never takes us there. 1/5

Atmosphere (0-5 points): Once again, the clear sense that this production was rushed. There is still an uncanny eye for lighting and camera work, but it spends less time on the fine details and gives a more forgettable experience. The set of the laboratory looks utterly last minute and carries none of the nuance of the Voodoo Man's ceremonial chamber in the previous film. And the music (while new to me) feels even more jarring and unrelated to the action of the film than it did in Voodoo Man. 1/5

Other Actors (0-3 points): Forgettable. John Carradine, a masterful actor who proved himself impressively in the previous film, gets the second largest role and seems to have no idea what to do with it. Evidence once again, perhaps, that this production was rushed. 1/5

The Lugosi Factor (0-10 points): Once again, when a film rolls out the red carpet for Bela and gives him an opportunity to shine in a great role in a great production, he chokes, but give him a lousy script in an uninspired film, and he gives it his all. This is not exactly a memorable role for Bela, but he sells every line to the best of his ability, turns on his charm, and gives us a big range of emotions. 7/10

Overall: Probably more entertaining than it should have been, but that's largely thanks to Bela finding a little bit of Bela left inside of him once again. 10/23

Wow. This coincidence porn sounds right up the alley of any fan of B movies and (perhaps) of Bela Lugosim. Consider me interested!

The Body Snatcher (1945)



One of my favorite films of all time, and yet I always forget Bela is even in this one. Certainly, his character seems entirely ancillary to the central plot. Producer Val Lewton had an unusual arrangement with RKO: they gave him the film title and the running time; he had freedom to decide the rest. This was now the third Lewton film starring Boris Karloff, and my suspicion is that RKO wanted to capitalize on this and demanded that Lewton give RKO a film with both Karloff and Lugosi in order to drum up additional interest and ticket sales. As a result, Lugosi's big scene with Karloff is absolutely brilliant, but it also has zero impact upon the rest of the film.

This is the film where director Robert Wise (one of the greatest American filmmakers who ever lived, if you ask me), complained about Bela's ailments being a constant disruption to the production. Bela plays an incredibly frail old man who hunches and lumbers when he walks. I wonder to what extent this was called for by the script, and to what extent Wise and Lugosi had to make adjustments based upon his current condition. Though Bela ends up turning in a brilliant performance (certainly the best we've seen from him in at least two years), it's tragic to contrast this against the earlier films in which he would face off with Karloff. There was a time when Bela was the attractive-looking one with the calm demeanor who exuded authority and control. Now he's an object of pity.


Plot (0-5 points): Truly one of my favorite films ever made, and a good deal of that is owed to this complex story (loosely based upon The Robert Louis Stevenson source material) that is more concerned with what we sacrifice in the pursuit of success than in random murderers in alleyways. It exposes the true horror in a civilized world and wastes little time with fantasy. 5/5

Atmosphere (0-5 points): Robert De Grasse's cinematography is gorgeous and pain-stakingly deliberate. Every angle, every rich shadow or glint of light paints the emotional undertones in vivid shades of black and white. [5/5]

Other Actors (0-3 points): Karloff is at his absolute finest, as is Henry Daniell as the morally ambiguous mentor figure. Russell Wade is a little too goody-goody for my taste, but I think that was the point -- watching someone so bright and optimistic come so close to falling from grace. 3/3

The Lugosi Factor (0-10 points): Simple, mischievous but trusting, old and pathetic, it's not a role you WANT Bela to be good in, but he truly does bring his best to the role. His big scene with Karloff is priceless. Still, his character isn't in much of the film and really doesn't belong in it at all. 6/10

Overall: A masterful film in which Bela shines for the wrong reasons in that one scene you've probably forgotten. 19/23