MovieChat Forums > The Wolf Man (1941) Discussion > Dracula and The Wolf Man never got their...

Dracula and The Wolf Man never got their own sequels

posted 10 years ago by mercury4
16 replies | jump to latest

I really thought that was a shame. Lugosi's Dracula never got a whole series the way Frankenstein's Monster did. The Wolf Man got a sequel, but it was Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man. We did get to see Lon Chaney Jr. play Larry Talbot four more times after The Wolf Man. But Bela Lugosi only played Dracula once more. It was cool that they got Lugosi back for Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. I loved him in that. I loved everyone in that movie. I noticed they really made great use of Lugosi in that movie. Dracula still had that charm he had in Dracula years ago.

[–] GreenGoblinsOckVenom86 10 years ago

I don't agree with you completely. Most of Frankenstein meets the wolf man is about Larry. The monster doesn't even show up until quite a ways into the movie. Then after they search the ruins for Frankenstein's diary, Larry goes into town to see Frankenstein's daughter and you don't see him until a ways after that scene. Actually House of Dracula has quite a bit of Larry but only a few minutes of the monster. Guess they decided to let the other characters shine.

When the Story Lady tells us about the naughty boy who blew up his goldfish.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] reaseltbim 10 years ago

why didnt they like him?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] reaseltbim 10 years ago

that's very interesting. It makes me wonder if Bela could even change his accent (I never looked into it) maybe he was embarrassed but instead of telling them he couldn't he just said no?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] millsey72 (10666) 3 years ago

How could Dracula get a sequel when he was killed off in the original

[–] urrutiap (1124) 2 years ago

he survived.

go watch Son of Dracula

[–] millsey72 (10666) 2 years ago

That was his son who went by the name of Alucard

[–] urrutiap (1124) 2 years ago

no. it was Dracula the whole time. he survived, you moron.

I watched the movie last year.

Also go get your facts straight over at frikkin wikipedia too while youre at it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_Dracula_(1943_film)

Hungarian Professor Lazlo arrives at Brewster's house. Brewster has noticed that Alucard is Dracula spelled backwards and Lazlo suspects vampirism. A local boy brought to Brewster's house confirms this suspicion—there are bite marks on his neck. Later, the Count appears to Brewster and Lazlo but is driven away by a cross. Katherine sneaks into Frank's cell and explains that she only married Alucard (who is really Dracula himself) to obtain immortality and wants to share it with Frank.

[–] millsey72 (10666) 2 years ago

And I watched the movie this afternoon. The Dracula in this movie is the son of the original Count Dracula. Count Dracula had a son and daughter and each got their own movie. Can't you tell the difference between Bela Lugosi and Lon Chaney Jr? They are father and son. Now I want you to watch this movie again before you respond back to me. And I only accept apologies in a 15 minimum worded post.

By the way, Count Dracula was dead in the 1936 movie titled Draculas Daughter. In fact, she burned his body. How the heck can this be the original Count Dracula?

[–] urrutiap (1124) 2 years ago

Im right and always will be right.

So fuck you dipshit

[–] millsey72 (10666) 2 years ago

How dare you post those words to me

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7818) a year ago

No. It's a diffetent Dracula than the Lugosi film. It's mentioned by Dr. Harry Brewster in that movie that Dracula was chased back to Transylvania in the past which didn't happen in the Bela Lugosi Dracula.

[–] urrutiap (1124) a year ago

whatever, man

[–] FilmBuff (7360) a year ago

I find you have to take the recaps and explanations in the old Universal films with more than a few grains of salt. They more or less rewrote the history, and/or glossed over it, to fit whatever was needed for the current film. Audiences didn't care, they just wanted to see their favorite monsters on the big screen again.

Larry Talbot was clearly killed at the end of the Wolf Man, and nothing in the legend says that the full moon shining on the corpse of a werewolf will bring him back to life, yet that made for an exciting scene and allowed them to bring their werewolf back. Likewise pulling the stake from the ribcage of a skeleton should not allow said skeleton to suddenly grow flesh and blood and turn back into the vampire it used to be, but there you have it. And how many times did the Frankenstein monster burn, freeze, explode, etc.?

To paraphrase Muggsy, "Positively the same vampire!"