It didn’t take long for other studios to capitalize on the success of Universal Pictures’ Dracula [1931] and the first was from Larry Darmour Production who also owned Majestic Pictures distribution company, which was known as a Poverty Row studio aka b-movie/ ow-budgeted films that existed from 1920s to 1950s. This particular 90-year-old film, is likely forgotten by many perhaps even omitted from memory, especially when one considers other films of that year namely King Kong [1933] and Mystery of the Wax Museum [1933], and that the storyline for it is loosely constructed  but does have some well filmed  extended scenes that might appeal to the students and fans of cinematography that harken back for historical techniques long since forgotten. Therefore, director Frank R. Strayer (The Moster Walks [1932]) and screenwriter Edward T. Lowe Jr. (House of Frankenstein [1944]) both snippets of influence from Dracula but also Frankenstein [1931] to create this rough diamond.

The film opens with a series of interesting editing transition cuts, and some trickery of light to conceal the villain, the audio mixes a wolf’s howl and woman’s scream. Then the camera pans to a private meeting at the Bürgermeister (mayor) Gustave Schoen (Lionel Belmore (Son of Frankenstein [1939])) of Klineschloss a small German village where it was plagued with a series of mysteries deaths that leave the victim drained of blood, the elders believe it is the work of a vampirism, as historical facts mention giant bats from 1643. However, Police Inspector Karl Brettschneider (Melvyn Douglas (The Old Dark House [1932]) is more of a rationale man, and believing in the hogwash of folklore, but scientific facts; he’s thinking the killer is mad scientist with bizarre experiments. The story works to two sides of the town the knowledgeable or affluent versus the common folks who cling to their beliefs of old-waves tales. For example, aside from the Inspector, Dr. Otto von Nieman and his assistant (Lionel Atwill (The Ghost of Frankenstein [1942])) and Ruth Bertin (Fay Wray (Mystery of the Wax Museum [1933])) respectively treat those beneath their status with contempt. One must mention the character Gussie (Maude Eburne (The Bat Whispers [1930]) to serve as comedic relief against the building tension, a trait still common in today’s horror films. It’s at this point which serves as an underlying aspect of the story that the killings enforce the fears of the vampire folklore; hence instills isolationism, gossip and mistrust while breeding rampant suspicions. This was not new for the early cinema, The Lodger [1927] introduced these concepts as did other filmmakers, as it work on the principles of distrust amongst outsiders and anguish with the townsfolk. The locals start to devise who the culprit which they deemed is Herman (Dwight Frye (The Bride of Frankenstein [1935])), while his performance is nothing quite like is legendary role Renfield, he does strive to create a character that is afraid of everything and has a tendency to utter gibberish about how bats are his friends. They pursue him with pitchforks and flaming torches, as if he were Frankenstein’s monster, to the Devil’s Well; however, an experienced cinemagoer will see this as a red-herring. The dear doctor appears to be communicating via a form telepathy as well as using his power to hypnotize his butler Emil (Robert Frazer (White Zombie [1932]) all to assist him in his evil misdeeds, and herein the plot borrows a bit from The Cabinet of Dr Caligari [1920], easily showing how mad the doctor has become thanks his pseudo-science of immortality.

Cinematographer Ira Morgan, does create some rather interesting work of this highly tight budgeted film, with regards to moody opening that strives to give appearance of bat creature gracefully moving across rooftops. In addition, there are a few scenes in which appear to have very tight closeup shots of victim’s faces to capture frozen fear of their pending death, remembering it’s 1933 and the camera wasn’t easily maneuverable as today – a solid effort, as there is very little bobble in the framing of the shots. Also, a lack of music allowing the stillness of the night, the eerie silence to grow the tension, works well, but often some of the cast delivers extremely stiff dialogue, thereby lacking emotional convictions.

The average viewer might definitely have their interest and attention wane a bit during this film, as their excessive discussions on bats, vampires and various plagues; although it does use the very common gothic atmospheric tropes to enhance both dreariness and an abundance of suspicion. However, some critics label the movie as egoistical horror, due to their deeming infiltrating aspects between the different societal classes of people; although one must note both the era in which was film made and the region where it is supposedly set as the action is not elitist rather commonplace. The Vampire Bat is filled cliches namely the mad doctor, and sadly doesn’t originate many independent thoughts, instead borrowing from predecessors and since then has fallen into the public domain.

TAGLINES:

• These are the TALONS of The Vampire Bat (original ad)
• THRILLS! CHILLS! Shudder at the Mad Blood-Thirst of a Human Fiend! (Print Ad- New York Sun, ((New York NY)) 20 January 1933)
• A Picture That Will Thrill You- That Will Chill You to the Bone! (Print Ad- Albany Evening News, ((Albany NY)) 29 June 1933)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0024727/

IMDb Rating: 5.7/10

Baron’s Rating: 5.0/10

Full Movie: