Devil Bat's Daughter (1946) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
13 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Nice Sequel
Rainey-Dawn22 January 2016
While this film is nowhere near as good as the original, The Devil Bat (1940), it does have its own charm. This one is actually a mystery-horror and more towards mystery with little horror.

The flashbacks/clips of the original film really helped to make the Devil Bat's Daughter (1946) better - without them the film would fall almost flat I'm afraid. It made Bat's Daughter a lot more interesting with the flashbacks.

I enjoyed this film and I would recommend it to those that are fans of Bela Lugosi and the original film. It's not as good as the original but it is a film that is worth watching if you want to see the sequel.

5/10
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
DEVIL BAT'S DAUGHTER (Frank Wisbar, 1946) **
Bunuel197617 October 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This is a maligned vintage horror effort with a plot that is oddly similar to those of two equally disreputable titles i.e. the same year's SHE-WOLF OF London and Edgar G. Ulmer's DAUGHTER OF DR. JEKYLL (1957) – that is to say, a young woman is made out to be a monster (here, a murderess) because her family is apparently cursed (in this case, her father was supposedly behind a killing-spree perpetrated by a vampire bat) but it all proves to be a conspiracy to disinherit the girl. While the afore-mentioned two films could get away with it by being variations on well-worn themes, this was actually a direct sequel to a hardly-classic movie which it then goes on to completely contradict, by making the villain of the original (played in THE DEVIL BAT {1941} by none other than Bela Lugosi) a benign Professor! That said, taken on its own merits, the film provides mild narrative interest (the script is by genre stalwart Griffin Jay – this was actually his last work) and adequate mood (accentuated by distorted footage from the original to serve as the heroine's hallucinations!) and which, though admittedly let down by generally bland performers, ought to make it nonetheless palatable for hardened buffs. For what it is worth, this PRC effort shares its female lead (Rosemary La Planche) and director with a superior outing from the same stable, STRANGLER OF THE SWAMP, which came out earlier that year.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
"I wonder what became of her grip?"
hwg1957-102-26570422 December 2022
Warning: Spoilers
The 'Devil Bat's Daughter' in this film doesn't turn out to be a devil bat. Indeed in this sequel to the 1940 Bela Lugosi film 'The Devil Bat' the previous devil bat retrospectively becomes not one at all but just a misunderstood scientist. (Which he wasn't.) So this film entirely removes the devil bat-ness of two films! What we have instead is a murder mystery with the perpetrator being completely obvious. The leading lady Rosemary La Planche as the befuddled titular daughter is nice to look at but can't act and apart from Michael Hale as the plausible but manipulative psychiatrist Dr Morris the rest of the cast are forgettable. There is a nice dog but one shouldn't get too attached to him....

At the end the Dr Morris pulls a gun on his accusers and tries to run away which was a bit silly as the Sheriff hardly had any evidence to convict him. If he had bluffed it out he would have been fine. His was a cool and level character until that moment of madness. An absurd ending to a rather tedious film.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not-So-Sinister Semi Sequel to the 1940 Original
daytimer5926 July 2003
The title seems to suggest that "Devil Bat's Daughter" is a sequel of sorts to the original "Devil Bat" (1940). However, there are too many inconsistencies to establish the continuity needed for a sequel. "Devil Bat" fans will notice right off the bat (couldn't resist) that in the six years after the first movie was made, the locale changed from Heathville (apparently somewhere in Illinois and near Chicago) to Wardsley, New York, outside New York City. The characters are all of course different, and so is the home of the mad doctor, Paul Carruthers, which now has a basement. The 1946 film also goes lightly over the facts concerning the doc's predictable demise, noting that he was found dead, the apparent victim of one of his large bats. However, in the first film he is plainly killed by the devil bat in view of the sheriff, the heroine and the star reporter. Actually "Devil Bat's Daughter" is little more than a rather obvious vehicle for a 1941 Miss America named Rosemary La Planche. The film lacks any of the mystery of the first, and simply winds its way to the predictable end.
10 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
poverty-row horror without much horror
Eegah Guy12 October 2000
Do not watch this movie expecting to see any monsters or vampires because all you'll get are some bats. Actually this film is more of an identity crisis drama and murder mystery rather than a horror movie. The best parts are the dream sequences which are reminiscent of surrealist experimental films (has David Lynch seen this?) and also LSD sequences from 60s films like HALLUCINATION GENERATION or BLONDE ON A BUM TRIP.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Despite an exciting title, this is an awfully dull film...
planktonrules22 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I guess I should have known better. After all, this movie was made by PRC--an incredibly terrible tiny studio that made a long string of sub-par films. But, when I saw the title and read the description, I sure thought it would be exciting. Well, it wasn't! The film, despite its title, has nothing to do with the movie "The Devil Bat". Instead, it's about a neurotic woman and her evil psychiatrist. It begins with a woman discovered wandering aimlessly. She's brought to the hospital and soon admitted because she is catatonic. Eventually, she slowly begins to come to and, oddly, the psychiatrist's wife invites her to come live with them while he treats her (don't even get me started about the ethical problems with this). The woman is apparently the daughter of a man termed 'the Devil Bat', as people thought he was a vampire. She is obsessed with this as well as a compulsion and strange dreams to kill.

Unfortunately, the actual killer is VERY obvious throughout the film. Despite the neurotic lady being accused of killing her dog and then the psychiatrist's wife, it's 100% obvious who the real killer is. There is absolutely no sense of suspense. And, to make things worse, the lady (Rosemary La Planche) was a dreadful actress who had a hard time delivering her lines. As a result, the film is neither exciting nor worth seeing because it is so dreadfully bland and poorly constructed. So, despite the great title, it's a pretty dull film.

By the way, this video was released on DVD by Image Entertainment. It was of an extremely terrible quality--with poor sound and a very poor picture. It BADLY needs restoration.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
LAST TIME when we checked in with the devil bat....
mark.waltz9 July 2015
Warning: Spoilers
In perhaps the most unnecessary sequel in film history, the events which audiences who had seen the Z-grade "Devil Bat" were totally altered to clear the Bela Lugosi character of Paul Carruthers of being an evil scientist who used enlarged bats to kill the men who deprived him of what he felt he deserved for creating a marketable lotion for shaving. Altering it, he made the lotion so potent to bats that they would attack the man wearing it and kill them. This was very clear from start to finish in that PRC horror film. And to make pretty rotten cinema even more rotten, along comes this sequel which in advertising, is supposed to be a horror film, but ends up being just another mid 40's psychological drama, and a very boring one at that.

Rosemary La Planche is cast as the daughter of the late Lugosi who arrives mysteriously in the town where he allegedly sent out these horrific creatures. She begins having nightmares of bats, and when a dog is mysteriously killed, she is accused of causing its death. Michael Hale is her doctor who is trying to help her deal with these nightmares, while John James (no relation to the "Dynasty" actor) is his stepson, investigating her father's past. You won't believe how ridiculous this gets after half the movie has spent boring you with psychosis mumbo-jumbo and a sudden twist which changes everything you may or may not remember from the first film.

As schlocky as it was, "The Devil Bat" was an entertaining movie which had a definitive conclusion and didn't need continuation. The only way to have continued this would be to have had Lugosi reprise his role as a spirit coming to his daughter from beyond the grave as part of her nightmares and have other horrific things happen which makes it appear to be her. But the character of Paul Carruthers was so memorably evil (responding to his victims "Goodbye" every time they would say "Goodnight") so to change him into a misunderstood do-gooder made no sense. The sets look even cheaper than the first film, the performances are bland, and the script even weaker. Do yourself a favor. Watch "The Devil Bat", skip this, and move on over to Lugosi's Monogram films which even at their worse look like "Citizen Kane" when compared to this.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A sequel without Bela Lugosi understandably lacks bite
kevinolzak7 April 2022
1946's "Devil Bat's Daughter" proved a sad finale to a decent run of horror titles from Producers Releasing Corporation (PRC), director Frank Wisbar coming off the more impressive "Strangler of the Swamp," which also starred Rosemary La Planche, former Miss America of 1941. Screenwriter Griffin Jay had an interesting resume, first at Universal with "The Mummy's Hand," "The Mummy's Tomb," "The Mummy's Ghost" and "Captive Wild Woman," then Columbia with "The Return of the Vampire" and "Cry of the Werewolf," plus PRC's recent "The Mask of Diijon," a vehicle for Erich von Stroheim. What most of these admittedly minor efforts show is a proclivity to headline strong female characters, in particular Acquanetta and Nina Foch, screen newcomers like Rosemary who all enjoyed backgrounds in modeling before Hollywood came calling. Bela Lugosi fans still rejoice that their hero got to play the title role in "The Return of the Vampire," as it was his only actual vampire other than two films as Dracula, while this curiosity was intended to be a sequel to the Lugosi classic that kick started the studio's Poverty Row reign, 1940's "The Devil Bat," but with no one on board from the original it's no wonder that this storyline is so sorely lacking. This may well be the first instance where the original was altered for the sequel though hardly the last, as in 1981 the John Carpenter "Halloween" was granted a prime time airing with new footage added to make it better 'fit' the upcoming Rick Rosenthal follow up "Halloween II." Rosemary's character hardly speaks for much of her limited time on screen, relating how Lugosi's Paul Carruthers was a Romanian (like Armand Tesla in "The Return of the Vampire") who wed her Scottish mother before abandoning the family when the daughter was only 4, her mother soon dying of anemia eventually blamed on a 'vampire.' The original midwestern town of Heathville is now the New York locality Wardsley, where Carruthers engaged in experiments on 'cell growth stimulation,' escaped bats claiming a small number of innocent victims including the doctor himself, a far cry from setting them up with shaving lotion that attracted the flying death by fangs and claws. The girl spends much of the running time in a trancelike state, in the belief that her father was the 'Devil Bat' and that she must also suffer from inherited tendencies of vampirism. The actual villain of the piece comes as no surprise at all, Michael Hale as Dr. Clifton Morris clearly revealed early on as cheating on his wealthy wife (Molly Lamont) with her best friend (Monica Mars), intent on using poor Rosemary as the perfect foil to dispose of said spouse to gain access to her money (death implemented by scissors), only to run afoul of a stepson (John James) who inexplicably falls for the pretty headcase while simultaneously building a case against his mother's killer, a man he despises for obvious reasons. Griffin Jay's mastery at recycling meant that old ideas now became part of the new backstory at odds with the events from "The Devil Bat," and with its slim running time of 67 minutes occupied with discussions about things never shown or points already seen it becomes a struggle coming to grips for the viewer trying not to drift off into blissful sleep. Rosemary La Planche made a good impression in the lead of Wisbar's "Strangler of the Swamp" but here is largely absent during the second half, and dog lovers will not approve of one canine's demise, very different to the Great Dane in Monogram's John Carradine vehicle "The Face of Marble." June Lockhart played a similarly distressed victim in Universal's "She-Wolf of London," completed roughly two weeks before "Bat" shooting began on Jan. 9, more manipulations in store for the Jekyll family in 1951's "Son of Dr. Jekyll" and 1957's "Daughter of Dr. Jekyll."
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not Bad
email2amh25 May 2005
Okay, unless you're a fan of mystery and horror films, you likely find all the stuff from the 1930's and 1940's intolerable, but what's the point of putting that in a review? I AM a fan, and I liked this sequel (of sorts) to The Devil Bat. It has classic 1940's styling and 1941's Miss America in the lead role. I thought the flashbacks to the first film were handled well, and the storyline is plausible. The whodunit aspects and ending are relatively predictable, but not unsatisfying. Miss LaPlanche and Mr. Leary starred in the same year in The Strangler of the Swamp, which I liked a little more. I also liked the use of the newspaper's vampire headlines which provided a link to Bela Lugosi and a theme of the previous film.
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Sequel to a Bela Lugosi "classic" is a good if unremarkable horror mystery
dbborroughs3 June 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Sequel to the Bela Lugosi film the Devil Bat has the daughter of the Lugosi character showing up in the town in order to find out what happened to her missing father.When we first see her she's catatonic from some event. She's eventually brought around by the local shrink who helps her to come to terms with what happened. She also works with a handsome young man to unravel actually what really did happen previously since it seems Bela wasn't a bad guy after all. Creaky familiar feeling horror mystery film is an okay film designed to build on the previous film. High art its night, but its the sort of black and white film that one used to find with regularity on the Late Late Late Show, when such a thing meant movies not stand up comedy. Worth a look for those familiar with the earlier film or those in an undemanding mood and a desire for a black and white horror film.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dull Sequel To A Very Enjoyable Original
mord3918 October 2000
MORD39 RATING: * out of ****

The original DEVIL BAT was arguably one of the most enjoyable low budgeted Poverty Row horrors of all. This unnecessary sequel is pretty awful, and not a film required to be seen by even the most diehard fan of 30's and 40's horror.

For starters, this follow-up asks us to believe that the demented Bela Lugosi character from the first film was actually innocent of all those bizarre murders! Now in the followup we have his daughter having nightmares over the whole thing.

This is a poorly acted "whodunit" attempt, but you'll figure out who the culprit is long before your eyelids surrender to the gentle calling of the Sandman. Pleasant dreams!
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lousy sequel to a lousier original
BrianG28 January 2000
German director Frank Wisbar was a rising star in his own country before he was forced to flee the Nazis and emigrated to the U.S. Whatever talent he had apparently disappeared on the way over here. Most of the films he made in the U.S. were cheapo horror junk for PRC Pictures, which was pretty much at the bottom end of the Hollywood food chain. The only good thing that can be said for this picture is that it's not as lousy as the film it is a sequel to, 1940's "The Devil Bat"--and, since that was one of the absolute worst films ever made, is not saying much. The story is about a woman (former Miss America Rosemary LaPlanche, who is basically the only good thing in the movie) who believes herself to be possessed by the spirit of her dead father. The film is treated more like a mystery than as a horror film, but what "mystery" there is is painfully obvious. The film didn't do much for the career of Rosemary La Planche, Frank Wisbar or anybody else who had anything to do with it, and for good reason--it stinks.
4 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Awful Sequel to a Decent Lugosi Picture
Michael_Elliott4 October 2013
Devil Bat's Daughter (1946)

1/2 (out of 4)

Nina MacCarron (Rosemary LaPlanche) believes that she is evil just like her father who murdered several people after creating a bat to attack them. She begins seeing a psychiatrist (Nolan Leary) to try and make sense of whether she's going crazy or perhaps there is something evil around. This here is a sequel to THE DEVIL BAT, a fun Bela Lugosi picture but this thing here is just downright awful on just about every level. We'll get to the awful things in a bit but the most disappointing thing is how stupid it treats the viewers and fans of the original film. In that film Lugosi was a murderer but this sequel pretty much throws everything out and completely contradicts what the original film was about. Why on Earth they did this is anyone's guess but it really wouldn't shock me if the screenwriters of this thing never actually saw the picture. Being a PRC film you should expect a low-budget but I'd really be shocked if this thing took more than a couple days to shoot. The entire thing looks as if it was shot on just a couple sets and everything from the performances to the editing to the direction are downright horrid. The weird thing is that director Frank Wisbar and actress LaPlanche would fair much better together the same year with STRANGLER OF THE SWAMP, which proved they could deliver something of quality. I think this film perfectly shows how very little effort anyone was putting into it because the studio simply wanted a film to get into theaters and hopefully milk some horror fans. DEVIL BAT'S DAUGHTER was released the same year as SHE WOLF OF London, another horrid film dealing with a female monster.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed