BCB After Dark: A return option behind the plate?

The late-night/early-morning spot for Cubs fans asks if the Cubs should trade for Willson Contreras

It’s the night before Halloween here at BCB After Dark: the haunted house for night owls, early risers, new parents and Cubs fans abroad. We’re so glad you decided to spend some time with us. There’s no cover charge. Costumes are optional. We still have a few tables available. Bring your own beverage.

BCB After Dark is the place for you to talk baseball, music, movies, or anything else you need to get off your chest, as long as it is within the rules of the site. The late-nighters are encouraged to get the party started, but everyone else is invited to join in as you wake up the next morning and into the afternoon.

Congratulations to the Los Angeles Dodgers, who came back from a 5-0 deficit to beat the Yankees 7-6 and win the World Series four games to one. I had this conversation with a former major league pitcher tonight.

I mean, McCarthy was a minor leaguer in the White Sox system in 2003. You’d think he’d remember that.

I’m sorry to bring up painful memories. Hopefully at least some of my readers are too young to remember that. I’d like to spare you that agony.

The next baseball games that count will be the Dodgers and Cubs in Tokyo.

Last night, I asked you which Cubs pitcher, who had already made their major league debut and was 25 or under, did you think would have the best career for the Cubs. The vote wasn’t really close, as Ben Brown received 68 percent of the vote. Jordan Wicks finished second with 17 percent.

Here’s where I play jazz and talk movies. Those of you who skip that can do so now. You won’t hurt my feelings.

---

Traditionally, in the final BCB After Dark before Halloween, I play Lambert, Hendricks and Ross performing “Halloween Spooks.” So who I am to mess with tradition?

I do think it’s neat that Rockies pitcher Peter Lambert teamed up with Kyle Hendricks and David Ross to perform this song.

---

If you’re Universal Pictures boss Carl Laemmle and your studio is on the verge of bankruptcy in the Great Depression because you failed to build a theater chain to show your films, you better find something that makes money. And for Universal, those were the monster horror films that are still classics today—Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, the Invisible Man and Werewolves of London. (The Wolf Man came later) The problem is that if you can’t develop anything else, you have to keep dipping into that monster well and eventually it’s going to run dry. Universal did successfully follow up Frankenstein with The Bride of Frankenstein, which is arguably the better film. So if The Bride of Frankenstein was a hit, then Dracula’s Daughter (1936) is a logical next step. Unfortunately, Dracula’s Daughter manages to just be a “meh” picture. It’s not terrible, like some of the late-thirties attempts at monster movie sequels, but it lacks much of the charm and horror of the original Dracula.

A desire to do a Dracula version of The Bride of Frankenstein wasn’t the only reason for Dracula’s Daughter. Unlike the other Universal monsters, the character of Dracula was only licensed from the Bram Stoker estate and Universal needed to make another Dracula film to keep the rights. MGM had bought the rights to “Dracula’s Guest”, a deleted chapter of the novel that Stoker later published as a short story. So to keep MGM from making a Dracula film, they agreed to buy the rights to the short story from MGM and the Stoker estate.

Unfortunately, the terms they signed with the Stoker estate forbade them from using any character in Dracula that wasn’t in “Dracula’s Guest.” So basically, Universal had to make a Dracula film without Dracula. So no Bela Lugosi. In fact, the only actor that returns from the first film is Edward Van Sloan as Professor Van Helsing.

Whereas The Bride of Frankenstein brought back director James Whale and stars Boris Karloff and Colin Clive, Dracula’s Daughter is working with an all-new team. Director Tod Browning and cinematographer Karl Freund (whom some have claimed was the real director of Dracula) are gone and replaced with studio hacks Lambert Hillyer and George Robinson respectively. And while Lugosi’s Count Dracula is undeniably one of the most iconic performances in the history of cinema, Gloria Holden as Countess Zaleska is not. She’s also certainly not Elsa Lanchester, who was barely in The Bride of Frankenstein but stole the show anyway.

The film picks up immediately after Dracula, as officers from Scotland Yard find the bodies of Renfeld and Count Dracula in the catacombs of Carfax Abbey. Van Helsing is still there and he quickly confesses to killing Count Dracula, explaining that he was a vampire. Obviously the police don’t buy that and arrest Van Helsing.

Van Helsing asks for one of his former students, the psychologist Dr. Jeffrey Garth (Otto Kruger) to help his defense. Meanwhile, Countess Zaleska awakes from her tomb (Was she one of Dracula’s brides? Unclear) and she steals Dracula’s body from Scotland Yard, hoping that burning it would cure her of her vampirism.

Eventually, Zaleska meets up with Garth. She thinks a prominent psychologist might be able to help her overcome her vampire tendencies. But of course, she is what she is and while she tries, she ends up preying on young women anyway.

Unlike Dracula, Dracula’s Daughter was made under the eye of the Hays Office, so the sex and violence had to be toned down. Despite that, Dracula’s Daughter managed to sneak some very lesbian content past the code. Because of that, the film has a kind of cult status in queer film circles. To be clear, most of it is not a positive portrayal of lesbianism. Yes, there’s the coming out of the closet part where Zaleska embraces her true nature and stops looking to psychologists to make her “normal.” But that aspect went over the heads of audiences at the time. What contemporary critics and audiences did catch was the trope that older lesbian “inducts” an innocent young woman into the “club” through seduction, so to speak. Certainly the way that Holden, as Zaleska, seduces and bites Lili (Nan Gray) codes as queer.

Dracula’s Daughter also lacks the gothic sets and camera work inspired by German expressionism that helped make Dracula so special. What remains is very pedestrian and ordinary. The camera work and production design isn’t bad—nothing looks cheap, for example—but it doesn’t pop like the original.

If you go into Dracula’s Daughter looking for a companion piece for Dracula or The Bride of Frankenstein, you’re going to be disappointed. Holden has her moments as Countess Zaleska, but she definitely doesn’t have the charisma of Lugosi. The supporting cast is inferior as well—even Van Sloan as Van Helsing isn’t given the same opportunity to shine. He’s not Zaleska’s nemesis like he was to Count Dracula. Probably the best performance in the film is from Marguerite Churchill, who plays Garth’s mischievous and jealous girlfriend Janet.

But if you just want more Universal monsters or if you’re a fan of the history of queer cinema, then you should check it out. Dracula’s Daughter also won’t insult your intelligence like some of the other sequels the studios churned out throughout the thirties and into the forties. It’s a competent story that is competently told and competently performed.

Here’s the trailer for Dracula’s Daughter.

---

Welcome back to those of you who skip the music and movies.

The news down south with the Cubs arch-rivals should sound familiar. While the Cardinals aren’t using the word “rebuild,” it certainly looks like St. Louis is going to break up the team and start from scratch. Longtime president of baseball operations John Mozeliak is going to step down after the upcoming season and his replacement, former Red Sox chief baseball officer Chaim Bloom will advise Mozeliak this year before taking over in the next offseason.

In this interview, Mozeliak uses terms like “reset” and “step back” for the Cardinals in 2025. We’ve already mentioned that the Cardinals won’t be bringing back Paul Goldschmidt and this article by Katie Woo (The Athletic sub. req.) reports that the Cardinals won’t be bringing back pitchers Lance Lynn or Kenyan Middleton either. Kyle Gibson will only return if the Cardinals can find a taker for either Miles Mikolas or Steven Matz.

There has been a lot of reporting that the Cardinals will be looking to cut back on salary this upcoming season by dealing whatever veterans they can. You probably know where this one is going.

The Cubs are reportedly in the market for a catcher to pair with Miguel Amaya and serve as a bridge to Moises Ballesteros. The Cardinals have a very highly-paid catcher coming off an injury-plagued season that they’d probably like to be rid of, if only because of his contract. You may be familiar with him. His name is Willson Contreras.

Contreras has three years and $59.5 million left on his deal with St. Louis. He also has a no-trade clause, so if the Cardinals can’t trade him anywhere without his permission. Are there too many hard feelings between Contreras and the Cubs that he wouldn’t want to come back? I don’t know. It’s possible he’d jump at the chance to return to Wrigley as well. He knows that he’s still well-loved on the North Side.

Contreras only played 84 games last season, but he was still very productive at the plate, hitting .262/.380/.468 with 15 home runs. His defense is still a matter of much discussion, but it’s safe to say that it hasn’t changed much from his final days in Chicago.

The pros of Contreras is that he can still hit and he’s a beloved icon. The downside is that he turns 33 in May, has struggled with injuries and has three years left to go on his contract.

What the Cubs would have to offer St. Louis for Contreras would probably depend on too many factors to determine here. If the Cubs were willing to eat the entire contract, the Cardinals probably wouldn’t ask for much. If St. Louis sent $30 million along with Contreras, they probably ask for a top five prospect in the Cubs system. They might settle for a little less than that, but that’s what they’d ask. It would also make a difference if Contreras told the Cardinals he doesn’t want to hang around for a rebuild and deal him anywhere or if he just said he’d only waive his no-trade deal if he was being sent to the Cubs. Those are questions I can’t answer.

But my question to you is—would you want Willson Contreras back in Chicago? Or maybe you think it’s just best to find a catcher who would be more require less of a financial commitment as we wait for Ballesteros to be major-league ready.

It’s been my pleasure hosting you this week. If you checked anything, let us get that for you now. Please get home safely. Recycle any cans and bottles. Tip your waitstaff. And join Sara Sanchez tomorrow night for more BCB After Dark.