Step One: Go to www.random.org.
Step Two: Pick a Number.
Step Three: GET WEIRD!
Dracula: Prince of Darkness
DEAD for Ten Years DRACULA, Prince of Darkness, LIVES AGAIN!
Whilst vacationing in the Carpathian Mountain, two couples stumble across the remains of Count Dracula's castle. The Count's trusted servant kills one of the men, suspending the body over the Count's ashes so that the blood drips from the corpse and saturates the blackened remains. The ritual is completed, the Count revived and his attentions focus on the dead man's wife who is to become his partner; devoted to an existence of depravity and evil.
There'll be no morning for us.
This sequel looses Peter Cushing and his character of Dr. Van Helsing, but regains Christopher Lee in the role of Dracula. While I love Cushing in these films, it seems to be a fair tradeoff to regain the character of Dracula for your newest Dracula sequel. It doesn't retcon or reboot anything however and acknowledges the fact that the good old Count is supposed to be dead and that's where lies the great little horror tale that unfolds.
As a stand alone film this is a great little horror yarn, but I imagine people expecting it to showcase Christopher Lee as Dracula will be disappointed. Most of the story is about how…
Though Dracula: Prince of Darkness is a better made sequel, I much prefer Hammer's ludicrous 70s Dracula output like Scars of Dracula and Dracula A.D. 1972. Still Dracula: Prince of Darkness entertains. It has everything you'd want from a Hammer flick: an ominous castle, a creepy human sidekick for Dracula, pompous rich couples not taking the advice of locals, bright red blood, and Christopher Lee. With Terence Fisher in the director's chair, it's pretty much a guaranteed winner. I love the way Fisher uses colour and only moves the camera when he needs to. He's truly Hammer's finest director. Lee is quite terrifying in this entry with his bloodshot eyes and animalistic portrayal of Dracula, though it's frustrating how long…
Ten minutes ago we were stranded in the cold, miles away from anywhere. Now we're warm. We're going to be fed. And if that man's master is anything like I think he's going to be, we're going to be entertained as well.
Even though it took 8 years for Christopher Lee to return as Dracula, Hammer Films still accomplished something that Universal Pictures never did and that's make a proper sequel to their Dracula with it's original star. Of course Hammer would go beyond just that as Lee ended up playing the Count five more times for the studio.
Even by today's standards Lee's take on Dracula is beyond what you usually see. He makes him look crazed…
Time to crown the Prince of Darkness - Hooptober's 25th entry - 26.10.2016
Reminding us of the Horror of Dracula's climax, Prince of Darkness begins stating that the evil creature Dracula is merely a horrible memory anymore. He's still very real to most of the people aware of the story who act like his presence is eternal, a fear that doesn't let go. Even as a memory Dracula's reign of terror continues.
Of course the fearful citizens are right. Evil always finds a way to return. Four tourists from England end up visiting quite an eerie castle and get involved with something terrible. Dracula is resurrected. The horror begins again. Goddammit people, all you had to do was to not…
We've seen it all before, but this seems almost like the perfecting of a formula for Hammer, and as a fan, this makes for a very appealing film. This mute, bestial, red-eyed reconstitution of Dracula, may not get much screen time, but Christopher Lee makes every second, ahem, Count. And of course we get all the other gothic trappings that make a classic Hammer Horror. It may not be one of the best, but it's one of my favorites from the studio.
Film #22 of Hoop-tober 3
It fitting that Christopher Lee doesn't speak in this film because it feels rather muted in comparison with the other Hammer Dracula films even though it is probably the bloodiest I've seen so far. The cinematography doesn't seem quite so colorfully regal and the cast feels flat, not giving Lee a strong presence to play off of. Not bad by any means but it's pretty by the numbers.
A little disappointing but it's got that classic Hammer look and a couple of nifty things (D's reanimation, Christopher Lee and his crazy red eyes, death on the ice).
This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.
As a Hammer horror film, it mostly works. The biggest thing it suffers from is the fact that Dracula is barely in it, and never speaks when he is (with the exception of a few screams, which obviously aren't Christopher Lee's). Still, it has a nice Gothic setting and likable characters, along with a well written story.
Manages to be passable despite the absence of Peter Cushing and no dialogue from Christopher Lee. Here Dracula isnt as icy and menacing as his Horror of Dracula incarnation, but rather a silent bloodthirsty killer.
3rd Annual 31 Days of Horror 20 of 31
After sitting out the last couple of Hammer vampire films, Christopher Lee returned in Dracula: Prince of Darkness. Unfortunately, it wasn't a rematch (yet) of him and the great Peter Cushing as Peter did not return for this one. A group of people, after several strange coincidences, end up at Dracula's old castle only to find he's been dead for a while. Soon enough though, they find out they are exactly what is needed to resurrect the vampire.
Most of what leads up the Dracula's resurrection is interesting, but it's when he comes back to life that it becomes very been there done that. Without Cushing there really isn't a great…
Only this film could've used neon red paint as blood and got away with it
Pretty fun kinda boring.
Better than Brides, good so see Lee back and a few good captivating scenes.
Hammer Horror: making Dracula kinda sexy since 1958.
My favorite Hammer vampire film, in spite of pitching the early victims sort of set up as deserving of their fate, especially Barbara Shelley. Love Andrew Keir's monk
Step One: Go to www.random.org.