Generate a number from 1 to 2999 via:
You can skip movies 10 times but never go back.
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…
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.
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…
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.
I'm no expert in anatomy, but I'm pretty sure the heart isn't located around the lower left ribcage
Last night via TCM I finally saw this film, which is usually hard to track down. I was hoping it'd be better than just average, but beggars can't be choosers. It brings back Dracula to the halls of Hammer, and it's done so in not as preposterous a way as I had feared; incidentally, one day I should watch the Peter Cushing Brides of Dracula, as I've heard good things about it.
The plot here revolves around two couples (both on the annoying side) who are on vacation in Eastern Europe and they happen to land in what is now Castle Dracula, which of course is different from the former Castle Dracula. The Count has a master and he is…
Technically the second sequel to 1958's Dracula (but the first in which Christopher Lee reprised the count), the pacing is slow in the first half. However, once Dracula is resurrected, in grand bloody fashion, things really get going, leading up to an exciting climax. Hammer stalwart Barbara Shelley's transformation from a prim and proper Victorian lady into a sexually-charged vampiress is a joy to behold.
An alternate/more accurate subtitle would have been: A Series Of Unfortunate Events That Could Have All Been Avoided If Someone Would Have Asked "Why?" At Some Point
Movie number two in the Christopher Lee tribute on TCM. This one is a little more creaky. Years after Dracula's death (which we see in a strange Eye of Sauron sort of montage at the top of the movie) everyone is still afraid of Castle Dracula in Carlsbad. They stay far far away. But then a pair of couple on holiday decide to ignore all the warnings coming their way. Worse, they get into a carriage that is mysteriously driven by no one. It drives them to the castle, where they meet the strange butler of the castle. Still, this pair of couples that are kind of annoying, decide to stay the night.
And then that's when things get interesting…
Realizing this is almost step by step The Texas Chainsaw Massacre for the first 45 minutes. It's also stupid for the whole 90.
Oh yeah. Takes a while to get past the vacationers plot and then takes a nap in the middle but there's some prime Dracula in here.
tours stay at Dracula's castle-big mistake!
well at least it had a cool vampire resurrection scene
Well made Hammer horror -a tad on the slow side but comes alive whenever Lee is on screen which is not enough.
a list that is trying to contain every horror film made that is not lost and is found on the…
Step One: Go to www.random.org.
Step Two: Pick a Number.
Step Three: GET WEIRD!