Rating: 
Summary: Good for its time
Review: Hardly an adapatation of Bram Stoker's Dracula, this low budget Hammer film is a halfway decent vampire flick, considering the time it was made. Christopher Lee is an ideal choice for Dracula; his dominant screen presence more than compensates for the slapdash plot. Peter Cushing is perfect as this film's version of Van Helsing. The film benefits from a brisk pace and its economical running time (1 hr 20 mins). Unfortunately it drops much of what makes the opening sequences of Stoker's story so effective. In this movie there is no midnight ride with the mad coachman (Harker makes the final journey to Castle Dracula on foot, and in broad daylight!). Still, despite the Bela Lugosi version's greater fidelity to the story, this is a smoother film, without the leaden pacing that drags down the 1931 original. Perhaps someday Masterpiece Theatre will give Dracula the eight-hour miniseries treatment it needs... but we have yet to see a real adaptation of the novel.
Rating: 
Summary: Art Work - What a joke!
Review: I have not even opened the package for this classic film from Hammer Studios - because I can not get past some obvious errors and bad choices on the packaging of the DVD from Warner. First, this film has always been considered a classic movie with fine production, acting and script components. So why is the outside of the front cover listing the film as Christopher Lee's "Fang-tastic", first ever, etc...??? I take umbrage with the use of this explotative term, that I would coin for an Abbott and Costello movie. And why would they use such a ... cover poster. Dracula does not even look like Christopher Lee. Fo course the last error is the obvious glitch on the back cover, which I don't need to mention again here...
Rating: 
Summary: The Best of Hammer
Review: This is without question the best of the classic Dracula movies and perhaps the best offering ever from Hammer studios. Loosly based on the Stoker novel this movie made Christopher Lee a star. Peter Cushing is nothing short of brilliant as Dr. Van Helsing and the scene in which he destroys Dracula (this time) is magnificent.
Rating:
Summary: 5 star film 3 star packaging
Review: Warner has done a terrific job with some movies while others (such as HOD) seem to have escaped their attention. Time After Time, for example, has audio commentary from director Nicholas Meyer and star Malcolm McDowell and the transfer (despite a few analog artifacts) is nearly flawless. Curse Of Frankenstein has a better picture overall--less problems with grain but appears darker than HOD. Horror of Dracula is certainly a 5 star film and Hammer's finest hour (along with Revenge of Frankenstein. ROF stands as a rarity like The Godfather 2 where the sequel is superior to the original film in the series). The matted picture and transfer are pretty good overall. There are a couple of sequences where the transfer exhibits a high amount of grain and some analog artifacts. The good news is that as the film progresses the picture quality does improve (except for a few short sequences). The beginning of HOD looks like it was pulled from the same print as that used for HOD on video. The colors are richer and more vibrant than the PAL-VHS release. The extras are relagated to the trailer and info on the performers/film. The info section is pretty basic and most Hammer fans will know this stuff. Like The Mummy (which I personally think upon seeing again is a superior transfer to Horror), this is a nearly bare bones DVD. Still, it's nice to have Horror available on DVD and in the correct aspect ratio for the first time since it's release in 1958. Enough has been said about this fine feature in terms of the plot and performances so I'll be succint; Chris Lee IS Dracula. He manages to capture Stoker's Dracula with all his sexual swagger and refined sense of culture. Lee captures the dual nature of Dracula; he's both monster and seducer (capturing elements of the original performance by Max Shrek in Nosferatu and Lugosi's Dracula). Peter Cushing captures the energy and single mindedness of Van Helsing portraying him as a cross between Sherlock Holmes and Sinbad. His rich performance invests quite a bit of power in a role that had little to offer in previous films. Michael Gough also gives a focused fine performance as do all the actors. I don't think it odd that the actors all have English accents--no more odd than hearing American (or English) actors with fake middle European accents. Terry Fisher's direction is taunt, visually appealing and more performance orientated than some directors. The production design makes this the richest Dracula film Hammer produced. Brides of Dracula is the only film in the series (and technically speaking it wasn't a Dracula film but a Van Helsing film) that rivals HOD for production design and performances (although BOD suffers from a schzoid script that clearly had too many cooks) During the mid-60's the production values took a significant drop and by the end of the 60's and early 70's, Dracula films began to look like the poverty row films Hollywood produced during the 30's, 40's and 50's. While other Hammer films (most notably Dracula Prince of Darkness)have Dracula in a mere supporting role, HOD puts the character and conflict right up front. The final sequence between Cushing and Lee is still one of the best shot action sequences in a Hammer production. Fisher and his director of photography were in top form throughout this fine film. Jimmy Sanger's adaption manages to incorporate a number of key points from the original novel while injecting surprise with some intriguing changes. (If you haven't seen the film I'd suggest skipping the rest of this paragraph) The scene where Van Helsing has to dispatch Harker--who has become a vampire--is powerful and original. It works despite its lack of fidelity to the novel. So, how can we improve this film for future DVDs? Do what I did last year--write Rhino (which is owned by Warner) and let them know you'd like a special edition of this film produced. They'll do it if their parent company will allow them to license it. This DVD isn't exactly a disappointment just an underachiever. The packaging isn't as good as the box for the VHS (and has a picture that's clearly from Dracula AD 1972--just look at the hair style!) I was just hoping for something better for this fine film. It may not be Citizen Kane in the eyes of critics, but it is as important to the horror genre.
Rating:
Summary: Package art wrong
Review: This film is great, however, I have one complaint, on the back of the package, there is a picture of Stephanie beecham in a scene from Dracula AD 1972. Will someone please explain to me why it is there? The same thing with the curse of frankenstein dvd, there is a scene on the back of the package from "The Mummy". How can wb make this mistake? Any thoughts?
Rating:
Summary: A Reluctant Purchase
Review: Can't say anything about the actual film contents and style that hasn't been said before: Christopher Lee IS the Count to me and always will be. That being said, I'm saddened by the fact that Warner was the distributor of this film. While, yes, the movie is 44 years old, I found the picture to be grainy and the mono sound? Don't get me started. Why is it that a movie like _Scars of Dracula_ on Anchor Bay is a 2 disc set and at least looks really good, and _HOD_ is treated this way with amateurish special features?! The only reason I bought this movie was for what it is, and so that hopefully one day Warner may realize that there was enough support for the DVD to warrant a re-release that does this great film justice.
Rating:
Summary: AS GOOD AS IT GETS......
Review: First-rate Hammer treatment of "Dracula" and literally where it all began for the famous British studio. Warner Bros. presents it finally on DVD and it looks and sounds splendid in widescreen. This shows why Christopher Lee was matchless as the undead count and Peter Cushing was the ideal choice for the unflappable Van Helsing and so many "sequels" were spawned in it's wake. Some were good but this is the real thing. Only fault---the back cover of the snap case features a shot of Stephanie Beacham from "Dracula A.D.-1972"!!! This glaringly stupid error will anger some fans and no doubt confuse those seeing this for the first time. However, the goods are fine and the music intact with that unmistakeable Hammer sound. A bloody good show all the way around. Gobble this up before it disappears from the shelves.
Rating:
Summary: Mixed Thanks To Warner Brothers
Review: I've changed my opinion of this product, after a second viewing. I thank Warner Bros. for releasing Horror of Dracula on DVD. It's about time. Those of us hungry for Hammer Horror films have been waiting for this for a long time. And we wait with baited breath for the other titles liscensed to Warners. This is generally thought of as the closest film version of Bram Stoker's original novel. Though it does not follow the novel by the letter, it keeps the spirit of the novel, and adds some heroic flavor that was much needed since the Univeral version released some thirty-five years before. Warner has released it in anamorphic widescreen, and in stereo. I don't think "Horror" has ever looked this good on any previous release. I do think it's a shame that Warner did the bare minimum of extras. They still don't seem to appreciate the money making potential of Hammer Horror film fans world-wide. I don't know why the early-on announced collaboration with Christopher Lee didn't pan out, perhaps he was too busy. These days he's been in the public eye more than I can recall in decades. The extras are as close to non-existant as possible without being invisible. What is offered is barely more than rehashed, already known trivia to the Hammer Horror fan, and more than likely to the general public who's ever happened across an article about Hammer Studios. And apparently, whomever was put in charge of the dvd cover art, didn't do the research before putting together the art for the back cover (they made the same mistake for the newly released "Curse of Frankenstein", which sports a scene from "The Mummy" on the back cover), which includes a scene from another Hammer Horror film that is most definately not "Horror of Dracula". I suppose that's nit-picking. The truly unfortunate thing is, I like Warner Bros. They've given us tons of wonderful films over the decades; anything from dark mystery films with Bogart to way out sci-fi adventures such as Outland or THEM. But many of us who study film, and have grown up loving certain themes and stories presented in films, such as the good against evil portrayed in films like "Horror of Dracula", are willing and waiting to hand over money for a wonderful product meant for us. It's just taking so long for them to understand this. There was a wonderful opportunity here for a satisfying exhange between provider (Warners) and consumer (the fans, us), that somehow got a little muddled. Still, to have this movie in it's original widescreen format, from a source print that is definately better than any previous release, makes it a must buy. I don't think you'll be disappointed. And once again, with a huge company like Warner Bros., money talks. If sales for this release do well, we may see some of the other Hammer titles they hold, like "Taste the Blood of Dracula", or "Dracula Has Risen From the Grave".
Rating:
Summary: IT'S ABOUT TIME!
Review: I have been a Christopher Lee fan for about 45 years, and this is the movie that did it. I was 12 years old when I went to see it and, once he made his first appearance with blood, fangs, etc., I spent much of the rest of the film with my eyes covered. Then, when it ended, I went back to the ticket window and purchased another ticket. This time, forewarned, I watched the whole thing. I had never seen a horror film like it and, as far as I'm concerned, it set the standard for all horror-genre films to come after it. From the realism of the make-up to the lavishness of the sets, Hammer was in a category of its own. I have owned the VHS for many years, and have waited and waited for the DVD. Like the header to this review says, "IT'S ABOUT TIME!"
Rating:
Summary: Eros and the Vampire.
Review: Classic Hammer Films version of the famous vampire story. The film is notable for several reasons. Christopher Lee makes his first appearance as Dracula, his most famous role. Unlike Bela Lugosi's sense of tragic mystery, Lee stresses the vampire's delight in his unholy lusts. Lust is the key word. The late-Victorian era novel dealt only indirectly with sex. This movie has a definite erotic tone that is a Hammer tradition. For 1958, this was sexy stuff. Prim and proper women wantonly seek the vampire's kiss. The penetration is of the fangs in the neck variety, but we get the idea. Peter Cushing is Van Helsing, the vampire slayer. The brilliant casting of Cushing and Lee as adversaries became familiar fare in many subsequent horror flicks. The final battle between Dracula and Van Helsing in Dracula's castle is one of the great moments in vampire cinema. Lee's towering, menacing figure in the flowing black cape dominates the film. Lee's dialogue is minimal, but he projects more danger with icy stares than most actors accomplish with reams of discourse. When bloodlust rages, he is feral and overpowering. The characters are based on Bram Stoker's work, but the story unfolds in a way uniquely its own. One minor note: the obvious British accents of the supporting cast provokes unintended chuckles as they portray central European innkeepers and domestics. Little Tania is a special hoot. This is a great example of the way they used to make horror movies before the onslaught of insane killers stalking teenagers in a theater near you. Collectors building a library of Classic Horror 101 certainly need this one. ;-)
| 
