Home :: DVD :: Horror :: General  

Classic Horror & Monsters
Cult Classics
Frighteningly Funny
General

Series & Sequels
Slasher Flicks
Teen Terror
Television
Things That Go Bump
Dracula - Prince of Darkness

Dracula - Prince of Darkness

List Price: $29.99
Your Price:
Product Info Reviews

<< 1 2 3 4 .. 7 >>

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: My First Hammer Experience A Good One!
Review: Christopher Lee doesn't utter one word in "Dracula Prince of Darkness", the follow-up to "Horror of Dracula". He doesn't have to. With those boiling red eyes, that tall, imposing figure and the swirl and dash of a black cape lined in red satin, Lee projects enough on-screen menance to leave no doubt in the mind of the viewer as to his Count's blood-thirsty intentions.

A literate script and fine acting on everyone's part contribute to the obvious high production values of this film. Extras include two original trailers (one of which is a double-bill with a Hammer zombie film) and a documentary narrated by the late, great Oliver Reed containing all the information on Hammer Dracula/Vampire films that one might ever need. There are also home movies taken on the set of "DPofD" which contain commentary done in 1997 by Lee and some other surviving co-stars. (In these frames, sunlight doesn't seem to hurt the Count one little bit.)

All in all, a great DVD for watching on a cold, rainy night ... all alone ... in an unfamiliar house? Just don't invite any tall, handsome strangers in ... or you might wind up as dinner yourself!

Rating: 2 stars
Summary: Where's Peter Cushing when you need him
Review: Everyone to their own thrills and chills but this movie has a problem -- it's boring. In fact, the most entertaining sequence is the opening flashback to its predecessor, "Horror of Dracula".

After the success of that earlier film, it was no doubt evident to Hammer Productions that they needed to get Christopher Lee back into the cape. They must have felt that this was all that was necessary, because they forgot to add a compelling story to go along with the garment.

We follow two vacationing couples as they stumble into Dracula's Castle, and provide the necessary cocktail for his comeback. The problem is that it takes forever to get things rolling. They talk and grumble, and talk and whine. Finally Drac appears, nails Barbara Shelly, couple of mild thrills, and we're back to the "slooooows" again. Another cheap thrill or two, Drac slips onto ice, and we get this hokey ending.

I think that Hammer's first vampire work, "Horror of Dracula", while generally appreciated, is not given credit for the level of fright it delivered to its 1958 audience. While a low-budget film, it dispensed various elements of horror up to that time unseen. It also contained a crisp, fast-moving script (albeit, full of plot holes), and an unrelentingly, adversarial relationship between Dracula and Van Helsing (the great Peter Cushing) that drives the story all the way to its slick ending. If you contrast these two films, "Dracula, Prince of Darkness" is not in the same league. At best, it is a mild thriller.

After "Prince of Darkness", things only became worse. Reluctant to give up its cash cow, Hammer drove on into the seventies, until the films became so pitiful that the monsters were being killed by boredom.

With "The Curse of Frankenstein", "Horror of Dracula", "Brides of Dracula", (and "The Mummy", if you like), Hammer infused new blood into the horror genre, and deserves that recognition. Like most creative ventures though, the originality and inspiration dwindled within a few years; nevertheless, we're left with a batch of chilling treasures from which to pick our favorites for curling up on cold, dark, windy nights.

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: Gothic Masterpiece
Review: This is the third and best instalment in Hammer's Dracula-series, it ignores the second one and continues where the first one left off. Actually, knowledge of any of the other movies is not required at all, each one of them a ritual reviving the important elements, this one being the most ceremonial. The main theme seems to be the disproportion between rationality and sexuality, the former represented by Victorian morals, the latter by the vampire, stoic nobelman and hissing animal in one, he comes off as a diabolic high-priest of passion. Thus the beautiful Barbara Shelley, who enters Dracula's castle together with her boring husband, is transformed from uptight pedant to sexy vamp in lingerie, the actress mastering both roles accordingly. The scene in which she begs the heroine to let her in because "it's cold out here", sniveling like a child, but truly menacing at the same time, is one of the iconographic highlights of the genre.

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: Kiss of the Vampire.
Review: There was a delay of eight years, but Christopher Lee finally did a sequel to "Horror of Dracula." Note the tag sequence repeating the classic confrontation between Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) and Dracula (Lee). Lee has no dialogue in this film. His part consists of cold stares, feral looks, and raging hisses. Part of the film's appeal is Lee's towering image in the billowing black cape. His delight in the vampire's unholy lusts cast uncertain motivation out the castle window. The plot is slow to begin, but the bloody resurrection scene covers a multitude of foot-dragging. As usual, unwary travelers make their way to dreadful doom at Dracula's castle. A cold woman (Barbara Shelley) falls prey to the vampire's kiss. From a buttoned-up prig, she becomes a seductive woman, diaphanous gown and all. Shelley's wanton transformation is Hammer at its ample cleavage best. Sex and the vampire prevail. Father Sandor (Andrew Keir) is the vampire slayer. Sandor is a worldy priest who rides and shoots as well as he prays. He assists Francis Matthews rescue the delectable Suzan Farmer from Dracula's spell. Thorley Walters contributes timely comic relief as a lovable lunatic, secretly loyal to Dracula. Critics and some Hammer fans complain that this flick is a step down in the series. Whatever the merits of that complaint, this is fun. Some viewers may recall that this flick appeared on a double feature with "Plague of the Zombies" at a theater near you in 1966. Great stuff for collectors. ;-)

Rating: 2 stars
Summary: Weak sequel
Review: I was very disappointed with this first sequel to the classic "Horror of Dracula". The latter film is one of my favorite films of all time, with Christopher Lee giving a terrifying performance along with Peter Cushing. This sequel doesn't come close.

What really surprises me is how good this film starts, and how dull it gets once Lee appears as Dracula. Four individuals are lost and find Castle Dracula. There, they are welcomed to stay by a very eerie, creepy butler. This guy is terrific. He has the same mannerisms that Lee has in the beginning of "Horror": polite but very scary.

As the movie progressed, I started to feel the same anxiety and terror of the first film. The guests stay overnight but then they start walking around the castle as they hear noises. This section creates suspense and chills because we don't know what will happen next, or how Dracula will be revived. Once Dracula appears though, the movie seems to lose everything. Lee pops up and gives a few perfunctory snarls and runs around, but has nothing to say. Somehow he just doesn't have the presence he had before (maybe because he's bored playing it a second time). In "Horror" he was much scarier even when he didn't have lines. From there, the film never seems to recover.

One question: Why isn't "Horror of Dracula" available on DVD?

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: Dracula Returns
Review: In 1895 two english couples on a trip in the Carpathians find themselves stranded at an eerie castle. They do not know it but they are at Castle Dracula. Count Dracula's manservent Klove has been waiting for this, it seems his master has been dead for 10 years. One of the guests becomes a victim and reconstitutes Dracula. The next day the other couple go in search of Alan & Helen Kent, Helen has become a vampire and Charles is no where to be found.

They seek the help of Father Sandor and he helps them combat the Count. The final is a thrill when Sandor shoots the ice around Dracula. The Count is consigned to the moat, destroyed by running water. Father Sandor replaces Dr. Van Helsing in this one.
Barbara Shelly gives the performance of a lifetime as Helen Kent.

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: Count Dracula's castle is really heart-stake hotel!
Review: This movie is one of my favorite vampire movies.It is also the best of the Hammer sequels to HORROR OF DRACULA.
This film is distinguished by two distinctive elements.First,Christopher Lee as the Count does not speak in this movie;he only hisses,snarls,and glares.But it works-the lack of human language used by Drac emphasizes his inhumanity.Lee pulls it off with commanding screen presence.The Lord of the Undead is scary even when speechless.
Second,the main vampire hunter is not Professor Van Helsing but Father Sandor,abbot of Kleinberg:a priest who had performed innumerable stakings and exorcisms for his parishoners.
The plot is most unusual for a vampire movie.The tension and fear is built through music,lighting,and atmospheric elements.The actors WITH speaking parts execute their roles flawlessly.A word of caution,to those of you with souls:stay with Monsignior Sandor in Kleinberg---don not take advantage of the elegant but spooky hospitality of Klove and Count Dracula!

Rating: 3 stars
Summary: Christopher Lee is back as the suddenly silent Count Dracula
Review: Christopher Lee returns to the screen as Count Dracula in this 1965 film from Hammer Studio directed by Terence Fisher. Unfortunately, instead of Peter Cushing as Van Helsing we have Andrew Keir as Father Sandor. Keir is a fine actor, but his character seems tepid after Cushing's work in "Horror of Dracula." The good father warns a couple of traveling Englishmen and their wives to stay away from Castle Dracula but the tourists end up there and the blood of one of them is used to revive the count (the title gives it away, huh?). As you would expect, Dracula goes after one of the women (Barbara Steele), who becomes both a vampire and a wanton woman (not necessarily in that order). Father Sandor saves the day in a rather novel way for a vampire movie (is running water ever the first choice for killing the undead?).

This is one of the worst of the Hammer Dracula movies and to be fair there are more bad ones than good ones. The biggest problem here is that Count Dracula is reduced to being almost entirely animalistic (Lee always maintained the dialogue written for him was so bad he refused to speak any of it). Even without dialogue Lee's performance has its moments, as does that of Kier, but the best thing in "Dracula--Prince of Darkness" is Barbara Steele and you really do not want your main victim stealing the movie. Certainly the victims are much more interesting dead than they were alive.

Rating: 3 stars
Summary: OK, but does not add up to the original
Review: This one is OK for Halloween perhaps, but not the best of them all. Dracula does not even say anything in this film although the evil is quite effective. Only buy this one if you are a die hard fan of the Hammer "Dracula" films. Other than that, renting it at your local video store might be better.

This film may have also been better with the presence of Professor Van Helsing, and that's what also made the first film even better.

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: like a marionette with its strings cut ...
Review: It's been years since I've seen this film but the thing that remains most clear to me is the first time we see the 'creature' fully. It's been unconscious or asleep on a low bench and it wakes and tries to get up, but its legs don't know what to do, and its arms are just as helpless. That's when I thought of a newborn colt, or a marionette with its strings cut.

Lee didn't need that ghastly makeup because his long somber face and those suffering Italian eyes did it all for him. He had as great an ability to make us understand him even when he didn't speak as Buster Keaton did.

He has that same grace to this day, as Sauroman. I've always wondered if he had early dance training.

Those perplexed and terrified eyes of the Creature put me on his side at once, just as they did when they belonged to Kharis later, in "The Mummy."

Although this film's plot varied from the classic book, the heart of it was still true to it. We see our humanity in the 'monster' more than we do in the genius who created him so heartlessly and then didn't know what to do with him.


<< 1 2 3 4 .. 7 >>

© 2004, ReviewFocus or its affiliates