Rating: 
Summary: LEE RULES.....
Review: Critics weren't kind to this follow up to "Horror of Dracula" but I think it's quite worthy. It has Hammer's stamp all over it and won't disappoint Hammer or Christopher Lee fans. Two couples get stranded and are forced to stay at Dracula's castle---their host unknown to them at that time. A faithful servant kills one of the husbands and uses his blood to revive the Count who then lures the man's wife ( a wonderful Barbara Shelley) to her fate as his 1st victim. She goes from uptight prim to full-blown vamp in her transformation to undead seductress. The remaining couple try to escape but Dracula has his red eyes set on the other wife (pretty Suzan Farmer from "Die Monster Die"). They find refuge at a monastery with some monks but Dracula soon finds them and kidnaps the wife. His attempted indoctrination of her by slicing his chest and urging her to taste his blood is pretty heavy for 1966. The climax with Dracula trapped on the ice flows is fun. If Hammer films are your bread and butter then you'll love this Dracula installment. It's another example of why Lee was the ultimate Dracula and always will be.
Rating: 
Summary: Show some respect
Review: Of all the Hammer Dracula films I found this the best. Others perfer Horror of Dracula but that's more man hunt than horror movie. This movie captures the claustrophobic atmosphere that makes the first few chapters in the book so resonant.The acting as well is top notch. Christopher Lee doesn't speak, he hisses and it works. His manner and speech in the first movie contradicted the insane lust later on. This movie stays consistantly creepy. And the music is very powerful.I have two gripes. First the supplements on my dvd don't work, except for the awful commentary by the cast. It sounds like a theater full of noisy stuck up people who are talking about everything but the movie. I don't need to hear Christopher Lee repeating the question, "What was I saying? while some great stuff is happening on screen. Commentary should support the film not drown it in nonsensical gossip. Anchor Bay and cast, have a little more repect for the work.
Rating:
Summary: Good effort that suffers when compared to its "Parent"
Review: With "Horror of Dracula" as its "Daddy" this film had a very hard act to follow and live up to. In its own right I find it a good installment in the Dracula cycle that Hammer produced between 1958 and 1972.Hammer waited roughly 7 years after the release of the classic "Horror of Dracula' before they produced a sequel. In the interim they had produced the interesting "Brides of Dracula' that was minus the Count's involvement. Christopher Lee was reluctant to don the Black Cape again and was only persuaded after much discussion by the director Terence Fisher and Hammer execs. The one fatal flaw in this production as has been mentioned by other reviewers, is the fact that Dracula never utters a word of dialogue during the whole running time of "Dracula Prince of Darkness" and is reduced to a series of sinister snarls and hisses. Part of Christopher Lee's great mastery of the Dracula role was his excellent deep voice which fitted the character to perfection and the fact that Lee still gives Dracula an arresting presence in this production without dialogue says alot for his excellent technique and commanding presence. Be that as it may Dracula in this production, despite limited time on screen, is still a frightening and very eerie presence and does add to the overraul look and atmosphere of "Dracula Prince of Darkness". Atmosphere and attention to period detail is certainly one of the very strong points of "Dracula Prince of Darkness". I watched this film for the first time in 2 years recently and I was very impressed by the beautiful look of the production, its top notch cinematography, excellent use of colour and above all else its settings. The set pieces are what make this film. For the first time Hammer made use of Black Park, a strange and wildly beautiful rural district full of birch groves, old oak trees and tangled undergrowth which would become a constant setting for future Hammer productions including their next Dracula film with Christopher Lee, "Dracula Has Risen From the Grave". The outdoor photography is some of the best used in Hammer productions. After 7 years no attempt was made to reproduce the original Castle Dracula exactly as it was in "Horror of Dracula". The new castle in this film is a much grander building which really adds to the overraul atmosphere. Its Gothic entrance way, sinister hallways, old paintings, and antique furniture are in the finest traditons of Hammer film settings and I feel add a very sinister feel to the whole production which is totally appropiate. The storyline is a fairly typical one but is one which sets the scene for an interesting story. 2 couples become lost in a mysterious wood after their coach driver refuses to travel any further in the direction of the former Dracula Castle. A sinister driverless black coach suddenly appears and before they know it they have been driven to Castle Dracula where they are invited to dine and spend the night by their unexpected "dead" host. The frightening manservant Klove (superbly played by Philip Latham) however has an ulterior motive for asking them to stay as he is intent upon reviving his dead master Dracula and proceeds to do this by brutally murdering one of the male travellers and in a very controversial and bloody scene slits his throat and suspends his hanging body over Dracula's ashes to mix the two and bring Dracula back to life. This scene causes much outcry at the time of the film's release in 1965 and still packs a punch . It definately isn't for the light headed. As Dracula's actual screen time is limited the focus of the rest of the story is on the remaining travellers and their attempts to escape Dracula's clutches, in particular Diana (Suzan farmer) who Dracula in particular pursues. Andrew Keir delivers a strong performance in the second half of the story as the gruff, no nonsense Father Sandor who is determined to destroy Dracula. After Dracula pursues Diana to the father's Monastery and almost Vampires her by using Barbara Shelley's character of Helen (she has already been attacked by Dracula and turned into a Vampire)occurs the second shocking scene where Father Sandor and his monks hold Helen down and drive a stack through her heart . Once again its not for the faint hearted and is quite graphic even by Hammer standards. Dracula's demise in this production has been declared by many critics to be a major let down as he is shot at and slowly sinks under a sheet of ice in the moat of his castle. I believe it is an excellent scene and the fight between Dracula and Francis Matthews who plays Charles just prior to this happening on the ice is excellently done and one of the better death scenes for Dracula. It also once again shows Hammers clear attention to detail in these earlier years of Vampire films whereby they have used the point of running cold water as a means to despatch Dracula which is correct with all the legends of how to kill a Vampire. While "Dracula Prince of Darness" can't match "Horror of Dracula" and suffers from a lack of screen time and dialogue for Dracula it is still a very entertaining film in its own right. Hammer had a way of giving their productions a unique look which matched so well with the stories they told and this film is no exception. To see the superb Christopher Lee in his most famous screen character is reason enough to enjoy this second film based on Bram Stoker's 19th century creation. Enjoy!
Rating: 
Summary: Terence Fisher's Dracula: Prince of Darkness
Review: I think people need to rethink their loyalty to Hammer Studios, since not everything they released was wonderful. This film is a prime example. A sequel to "The Horror of Dracula," it has no bite. Two brothers, Charles and Alan, are traveling with their respective wives, Diana and Helen. (Charles and Diana... how ironic). A burly priest warns them to stay away from a certain creepy castle, but does not elaborate as to why. They are warned off this certain castle, but end up there anyway. Helen is already shown to be the uptight one, and refuses to be swayed by the castle or its creepy servant, Clove. Charles, Alan, and Diana think this is a wonderful adventure, and take advantage of the "dead" castle's owner's kindness to travelers. To make a long story short, Clove kills Alan, revives Dracula, who bites Helen, turning her from a Julie Andrews into a Julie Strain, but without the constant nudity. Diana and Charles escape to the burly priest's monastery, where Dracula is helped in by one of his old employees. Dracula races Charles and burly priest back to the castle for the final showdown. This film is an hour and a half, and still too long. There are many dull stretchs as Charles and Alan say "oh, darling, there is nothing to be frightened of" much too often. Lee, who has no lines, does not appear until the midpoint of the movie (not counting the opening clip from the preceding film), leaving the viewer to have to suffer through boring plot points like where the pesky tourists will find lodging for the night and why is the burly priest so mad at the superstitious townsfolk when in fact the paranoid townsfolk had the vampire legend right all along? Charles and Alan are not Schwarzenegger and Stallone, as they often seem more annoyed by Dracula's lack of good manners than fearing for their very lives. Helen, played by Barbara Steele, is such a pill you wish she would get a stake in the heart long before she is turned into a vampire. Christopher Lee is not given much to do except to hiss and bug his eyes, like a kitten with a thyroid condition. The suspense consists mostly of Dracula's resurrection, thanks to lots of Alan's blood and some shadowy appearances. The climax, obviously filmed indoors, involves Dracula falling through some pretty fake ice. You will need a cold bath, too, to wake yourself up from this disappointment. I cannot recommend it, even to Hammer fanatics. This is unrated and contains strong physical violence and strong gore.
Rating:
Summary: Lee is Back
Review: A group of travelers visit Dracula's Castle, even after being warned not to go there. Before they arrived, a terrified coachman leaves them outside the castle, where Dracula's coach picked them up, took them to the castle where Klove (Dracula's faithful servant) greeted them. Dracula (played by Christopher Lee) is revived (he had been "dead" for almost 10 years) after one of the travelers is killed, hung upside down, and drained of blood over the tomb containing his ashes. This is a good movie; it is excellent to have Christopher Lee back playing Dracula. The only thing missing from this movie is having Peter Cushing play Dr. Van Helsing.
Rating:
Summary: Best of the series
Review: This one is a classic that I keep with the best horror genre of the latter 20th century. Mr. Lee was a wonderful actor, though I wish the writers would have had him speak more in these Hammer movies, for he has a very appealing voice. This movie takes off where Horror of Dracula left off, and it takes off with a bang. Lugosi may have introduced us to Dracula, but it was Lee who perfected him.
Rating:
Summary: NOT AS GOOD AS THE FIRST BUT STILL VERY GOOD!
Review: This is the squel to "Horror of Dracula"from 1958,and I must say that this squel is very pleasing and gorey.The errie atmosphere and the gore adds to the movie greatly.In this film,Christopher Lee returns as the vampire Count Dracula and is hungry for victims.After being bought back to life by his servant,Dracula waits in his crypt for human blood.But later that day,4 travelers get lost in the woods and see a errie castle in the distance so they go there for help but they later find themselves trapped in Dracula's Castle with the count himself.
Will they survive the night?
Rating:
Summary: Four Stars for Lee and the Bonus
Review: Christopher Lee and the bonus materials are what earns this movie 4 stars. Its not a great performance by Lee, but its Lee. The gothic atmosphere and capable acting do make for a fun watch, but unlike many Hammer fans I liked The Scars of Dracula much better. The "World of Hammer" bonus feature, once again carries an average film to a higher level.
Rating:
Summary: One of the better Dracula flicks
Review: I own all the Hammer Dracula flicks and this one is one of the better ones. THe dialogue is good (esp. Lee's since he says nothing).
The action is good.
I would recommend it eagerly to anyone who likes to see B movies
Rating:
Summary: really and truly good to the last drop!
Review: This film is actually not the second but third Dracula film made by Hammer studios, Christopher Lee bowed out of 1960's Brides of Dracula, but returns for this quite chilling sequel. You can tell this is still the sixties, the vampires are still repelled by the crosses and the film is devoutly pious while it is also quite scary! The only thing lacking is the heavy duty sexual content of some of the latter films. The kids can watch this one and will still get a good fright. The film was released in widescreen with the running commentary when it was actually done a couple of years ago on the Laserdisc, although this was lacking on VHS. The colors, film stock is not pristine, but the movie is still presentable. Andrew Keir is memorable as the rough and ready cleric who helps save the day.
| 
