IMDb RATING
6.3/10
7.4K
YOUR RATING
After killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.After killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.After killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
Anthony Higgins
- Paul Paxton
- (as Anthony Corlan)
Madeline Smith
- Dolly
- (as Maddy Smith)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
This is a very unusual Hammer horror film in that it picks up exactly where the last one left off--providing some nice continuity. It seems that after Drac was impaled in the last film, his body disintegrated and all that was left was his powdered blood. A REALLY STUPID passerby decided to scoop up the blood and later sells it--followed by the not unexpected resurrection of Dracula once again!! Despite this weird reincarnation, the movie does offer some nice innovations and some that weren't all that necessary. Dracula was revived by a Devil worshiper and three perverts. Just before Dracula revives, the three perverts get cold feet and kick the Devil worshiper to death. In an odd display of loyalty, Dracula decides to take revenge on the three man and their families because a sweet old Devil lover was needlessly killed! In most Dracula films his sidekicks are killed at the slightest whim by the vampire without a second thought. I really suspected that Christopher Lee's character was just looking for an excuse to shed some more innocent blood--and how he had them killed was pretty cool and unusual. However, were also some bad changes. Since the film came out in 1970 and the morals of the world were changing, the producer decided to "sex up the series" by adding a brothel scene and throwing in some gratuitous nudity. The entire scene could have remained and been just as effective without the boobies, but because of this some parents might want to think twice about allowing junior to watch this film. Of course, with all the killing and bleeding, this isn't exactly a kids' film anyway!! Overall, a very watchable addition to the franchise and a nice followup to "Dracula Has Risen From The Grave".
A couple final notes--when a dead woman is removed from the lake, the man who retrieved the body accidentally tripped a bit--and you can see the "dead lady" move her arm instinctively in response!! I'm amazed they didn't catch this or re-shoot the scene. Also, one of the three men marked for revenge is played by Peter Sallis (the voice of Wallace from "Wallace and Grommit"). It's interesting to see this man play a rather slimy part.
A couple final notes--when a dead woman is removed from the lake, the man who retrieved the body accidentally tripped a bit--and you can see the "dead lady" move her arm instinctively in response!! I'm amazed they didn't catch this or re-shoot the scene. Also, one of the three men marked for revenge is played by Peter Sallis (the voice of Wallace from "Wallace and Grommit"). It's interesting to see this man play a rather slimy part.
The story concerns three middle-aged men seeking thrills, making a pact with a devil's disciple, backing out of that pact at the last moment, and then dying as well as their progeny for their lack of commitment. The story has some big holes, but is one of the better Dracula films in the Hammer series. You get what you generally can expect from Hammer: good character acting, lush cinematography, dutiful direction(ably done by Peter Sasdy), Christopher Lee(alas no Peter Cushing), beautiful young girls showing lots of cleavage, wonderful period costumes, and the film's shining grace is the score by James Hermann which is simply poetry put to music. Ralph Bates stands out as a Lord Courtly living a life of sin and debauchery. Good Hammer Fun!
This was the only Dracula/Lee movie that I saw on the huge theater screen and it was pretty cool. My mom would never take me to these things so I had my dad drop me and my friend off, then pick us up later. It was a double feature along with Trog. The theater was not packed, but it had been playing for at least a week. Now some kids are going to rate this lower because they've all seen much bloodier and scarier stuff. No kidding, really????? When this came out it was very good in terms of gore and horror.
My most memorable scene was when the hardened dust broke in half and Dracula's face filled the screen with those red eyes. I just purchased the DVD and it includes some restored footage of the brothel T&A and during each victim's death they look up at the standing figure of Dracula. The first victim's shovel-gashed face was restored on the DVD, the second victim's bloody face and the third victim too. This version was never released in the US. It would have been rated R, instead it was GP (before they called it PG).
I think it's bull for another commenter to say it's obvious that Dracula was never intended to be in this. No, what is obvious is that a certain commenter read some of these movie facts before claiming they "knew all along." Yeah, they were going to have Bates as Dracula, thank god that fell through. Lee was talked into it again. They had to rewrite it to insert Dracula in there, and his presence was awesome though some of his lines were bad. Hmmm, Dracula can count to 3. I'll give this one 7 stars. The DVD quality is spectacular.
My most memorable scene was when the hardened dust broke in half and Dracula's face filled the screen with those red eyes. I just purchased the DVD and it includes some restored footage of the brothel T&A and during each victim's death they look up at the standing figure of Dracula. The first victim's shovel-gashed face was restored on the DVD, the second victim's bloody face and the third victim too. This version was never released in the US. It would have been rated R, instead it was GP (before they called it PG).
I think it's bull for another commenter to say it's obvious that Dracula was never intended to be in this. No, what is obvious is that a certain commenter read some of these movie facts before claiming they "knew all along." Yeah, they were going to have Bates as Dracula, thank god that fell through. Lee was talked into it again. They had to rewrite it to insert Dracula in there, and his presence was awesome though some of his lines were bad. Hmmm, Dracula can count to 3. I'll give this one 7 stars. The DVD quality is spectacular.
Three wealthy gentlemen go out during one night of the month for pleasure seeking (supposedly for charity the wives think) and are becoming incredibly bored in what they do in that time, as they think that they've done everything. That's until they meet Lord Courtley (Ralph Bates) who claims he can give them power if they join him in some ritual to recreate his dead master, but first they have to buy a certain item off a shopkeeper to perform this task. So, with the help of Dracula's servant Lord Courtley they meet in a rundown chapel to revive Dracula (Christopher Lee) from his ashes, but they chicken out of fulfilling their end of the bargain and to keep this quiet they kill the servant. Thinking that it will just blow over, but there wrong as now Dracula has been revived through his servants' corpse and he plans to take vengeance on those three for killing his servant.
Decent latter-day hammer effort that has very good production valves and some solid performances on show. The polished Victorian sets standout with sharp detail and great use of shadowy and dim lighting for its Gothic atmosphere. Though, the atmosphere was good it wasn't that grand in stature and it's not terribly suspenseful as we've seen it all before. The overall feel might come across a rather glum, but it has its lively parts and an undertone of pervading sexuality and flesh for some added boost. The compellingly clever plot is well thought out to begin with (great intro) and there are some unpredictable moments, but then it does seem to follow the usual pattern of the earlier Hammer Dracula's and ends rather unconvincingly after it looked like there was going to be an exciting finale. After a promising first half it does kind of drag in parts after the resurrection of Dracula and comes up with an uninspiring romance tale. The script is utter ham and quite stilted. Christopher Lee as Dracula doesn't really get that much too do, but whenever on screen his presence or quick flashes has some hypnotic pull making you wish he had more screen time. Most of the time his sneaking about in the background, counting down his victims in a husky voice (1,2 & 3) and giving orders to others (their children) to do his dirty work. Most of the performances were good (some deadpan) from the likes of Geoffrey Keen, Peter Sallis and John Carson as the three gentlemen and Ralph Bates as Lord Courtley is incredibly over-the-top, but seemed well suited for it. The ladies of the film or you should say Dracula's victims Isla Blair and the ravishing Linda Hayden give fair performances and some added eye-candy. The direction by Peter Sasdy is top-notch in delivery and he adds in some great sequences. The fine camera-work had sprawling crane and ground shots. While not forgetting the look into my eyes camera zooms too. Even the make-up and gore effects (nice flowing rich blood) were pretty well conceived and didn't come across as too wretched. Another highlight of the film would have to be piercing, but also moody music score.
Anyway maybe the formula was starting to wear thin in this film? Well, it does rehash certain elements and the usual clichés follow, but what do you expect from these campy hammer films. Its their trademark and has been a winning formula for them.
A mildly enjoyable hammer film, even if it's by the books.
Decent latter-day hammer effort that has very good production valves and some solid performances on show. The polished Victorian sets standout with sharp detail and great use of shadowy and dim lighting for its Gothic atmosphere. Though, the atmosphere was good it wasn't that grand in stature and it's not terribly suspenseful as we've seen it all before. The overall feel might come across a rather glum, but it has its lively parts and an undertone of pervading sexuality and flesh for some added boost. The compellingly clever plot is well thought out to begin with (great intro) and there are some unpredictable moments, but then it does seem to follow the usual pattern of the earlier Hammer Dracula's and ends rather unconvincingly after it looked like there was going to be an exciting finale. After a promising first half it does kind of drag in parts after the resurrection of Dracula and comes up with an uninspiring romance tale. The script is utter ham and quite stilted. Christopher Lee as Dracula doesn't really get that much too do, but whenever on screen his presence or quick flashes has some hypnotic pull making you wish he had more screen time. Most of the time his sneaking about in the background, counting down his victims in a husky voice (1,2 & 3) and giving orders to others (their children) to do his dirty work. Most of the performances were good (some deadpan) from the likes of Geoffrey Keen, Peter Sallis and John Carson as the three gentlemen and Ralph Bates as Lord Courtley is incredibly over-the-top, but seemed well suited for it. The ladies of the film or you should say Dracula's victims Isla Blair and the ravishing Linda Hayden give fair performances and some added eye-candy. The direction by Peter Sasdy is top-notch in delivery and he adds in some great sequences. The fine camera-work had sprawling crane and ground shots. While not forgetting the look into my eyes camera zooms too. Even the make-up and gore effects (nice flowing rich blood) were pretty well conceived and didn't come across as too wretched. Another highlight of the film would have to be piercing, but also moody music score.
Anyway maybe the formula was starting to wear thin in this film? Well, it does rehash certain elements and the usual clichés follow, but what do you expect from these campy hammer films. Its their trademark and has been a winning formula for them.
A mildly enjoyable hammer film, even if it's by the books.
Taste the Blood of Dracula is neither the best(Horror of Dracula) or worst(Satanic Rites of Dracula from what I recall, the film needs a re-watch though) of the Hammer Dracula series, for me it's somewhere in the middle as a flawed but very enjoyable film.
One of Taste the Blood of Dracula's biggest flaws is the ending, which is one of the series' most unimaginative and is far too protracted and drawn out, Dracula's demise is also too easy and the silliest of his demises in the series. The script is flat and far too talky, some of the talk not adding much, while Dracula's few lines of dialogue are rather ludicrous. While not as bad as in the films following it, the pacing in the first half is on the pedestrian side too.
However, the photography is incredibly stylish with lots of vibrant and creepy colour and use of camera that adds to the atmosphere. The sets and period detail are very evocative and splendidly Gothic, while the effects are decent(thankfully no laughably fake bats like there were in Scars of Dracula). The music thunders thrillingly, has a lot of personality, is orchestrated beautifully and cleverly and is deliciously spooky. It is a great score on its own and adds a lot to the film. Not all of the story works, but there are some cool death scenes, some chilling violence, gore that doesn't get too gratuitous and once the film does pick up there is a good deal of suspense and a real sense of horror and dread, something that Hammer excels in better than most horror films(before, during and now).
Taste the Blood of Dracula boasts some fine direction from Peter Sasdy, and as long as one doesn't expect any development the characters at least serve a point to the story and engage. The acting is good, with Ralph Bates making the most of his deliciously hammy and sinister character, Geoffrey Keen being appropriately stiff and shady and Linda Hayden is alluring and spunky. Anthony Higgins is very likable too, not the most well-developed of characters but one of the better-acted hero characters in the Hammer Dracula series. Christopher Lee does not have very much screen time and has to work with lines that are too few and pretty bad, meaning that he doesn't have a lot to do, but the suave and incredibly intimidating presence that he brings to Dracula really captivates so he is still memorable.
All in all, an enjoyable entry in the Hammer Dracula series, without being one of the series' best or worst. 7/10 Bethany Cox
One of Taste the Blood of Dracula's biggest flaws is the ending, which is one of the series' most unimaginative and is far too protracted and drawn out, Dracula's demise is also too easy and the silliest of his demises in the series. The script is flat and far too talky, some of the talk not adding much, while Dracula's few lines of dialogue are rather ludicrous. While not as bad as in the films following it, the pacing in the first half is on the pedestrian side too.
However, the photography is incredibly stylish with lots of vibrant and creepy colour and use of camera that adds to the atmosphere. The sets and period detail are very evocative and splendidly Gothic, while the effects are decent(thankfully no laughably fake bats like there were in Scars of Dracula). The music thunders thrillingly, has a lot of personality, is orchestrated beautifully and cleverly and is deliciously spooky. It is a great score on its own and adds a lot to the film. Not all of the story works, but there are some cool death scenes, some chilling violence, gore that doesn't get too gratuitous and once the film does pick up there is a good deal of suspense and a real sense of horror and dread, something that Hammer excels in better than most horror films(before, during and now).
Taste the Blood of Dracula boasts some fine direction from Peter Sasdy, and as long as one doesn't expect any development the characters at least serve a point to the story and engage. The acting is good, with Ralph Bates making the most of his deliciously hammy and sinister character, Geoffrey Keen being appropriately stiff and shady and Linda Hayden is alluring and spunky. Anthony Higgins is very likable too, not the most well-developed of characters but one of the better-acted hero characters in the Hammer Dracula series. Christopher Lee does not have very much screen time and has to work with lines that are too few and pretty bad, meaning that he doesn't have a lot to do, but the suave and incredibly intimidating presence that he brings to Dracula really captivates so he is still memorable.
All in all, an enjoyable entry in the Hammer Dracula series, without being one of the series' best or worst. 7/10 Bethany Cox
Did you know
- TriviaThe film was originally not going to feature Dracula at all, much like The Brides of Dracula (1960), due to Christopher Lee becoming increasingly reluctant to reprise the role and the producers not expecting to be able to convince him to do so. Lee's increasing salary demands were also a factor. Ralph Bates would have played the lead. The script was re-written to include Dracula after the producers were finally able to coax Lee back to the role after "Warner-Seven Arts" refused to back this movie without the actor's participation.
- GoofsLucy's front door has a Yale lock.
- Alternate versionsThe UK cinema version was cut by the BBFC to edit blood spurts from the staking of Paxton, a closeup of Dracula's bloodstained teeth and a brief shot of a brothel customer with a topless woman. The 1989 Warner video release featured the heavily edited U.S cinema print which runs around 4 minutes shorter and is missing shots of Dracula's blood becoming powder during the opening scene, the violent beating to death of Courtley, and a snake charmer's dance in the brothel. The 2004 DVD is the original UK cinema version, minus the BBFC cuts which may no longer survive.
- ConnectionsEdited from The Vengeance of She (1968)
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 31m(91 min)
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content