This is Chris Lee's 3rd appearance as Dracula, and Hammer
continues to believe that less Lee is more. As with this film's
immediate predecessor, Dracula Prince of Darkness, Lee is given
precious little screen time, but when he is on screen, he is
absolutely riveting. Many people think this is a highlight of the
series, and when I was younger, I used to be one of those people.
Now, while I still find this a vast improvement over Prince of
Darkness, and much better than the horrible pair of "modern day"
films (Dracula, AD 1972 and The Satanic Rites Of Dracula) that
would eventually mark the end of Lee's involvement in the cycle,
this film still pales to Hammer's 1958 original as well as the next
two films. Once again, the film makers have decided that we are to care a
great deal for the vapid dullards who are to be the nominal hero
and heroine in the story and therefore spend a great deal of time
away from the Count focusing on their relationships. Ho hum. On
the other hand, the film does score points for playing up the sexual
angle (ie, the breathless anticipation of Dracula's bite and the
orgasmic response thereto) to a degree that none of the earlier
films would venture, as well as trying to infuse the vampiric lore
with religious overtones. I'm not sure I'm entirely satisfied with the
latter angle, although it does lead to two of the films most powerful
sequences: one wherein the Count angrily wrenches a steak from
his chest after the hero's lack of religious conviction renders its
effect mute; and the final impalement of Dracula upon a huge
metallic crucifix. Also an upgrade from the last movie is the fact that Lee gets to
actually speak a few lines throughout the movie. But this is a
double edged sword as the lines are the most poorly written drivel,
such as "Now my revenge is complete!" Which leads me to the
poor plot, which has the Count seeking revenge on the family of
the monsignor responsible for nailing a cross to the door of his
castle while the vampire lay inert, frozen under the creek beyond
his castle walls as we left him at the end of Prince of Darkness. If
nothing else, I do admire how each film (at least through Taste
The Blood of Dracula) took great pains to pick up exactly where the
previous episode ended. While Taste The Blood of Dracula (the immediate sequel to this
film) also deals in a sense with revenge, Dracula's perverse and
subtle intrusion into the Victorian ideal of the proper English family
(a concept lifted from the original novel) provides that film with a
rich subtext that (for me) makes it the unsung entry in this series. It
is certainly the least known and least seen in the US. And it is well
worth hunting down. In fact, I think these two films would make a
fine cozy night's double feature.
continues to believe that less Lee is more. As with this film's
immediate predecessor, Dracula Prince of Darkness, Lee is given
precious little screen time, but when he is on screen, he is
absolutely riveting. Many people think this is a highlight of the
series, and when I was younger, I used to be one of those people.
Now, while I still find this a vast improvement over Prince of
Darkness, and much better than the horrible pair of "modern day"
films (Dracula, AD 1972 and The Satanic Rites Of Dracula) that
would eventually mark the end of Lee's involvement in the cycle,
this film still pales to Hammer's 1958 original as well as the next
two films. Once again, the film makers have decided that we are to care a
great deal for the vapid dullards who are to be the nominal hero
and heroine in the story and therefore spend a great deal of time
away from the Count focusing on their relationships. Ho hum. On
the other hand, the film does score points for playing up the sexual
angle (ie, the breathless anticipation of Dracula's bite and the
orgasmic response thereto) to a degree that none of the earlier
films would venture, as well as trying to infuse the vampiric lore
with religious overtones. I'm not sure I'm entirely satisfied with the
latter angle, although it does lead to two of the films most powerful
sequences: one wherein the Count angrily wrenches a steak from
his chest after the hero's lack of religious conviction renders its
effect mute; and the final impalement of Dracula upon a huge
metallic crucifix. Also an upgrade from the last movie is the fact that Lee gets to
actually speak a few lines throughout the movie. But this is a
double edged sword as the lines are the most poorly written drivel,
such as "Now my revenge is complete!" Which leads me to the
poor plot, which has the Count seeking revenge on the family of
the monsignor responsible for nailing a cross to the door of his
castle while the vampire lay inert, frozen under the creek beyond
his castle walls as we left him at the end of Prince of Darkness. If
nothing else, I do admire how each film (at least through Taste
The Blood of Dracula) took great pains to pick up exactly where the
previous episode ended. While Taste The Blood of Dracula (the immediate sequel to this
film) also deals in a sense with revenge, Dracula's perverse and
subtle intrusion into the Victorian ideal of the proper English family
(a concept lifted from the original novel) provides that film with a
rich subtext that (for me) makes it the unsung entry in this series. It
is certainly the least known and least seen in the US. And it is well
worth hunting down. In fact, I think these two films would make a
fine cozy night's double feature.