Hammer's last throw with Christopher Lee who refused to do another Dracula after AD 1972. He regarded the last Hammer's as such a departure from Stoker as to be sacrilegious. This replaces horror with a thriller. Dracula in a thriller? French Connection was a thriller. How does the suave and deadly Count become transplanted into a more style which uses more realism? He cannot, he is incongruous. Consequently Dracula makes almost no appearance until the last 15 minutes. The rest of the film is a chase between his henchmen and Cushing with the police. The quality of the Dracula films had deteriorated in their glamour and stylishness and transferring to the modern day was an attempt to inject glamour again. The most interesting piece of this film is the satanic rite of the title. Its images and practises have been used by the Church of Satan and other occult groups. The actor, scientist and parapsychologist Stephen Armourae has referred to it in articles and the actress Mia Martin has appeared in some of his drawings and paintings. Oddly despite such a high profile release none of the actors including Pauline Peart and Mia Martin did anything since despite their glamour and looks.
146 Reviews
Last rites for a once great franchise
KenLiversausage14 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The legendary Mr. Lee's last outing for dear old Hammer Studios in his red contact lenses and silk-lined cape. And what a sorry end to what was once one of the real jewels of British cinema, the Hammer horror franchise.
While there are one or two glimmers of the style and talent that put Hammer at the top of the tree in the 50s and 60s, this awkward hybrid of espionage thriller and supernatural horror never really gets off the ground. Lee has so little screen time he could probably sue the filmmakers under the Trade's Descriptions Act - "The Satanic Rites of a Bunch of Other People You Don't Give a Stuff About, not the Famous Vampire Count You Were Hoping For" might be a more accurate title.
What irks me about this film is not just that it represents a cheap, slipshod ending to the Hammer Dracula cycle, but that it's not even true to the spirit of those wonderful originals. What few thrills there are derive mostly from some motorcycle stunts and a bit of fashionable nudity. Lee might as well have phoned in his part, and poor old Peter Cushing, still reeling from the death of his beloved wife Helen, walks through what little action he's given like a refugee from Plague of the Zombies.
And as for the ending, well, there used to be a well-defined mythology in these movies, a vampiric rulebook that everybody abided by. Bram Stoker made most of it up in the first place, but once they'd put their spin on it, the Hammer boys generally stuck to it: garlic, stakes, holy water, silver bullets, running water, all that stuff we'd all rely on to dispatch the bloodsucking nobleman if he ever started licking his lips in our bedrooms. But suddenly, out of nowhere, there's this new lethal substance, something else that can do for a vampire - the King of the Vampires even. And what is it? A hawthorn tree. Yes, you heard right; Dracula, immortal, super-powerful, supreme monster that he is, curls up his pointy toe-nailed tootsies and shuffles off this mortal coil because he gets his cape caught in a bloody hawthorn tree. Ho hum. (Mind you, they can give you a nasty scratch can those hawthorn trees.)
Clearly Hammer had seen the writing on the wall splattered there by Night of the Living Dead and The Exorcist, but although it tried, it simply couldn't adapt. The truth is that the classical Hammer ethos doesn't really translate to the modern idiom. The films were very much of their time, and the times, as Mr. Dylan so helpfully reminds us, they are a changin'.
So charge your glasses with the best of British blood, leave this one in the rental store and check out something from the golden era of Hammer. Contrary to one of the film's many misleading alternative titles, Dracula is not alive and well and living in London. He's dead. And Hammer buried him.
While there are one or two glimmers of the style and talent that put Hammer at the top of the tree in the 50s and 60s, this awkward hybrid of espionage thriller and supernatural horror never really gets off the ground. Lee has so little screen time he could probably sue the filmmakers under the Trade's Descriptions Act - "The Satanic Rites of a Bunch of Other People You Don't Give a Stuff About, not the Famous Vampire Count You Were Hoping For" might be a more accurate title.
What irks me about this film is not just that it represents a cheap, slipshod ending to the Hammer Dracula cycle, but that it's not even true to the spirit of those wonderful originals. What few thrills there are derive mostly from some motorcycle stunts and a bit of fashionable nudity. Lee might as well have phoned in his part, and poor old Peter Cushing, still reeling from the death of his beloved wife Helen, walks through what little action he's given like a refugee from Plague of the Zombies.
And as for the ending, well, there used to be a well-defined mythology in these movies, a vampiric rulebook that everybody abided by. Bram Stoker made most of it up in the first place, but once they'd put their spin on it, the Hammer boys generally stuck to it: garlic, stakes, holy water, silver bullets, running water, all that stuff we'd all rely on to dispatch the bloodsucking nobleman if he ever started licking his lips in our bedrooms. But suddenly, out of nowhere, there's this new lethal substance, something else that can do for a vampire - the King of the Vampires even. And what is it? A hawthorn tree. Yes, you heard right; Dracula, immortal, super-powerful, supreme monster that he is, curls up his pointy toe-nailed tootsies and shuffles off this mortal coil because he gets his cape caught in a bloody hawthorn tree. Ho hum. (Mind you, they can give you a nasty scratch can those hawthorn trees.)
Clearly Hammer had seen the writing on the wall splattered there by Night of the Living Dead and The Exorcist, but although it tried, it simply couldn't adapt. The truth is that the classical Hammer ethos doesn't really translate to the modern idiom. The films were very much of their time, and the times, as Mr. Dylan so helpfully reminds us, they are a changin'.
So charge your glasses with the best of British blood, leave this one in the rental store and check out something from the golden era of Hammer. Contrary to one of the film's many misleading alternative titles, Dracula is not alive and well and living in London. He's dead. And Hammer buried him.
An OK Dracula Film from Hammer
Hitchcoc2 November 2020
I guess Christopher Lee had had enough of Dracula, and this was his swan song. This has a clever twist, bringing the old guy back one more time. It involves the Count trying to bring a plague on humanity by using a group of significant businessmen to do his bidding. Of course, it's the same old crosses made by two sticks of wood, and so on. Cushing does his usual spooky character, this time a latter day Van Helsing. I have to say I enjoyed it.
Better than you might think!
The Welsh Raging Bull30 November 2001
Hammer's penultimate Dracula film and the last one to feature a tired Christopher Lee in the title role.
This is a significant improvement over Dracula A.D. 1972, but Peter Cushing is used significantly less in the fight scenes (which are not particularly good anyway).
The story, which revolves around a revived Dracula (in disguise) getting government ministers and leading doctors to help him take over the world with the plague has its merits. Infact, the story is well-paced and it's content is refreshingly varied (bike chases, cellars with female vampires, a plague victim etc).
Freddie Jones turns up with a superbly jittery performance as a scientist (he was also excellent in "Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed").
Christopher Lee doesn't get enough screen time, but his scenes with Peter Cushing are, as you might expect, good (n.b. the scene in the tower block where Van Helsing goes to expose D.D. Denham as Dracula). Lee, also gets a chance to utter the immortal lines "..my revenge has spread over centuries and has just begun..." (which is apparently from the book).
If you go into this film with an open-mind, you won't be too disappointed - there is certainly plenty going on, even if the plot is not very tightly structured.
This is a significant improvement over Dracula A.D. 1972, but Peter Cushing is used significantly less in the fight scenes (which are not particularly good anyway).
The story, which revolves around a revived Dracula (in disguise) getting government ministers and leading doctors to help him take over the world with the plague has its merits. Infact, the story is well-paced and it's content is refreshingly varied (bike chases, cellars with female vampires, a plague victim etc).
Freddie Jones turns up with a superbly jittery performance as a scientist (he was also excellent in "Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed").
Christopher Lee doesn't get enough screen time, but his scenes with Peter Cushing are, as you might expect, good (n.b. the scene in the tower block where Van Helsing goes to expose D.D. Denham as Dracula). Lee, also gets a chance to utter the immortal lines "..my revenge has spread over centuries and has just begun..." (which is apparently from the book).
If you go into this film with an open-mind, you won't be too disappointed - there is certainly plenty going on, even if the plot is not very tightly structured.
Tired
nightwishouge14 October 2018
If you've seen Dracula AD 1972, then there's nothing terribly novel about this follow-up in seeing Christopher Lee's Count moving about contemporary London. Part of the charm of the Hammer franchise IS the formula, which is virtually abandoned for this often dull story of corporate machinations and devil worship. Visually, it's pretty drab, apart from some fun 1970s fashion, if you're into that sort of thing. Peter Cushing is dependable as always as the warm yet formidable Van Helsing (or his descendant anyway), and Joanna Lumley is certainly pretty as his granddaughter and assistant but despite an introduction that promises some kind of competency on her part she is never allowed to be anything but a hysterical, run-of-the-mill damsel in distress. The rest of the cast is unremarkable. As is the entire film.
Even a lesser Hammer film is better than most others...
lemon_magic24 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I wasn't aware that this was the last of the Hammer film's "Dracula" series when I saw it, but it was pretty obvious to me that by this point in the series that the franchise was getting winded and has lost most of its novelty and energy. Even so, the presence of Cushing and Lee was a guarantee that this film would have something going for it and would be worth at least a cursory viewing.
The good: I suppose it was inevitable that Hammer would bring Dracula to modern times, and at least they had a decent story idea which applies to modern time: Dracula plans to gets back at the world by destroying it with a new version of the bubonic plague. And he does it by corrupting officials, politicians and rich men at the highest levels of society and industry. This lends the movie a nice bit of paranoia and conspiracy creepiness that adds considerably to its punch and panache...because not only must the good guys win against the vampires, they have to do it without their most powerful leaders knowing about it. The conferences and meetings in a hidden underground bunker are nicely done - the actors manage to convey urgency and seriousness without losing the classic British "stiff-upper-lip" attitude that makes such scenes vastly more watchable.
The "action" has a bit of a different feel this time too. There's a bit of modern thuggery and spy-game terror involved. In fact, you could argue that the scene where Cushing's "survelliance" team is casually taken down and captured by a sniper team is actually the most chilling (and effective) in the movie.
The bad: Count Dracula, Prince Of Darkness, is defeated by a bush. Oh, sure, it's actually the tree from which Christ's "crown of thorns" was made, but still...it's a bush. And the 'wives in the dungeon' bit is not nearly as intense as it should be. Seriously, when the hero drives off three or four blood-craving vampire women by turning on the sprinkler system, it's as if the writers are saying "Sorry, but we're sick of these scenes, can we please do something else?"
The interesting: This is the first Hammer film I've seen with actual on screen nudity. (It appears to have been rated "R" when it first was released.) I'm not sure if there were others, or if the versions I saw of previous Hammer films had such scenes removed, but this is the first time for me. It was kind of a shock - like watching the docent at your local museum squat down and pee in the bushes outside the main gate. No doubt Hammer studios felt the need to compete with the crasser and sexier films that they were losing ground to, and I don't blame them, but it's kind of sad.
Also, Joanne Lumley is in here in a supporting part as Cushing/Van Helsing's granddaughter. She's quite lovely, of course, but the movie doesn't really let her show off the qualities that made her Emma Peal's replacement in "The Avengers" or the sociopath addict from "Absolutely Fabulous".
So, it's a Hammer film that's mostly interesting for the usual things that made a Hammer film - the art direction, the signature directing style, the presence of Cushing and/or Lee, and strong supporting actors who can sell the most turgid, ridiculous lines with their absolutely dead-on delivery. If Jesse Franco had made this film, you'd be on the phone to your travel agent, booking a plane to Europe so you could go to his office there and punch him in the mouth. But from this crew, you get an enjoyable, if minor, effort that's still better than most of the horror stuff being produced at the time.
The good: I suppose it was inevitable that Hammer would bring Dracula to modern times, and at least they had a decent story idea which applies to modern time: Dracula plans to gets back at the world by destroying it with a new version of the bubonic plague. And he does it by corrupting officials, politicians and rich men at the highest levels of society and industry. This lends the movie a nice bit of paranoia and conspiracy creepiness that adds considerably to its punch and panache...because not only must the good guys win against the vampires, they have to do it without their most powerful leaders knowing about it. The conferences and meetings in a hidden underground bunker are nicely done - the actors manage to convey urgency and seriousness without losing the classic British "stiff-upper-lip" attitude that makes such scenes vastly more watchable.
The "action" has a bit of a different feel this time too. There's a bit of modern thuggery and spy-game terror involved. In fact, you could argue that the scene where Cushing's "survelliance" team is casually taken down and captured by a sniper team is actually the most chilling (and effective) in the movie.
The bad: Count Dracula, Prince Of Darkness, is defeated by a bush. Oh, sure, it's actually the tree from which Christ's "crown of thorns" was made, but still...it's a bush. And the 'wives in the dungeon' bit is not nearly as intense as it should be. Seriously, when the hero drives off three or four blood-craving vampire women by turning on the sprinkler system, it's as if the writers are saying "Sorry, but we're sick of these scenes, can we please do something else?"
The interesting: This is the first Hammer film I've seen with actual on screen nudity. (It appears to have been rated "R" when it first was released.) I'm not sure if there were others, or if the versions I saw of previous Hammer films had such scenes removed, but this is the first time for me. It was kind of a shock - like watching the docent at your local museum squat down and pee in the bushes outside the main gate. No doubt Hammer studios felt the need to compete with the crasser and sexier films that they were losing ground to, and I don't blame them, but it's kind of sad.
Also, Joanne Lumley is in here in a supporting part as Cushing/Van Helsing's granddaughter. She's quite lovely, of course, but the movie doesn't really let her show off the qualities that made her Emma Peal's replacement in "The Avengers" or the sociopath addict from "Absolutely Fabulous".
So, it's a Hammer film that's mostly interesting for the usual things that made a Hammer film - the art direction, the signature directing style, the presence of Cushing and/or Lee, and strong supporting actors who can sell the most turgid, ridiculous lines with their absolutely dead-on delivery. If Jesse Franco had made this film, you'd be on the phone to your travel agent, booking a plane to Europe so you could go to his office there and punch him in the mouth. But from this crew, you get an enjoyable, if minor, effort that's still better than most of the horror stuff being produced at the time.
Dracula is going to end the world!!!... Why? I thought he was having so much fun!
Smells_Like_Cheese22 May 2004
Warning: Spoilers
The last sequel of the Hammer Dracula series and it's The Satanic Rites of Dracula. The strangest and perhaps most complicated sequel in the series. By far the weakest as well. I'm sure though that Christopher Lee was happy, sadly he just didn't enjoy these movies. He said in an interview that Dracula was never needed, that they always wrote the story first and added Dracula later. So I can understand what he was talking about, he didn't want to be typecast and wanted to move forward in his career. But I don't think he's suffered for it by any means as he's been an inspiration for so many and a lot of directors seek him out. Also much credit to Peter Cushing who did enjoy making these sequels and he's one of the bigger pleasures in the film. The man could have a role in the movie Pink Flamingos and give his role an Oscar worth performance. Plus the man made a career out of killing Christopher Lee, which not to many people could do and do it well. I always love how Dracula states that he's going to win this time but I can't help but say over his mouth "You've defeated me numerous times before, what makes you think you can do it again?!". As complicated as the plot is, I'll explain as best as I can.
A Secret Service agent barely escapes from an English country house, in which satanic rituals are celebrated. Before he dies of his wounds, he reveals to his superiors that four prominent members of society - a government minister, a peer, a general and a famous scientist - are involved in the cult. Murray suggests consulting noted occult expert Professor Lorrimar Van Helsing. The cult kidnaps the Secret Service secretary Jane, who is later bitten by Dracula. Murray, Secret Service agent Torrence and Van Helsing's granddaughter Jessica arrive at the country house, where they discover several vampire women chained up in the cellar, including Jane who is now a vampire herself. Murray kills Jane with a stake and the three escape the grounds. Keeley's research notes lead Van Helsing to the reclusive property developer D. D. Denham, who had funded Keeley's research. Van Helsing also suspects a reincarnated Dracula behind the plot, suggests that Dracula wants to exact revenge on humanity and speculates about a secret death wish on the Count's part. Van Helsing visits Denham in his headquarters and finds out his true identity: Count Dracula. He tries to shoot Dracula with a silver bullet but is beaten by the Count's conspirators. Dracula decides that killing Van Helsing would be too simple and has him transferred to the country house where Dracula will not only bite Jessica in front of Van Helsing but decides to destroy the world.
So the flaw of the story is I think the pacing. It's a lot of talking vs. the typical action we are used in the previous sequels. Plus you do lose interest at times, I had to watch the film a couple of times before I could write the review. I think because the story is a bit complicated, you don't get into it as well. Plus, Dracula destroying the world just doesn't make much sense. Like in the TV show Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the vampire Spike says "We like to talk big, vampires do. "I'm going to destroy the world." It's just tough guy talk. Struttin' around with your friends over a pint of blood. The truth is, I like this world. You've got... dog racing, Manchester United, and you've got people. Billions of people walking around like Happy Meals with legs. It's all right here. But then someone comes along with a vision. Goodbye, Piccadilly. Farewell, Leicester bloody Square." Good point there. However, with Peter and Christopher's chemistry, just bouncing back and forth off each other was great. I liked the way Van Helsing found out the true identity of Denham. Also silver bullets are brought into the mix, which by the way do not work very well. Dracula's death scene is alright, again, not so climatic, but Van Helsing got the job done by just getting him stuck in a bunch of weeds wow, did I really just say that? Yeah, maybe this was a huge flaw. If you want to finish the series, I say to go ahead and watch the movie, but you could skip it over all. It was a sad way to end the series, but I'm sure the when Star Wars came along for Cushing and Lee, they had no regrets whatsoever.
4/10
A Secret Service agent barely escapes from an English country house, in which satanic rituals are celebrated. Before he dies of his wounds, he reveals to his superiors that four prominent members of society - a government minister, a peer, a general and a famous scientist - are involved in the cult. Murray suggests consulting noted occult expert Professor Lorrimar Van Helsing. The cult kidnaps the Secret Service secretary Jane, who is later bitten by Dracula. Murray, Secret Service agent Torrence and Van Helsing's granddaughter Jessica arrive at the country house, where they discover several vampire women chained up in the cellar, including Jane who is now a vampire herself. Murray kills Jane with a stake and the three escape the grounds. Keeley's research notes lead Van Helsing to the reclusive property developer D. D. Denham, who had funded Keeley's research. Van Helsing also suspects a reincarnated Dracula behind the plot, suggests that Dracula wants to exact revenge on humanity and speculates about a secret death wish on the Count's part. Van Helsing visits Denham in his headquarters and finds out his true identity: Count Dracula. He tries to shoot Dracula with a silver bullet but is beaten by the Count's conspirators. Dracula decides that killing Van Helsing would be too simple and has him transferred to the country house where Dracula will not only bite Jessica in front of Van Helsing but decides to destroy the world.
So the flaw of the story is I think the pacing. It's a lot of talking vs. the typical action we are used in the previous sequels. Plus you do lose interest at times, I had to watch the film a couple of times before I could write the review. I think because the story is a bit complicated, you don't get into it as well. Plus, Dracula destroying the world just doesn't make much sense. Like in the TV show Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the vampire Spike says "We like to talk big, vampires do. "I'm going to destroy the world." It's just tough guy talk. Struttin' around with your friends over a pint of blood. The truth is, I like this world. You've got... dog racing, Manchester United, and you've got people. Billions of people walking around like Happy Meals with legs. It's all right here. But then someone comes along with a vision. Goodbye, Piccadilly. Farewell, Leicester bloody Square." Good point there. However, with Peter and Christopher's chemistry, just bouncing back and forth off each other was great. I liked the way Van Helsing found out the true identity of Denham. Also silver bullets are brought into the mix, which by the way do not work very well. Dracula's death scene is alright, again, not so climatic, but Van Helsing got the job done by just getting him stuck in a bunch of weeds wow, did I really just say that? Yeah, maybe this was a huge flaw. If you want to finish the series, I say to go ahead and watch the movie, but you could skip it over all. It was a sad way to end the series, but I'm sure the when Star Wars came along for Cushing and Lee, they had no regrets whatsoever.
4/10
an above-average entry in the series
dr_foreman28 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
"The Satanic Rites of Dracula" is a weird, dreamlike little movie that clearly doesn't appeal to the majority of horror fans. But hey, I kind of like it.
The earlier films in Hammer Studios' Dracula cycle tended to be very similar and predictable; Lee's Dracula would get resurrected early on in the proceedings, he'd put the bite on a cute local girl, and then the girl's boyfriend would track him down and destroy him. Needless to say, this formula got mighty dull after a while.
This movie at least attempts something different. Screenwriter Don Houghton cooks up a pretty novel story about Dracula forming a cult of followers in present-day England, and developing an extra-virulent new strain of the Bubonic Plague. It all feels very science fiction-y, and there are enough armed thugs running around to evoke crime and spy thrillers as well. But I think it works all right.
Unsurprisingly, most fans of Hammer's Gothic horror films dismiss this movie on the grounds that it's too different from "classic" Hammer. But hey, there are dozens of traditional Hammer films for fans to enjoy; must they automatically pan this one because it doesn't fit the usual pattern? I, for one, appreciate the new ideas in this movie - even if they don't always work.
So, here's a rundown of the film's strong points: the plague story is an interesting new wrinkle; director Alan Gibson lends the action scenes brutality and style; there are some great shock moments involving a basement full of vampire women; and most of the actors give solid performances.
On the downside, elements of the plot feel half-baked, the editing is somewhat choppy, and there are too many good guys who don't get enough screen time (Joanna Lumley springs to mind). And, as usual, Dracula proves much too easy to destroy; the dude must have a serious death wish.
Still, this ain't bad at all, given the time and budget constraints that were no doubt imposed upon the production team. I've seen lots worse, folks...lots worse.
The earlier films in Hammer Studios' Dracula cycle tended to be very similar and predictable; Lee's Dracula would get resurrected early on in the proceedings, he'd put the bite on a cute local girl, and then the girl's boyfriend would track him down and destroy him. Needless to say, this formula got mighty dull after a while.
This movie at least attempts something different. Screenwriter Don Houghton cooks up a pretty novel story about Dracula forming a cult of followers in present-day England, and developing an extra-virulent new strain of the Bubonic Plague. It all feels very science fiction-y, and there are enough armed thugs running around to evoke crime and spy thrillers as well. But I think it works all right.
Unsurprisingly, most fans of Hammer's Gothic horror films dismiss this movie on the grounds that it's too different from "classic" Hammer. But hey, there are dozens of traditional Hammer films for fans to enjoy; must they automatically pan this one because it doesn't fit the usual pattern? I, for one, appreciate the new ideas in this movie - even if they don't always work.
So, here's a rundown of the film's strong points: the plague story is an interesting new wrinkle; director Alan Gibson lends the action scenes brutality and style; there are some great shock moments involving a basement full of vampire women; and most of the actors give solid performances.
On the downside, elements of the plot feel half-baked, the editing is somewhat choppy, and there are too many good guys who don't get enough screen time (Joanna Lumley springs to mind). And, as usual, Dracula proves much too easy to destroy; the dude must have a serious death wish.
Still, this ain't bad at all, given the time and budget constraints that were no doubt imposed upon the production team. I've seen lots worse, folks...lots worse.
Sad end to Hammer Dracula films
dmuel4 August 2006
In this the last of the Hammer Dracula films, screenwriters tried to add a touch of James Bond, with Dracula heading a SPECTRE-like organization bent on world destruction and, of course, out to suck a little blood on his way to Armageddon. There is a bevy of pretty vampire girls, and loads of tooth and nail struggles to the death, but not much of this is very engrossing. Part of the problem is the laughable looking horde of motorcycle thugs who serve the evil count, as all seem to be dressed in clothing that makes them look like refugees from London's Carnaby Street; their hairstyles only underscore this impression. Hammer should have ended the franchise earlier.
Not The Disaster Some Would Imply
Steve_Nyland30 October 2008
Mark my words, "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" is indeed a very silly film, but vampire movies are silly in the first place so why not go for broke? Hammer Films was at the end of their rope by 1973 and knew it, so they mixed vampire hijinx with spy movie intrigue and cast Dracula as the megalomaniac villain instead of Goldfinger. You have to give them points for coming up with a new angle, even if the result doesn't really resemble anything Hammer did before it -- even "Dracula A.D. 1972", which this is something of a direct sequel to.
Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing both play their next-to-last performances as Dracula and the tireless Professor Van Helsing as they pit their wits against each other for the final time ... Both would return in their respective roles once more in separate films that are even more bizarre than this one (Lee the absurd "Dracula & Son" and Cushing in the even more absurd "Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires", which also isn't as bad as you've heard), and while they are on screen together for only a few scenes fans of Hammer's production line really do need to treat themselves to this baby at least once. Though Euro Horror favorite Freddy Jones actually steals the show in a far to brief appearance as a biological warfare expert driven mad by his contract work for Dracula's SPECTRE-like criminal organization.
The plot is far from simple: Count Dracula is alive & well in his Undead state, living (or, not) in London where he commands a sect of Satanists fronting for a global syndicate bent on unleashing a plague on humanity that will ultimately deprive Dracula of his supply of shapely office girls upon which to feed. Without any fresh donors to resurrect his corporeal state from a glass vial filled with his ashes or dehydrated blood -- depending on the needs of the script -- he will finally find eternal rest. Or something like to that extent. One of the sad things about the manner in which this film has been dismissed is that it actually dares to depict Dracula as a creature with actual plans rather than a Simple Simon existence of sucking human blood & unleashing his revenge against those who trespass on his property.
But the results are admittedly somewhat difficult to take seriously. Or rather if you DO insist on taking it seriously what you are confronted with is a bizarre turkey of a modern day vampire thriller with motor cars and subway trams, police inspectors, bell bottomed fashion babes and secret agent operatives firing chirping silencer equipped automatic weapons mixed with the Gothic hullabaloo of Satanic blood sacrifices, vampire babes chained up in basements, and Dracula lurking in the shadows. The mixture of themes is jarring if you are used to the foggy castle on the hill approach but one thing is for sure: The movie is never boring, moves at a brisk pace, and allows it's lead actors some impressive scenes that almost work.
Redemptive moments are found in another grand show by Peter Cushing as Van Helsing, who's uncanny ability to look concerned and impart dire urgency on those whom he addresses never wavers for a second. Perhaps this speaks best for the talents of Cushing, who like John Carradine can make even the most ridiculous dialog sound completely on the level. There are also some interesting touches like the depiction of modern skyscrapers framed as Gothic castles, strange costuming for the bad guys consisting of cave man vests over "A Clockwood Orange" inspired coordinated polyesters, and an orchestrated rock music soundtrack that sounds like it may have influenced David Bowie's "Diamond Dogs". Or rather he ended up with a similar sounding creation at any rate.
One bit of consternation for fans revolves around the film's availability on home video. There is a common misconception that "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" (and it's Americanized re- release title, "Count Dracula & His Vampire Brides) has lapsed into public domain leading to an overkill of low-budget DVD & video releases over the years of a widescreen laserdisc version. Anchor Bay Entertainment's excellent DVD has since gone out of print and even that version features an assembly of the film that was subjected to BBFC pre-release cuts that have never been restored. Yet it's the best that one can do, look for a used copy maybe or their still quite passable VHS pressing, it's available for a few dollars and is an actual digitally remastered anamorphic widescreen transfer from the original elements.
6/10: You really can't call yourself a Hammer fan and not give this one a chance, and can rest assured that it's OK to laugh.
Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing both play their next-to-last performances as Dracula and the tireless Professor Van Helsing as they pit their wits against each other for the final time ... Both would return in their respective roles once more in separate films that are even more bizarre than this one (Lee the absurd "Dracula & Son" and Cushing in the even more absurd "Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires", which also isn't as bad as you've heard), and while they are on screen together for only a few scenes fans of Hammer's production line really do need to treat themselves to this baby at least once. Though Euro Horror favorite Freddy Jones actually steals the show in a far to brief appearance as a biological warfare expert driven mad by his contract work for Dracula's SPECTRE-like criminal organization.
The plot is far from simple: Count Dracula is alive & well in his Undead state, living (or, not) in London where he commands a sect of Satanists fronting for a global syndicate bent on unleashing a plague on humanity that will ultimately deprive Dracula of his supply of shapely office girls upon which to feed. Without any fresh donors to resurrect his corporeal state from a glass vial filled with his ashes or dehydrated blood -- depending on the needs of the script -- he will finally find eternal rest. Or something like to that extent. One of the sad things about the manner in which this film has been dismissed is that it actually dares to depict Dracula as a creature with actual plans rather than a Simple Simon existence of sucking human blood & unleashing his revenge against those who trespass on his property.
But the results are admittedly somewhat difficult to take seriously. Or rather if you DO insist on taking it seriously what you are confronted with is a bizarre turkey of a modern day vampire thriller with motor cars and subway trams, police inspectors, bell bottomed fashion babes and secret agent operatives firing chirping silencer equipped automatic weapons mixed with the Gothic hullabaloo of Satanic blood sacrifices, vampire babes chained up in basements, and Dracula lurking in the shadows. The mixture of themes is jarring if you are used to the foggy castle on the hill approach but one thing is for sure: The movie is never boring, moves at a brisk pace, and allows it's lead actors some impressive scenes that almost work.
Redemptive moments are found in another grand show by Peter Cushing as Van Helsing, who's uncanny ability to look concerned and impart dire urgency on those whom he addresses never wavers for a second. Perhaps this speaks best for the talents of Cushing, who like John Carradine can make even the most ridiculous dialog sound completely on the level. There are also some interesting touches like the depiction of modern skyscrapers framed as Gothic castles, strange costuming for the bad guys consisting of cave man vests over "A Clockwood Orange" inspired coordinated polyesters, and an orchestrated rock music soundtrack that sounds like it may have influenced David Bowie's "Diamond Dogs". Or rather he ended up with a similar sounding creation at any rate.
One bit of consternation for fans revolves around the film's availability on home video. There is a common misconception that "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" (and it's Americanized re- release title, "Count Dracula & His Vampire Brides) has lapsed into public domain leading to an overkill of low-budget DVD & video releases over the years of a widescreen laserdisc version. Anchor Bay Entertainment's excellent DVD has since gone out of print and even that version features an assembly of the film that was subjected to BBFC pre-release cuts that have never been restored. Yet it's the best that one can do, look for a used copy maybe or their still quite passable VHS pressing, it's available for a few dollars and is an actual digitally remastered anamorphic widescreen transfer from the original elements.
6/10: You really can't call yourself a Hammer fan and not give this one a chance, and can rest assured that it's OK to laugh.
Count Dracula, CEO
evanston_dad3 September 2010
This rather odd entry in the Count Dracula film cycle finds the count (Christopher Lee) positioned as the head of a corporate conglomerate that has a group of high-level mucky-mucks enmeshed in a plan to unleash a new strain of uber-virile plague on the world. Why Count Dracula wants to kill off the world's population and therefore eliminate his food supply is never made clear; indeed, when vampire specialist Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) poses that very question to him, the count looks like he'd never thought of that before. The screenplay tries half-heartedly to explain it via some psycho-babble about the count really subconsciously wanting to bring about his own destruction and put an end to his tortured soul, etc. Nice try, but it doesn't fly.
The film is pretty short on atmosphere or scares, but there's some fun to be had anyway. Cushing is so assured in his performance that he almost makes you feel like you're watching something of substance, while a young Joanna Lumley is buxom and fetching as Van Helsing's in-peril granddaughter.
Grade: B-
The film is pretty short on atmosphere or scares, but there's some fun to be had anyway. Cushing is so assured in his performance that he almost makes you feel like you're watching something of substance, while a young Joanna Lumley is buxom and fetching as Van Helsing's in-peril granddaughter.
Grade: B-
A hugely entertaining change-of-pace Hammer horror vampire/action/thriller hybrid romp
Woodyanders12 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
By the early 70's Hammer Studios began making attempts to revitalize their by now trite'n'tired period Gothic horror formula with varying degrees of success. This enjoyably daft contemporary blend of horror, action and spy suspense thriller rates as one of their more engagingly offbeat efforts. Something sinister is afoot in modern swinging 70's London. For starters, there's a dastardly Satanic cult made up of wealthy businessmen and powerful politicians who participate in sick and kinky unholy rituals. Moreover, the leader of said cult is none other than Dracula (Christopher Lee, as fearsome and imposing as ever). Worse yet, brilliant, yet batty Professor Julian Keeley (a delightfully dotty Freddie Jones) has been commissioned by Dracula to create a virulent new strain of bubonic plague which could wipe out all mankind. It's up to occult expert Professor Van Helsing (Peter Cushing in typically fine form), his comely granddaughter Jessica (a pleasingly perky turn by ravishing redhead Joanna Lumley) and stalwart Scotland Yard special agent Inspector Murray (dashing Michael Coles) to stop Dracula before it's too late. Alan Gibson's lively, stylish direction treats the outlandish premise with admirable seriousness and maintains a ceaseless barnstorming pace throughout. The action scenes and shock set pieces are staged with substantial go-for-it brio (the use of strenuous slow motion is especially striking and effective). Brian Probyn's bright, sharp cinematography, the plentiful graphic gore, John ("Horror Express") Cacavas' funky, rousing, syncopated score, a smidgen of nudity, and sound acting from a tip-top cast all likewise hit the satisfying spot. Grood, groovy 70's fright feature fun.
Good, but dated
Vampenguin15 March 2006
I've had this one on my mind ever since a friend of mine mentioned it a few days ago. I didn't have anything better to do tonight, so I figured that I might as well pop this one in for my evening's entertainment. Well first off, it's not hard to tell that this was made in the 70's. The music and the styles of hair and clothing certainly give it away, but I think that gives it a charm of sorts. Cushing and Lee were great as always, although Lee was was very underused this time around. I don't think he got to say a single thing until over an hour into the film! Oh well, Cushing's performance made up for Lee's absence, I guess. Christopher Lee did have a great entrance, if nothing else...the smoke billowing around him and the lighting from behind made for a great effect. Though many complain about it, I thought this was a very unique and interesting take on the classic Dracula story. Though I'm not usually a fan of satanic conspiracy films, I throughly enjoyed this, and I recommend it despite it's dated feel.
7/10
7/10
Vampires and bikers for one bloody Hammer mess
kevinolzak4 November 2020
1973's "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" may have been commissioned by Warner Brothers to fulfill a 2 picture Hammer contract, but with the colossal failure of "Dracula A.D. 1972" and the same production team at the helm (Alan Gibson directing from a Don Houghton script), production would proceed with little confidence as "Dracula is Dead and Well and Living in London." Warners disowned the final product, issued in the US five years after completion with the title "Count Dracula and His Vampire Bride," Christopher Lee's 7th and final appearance in the title role, teamed for the third time with Peter Cushing's Van Helsing, who had destroyed his nemesis in modern day King's Road to conclude "AD," only to learn that the Count was swiftly revived by a new acolyte for a new mission, bringing in the nation's most powerful men in a plot to infect the world with a rapid mutation of bubonic plague. One general, one politician, one landowning Baron, and one Nobel Prize winning bacteriologist are installed under the pretense of using the weapon only as a deterrent, the vampire cult stationed at remote Pelham House, where blood rituals take place and biker guards attired in afghan prowl the grounds with sniper rifles. What a jumbled mishmash, keeping Lee offscreen until the final third, when his initial faceoff with Van Helsing evokes fond memories of past glories, and includes the bilingual Lee's personal tribute to Bela Lugosi by adopting a vaguely Hungarian accent. He remains a shadowy figure seated behind his desk as the reclusive entrepreneur D.D. Denham, the light reflected away to avert suspicion, Van Helsing armed with a silver bullet but not before making inquiries of the mysterious Denham, a helpless captive to witness Dracula's suicidal triumph. The ridiculous ease with which all vampires are dispatched also afflicts the central character himself, denied access to final revenge by the branches of a hawthorn bush (the object of Christ's crown of thorns), sent tumbling into an unworthy demise to quietly expire one last time, as opposed to the finale of "Horror of Dracula," a thunderous music score fully engaging the viewer in its thrilling battle of arch nemeses. The satanic rites themselves are superfluous and take up the entire opening half hour, after which Cushing effortlessly carries the picture on his own while protagonists fall like dominos; he'd be back for a 5th outing in Hong Kong, "The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires," while Lee concludes his run with more screen time than in any previous Hammer entry except "Scars of Dracula," at least bowing out in a literal blaze of glory.
Pretty good, considering some of the others in the series.
FoxRyan6 February 2003
Saw Satanic Rites last night for the second time, and paid more attention this time. The film, if you`re waiting to see a lot of Dracula will be a bit of a let down (but let`s face it, since Taste the Blood of Dracula, I don`t think Christopher Lee has had 30 minutes screen time with all of the Dracula films joined together.) The movie starts slowly, with, for once, no Dracula resurrection scene. He`s just back, and does not appear until well into the film. (He appears in a scene obviously stuck in because they realized he had not made an appearance at all so long into the film). When Peter Cushing appears, you start to feel like this is a proper Hammer film after all. Peter Cushing really does this one justice. Then from the time he visits D.D.Denham, it is a pretty good Dracula picture. The action between our hero and villain gets going, and builds up to a reasonable finale. This is better than Dracula AD 1972, but as I have said before, the whole series should have stayed in Victorian times. Joanna Lumley is radiant as Jessica, who's character returns from the previous film. It is a pretty scary premise. Dracula, finally sick of being resurrected for 2 or 3 days at a time, wants to end it all, but in doing this, he wants to take everyone with him. THE WHOLE WORLD! It is a good plot which just happens to have Dracula as the figure-head. For once Christopher Lee gets a reasonably decent script and delivers his lines beautifully. A couple of points. In some of the Dracula films, we are introduced to new but apparently tested ways of dealing with the fanged one. Dracula, Prince of Darkness introduced clear running water, as used at the end of DPOD, in Dracula AD 1972, and in Satanic Rites. Then in AD `72 we are introduced to the fact that the good Count can be knobbled with a silver bladed knife. Handy, since Van Helsing has one. Then in this movie, Van Helsing introduces the Hawthorn bush, from which Christ recieved his crown of thorns. Guess where Drac ends up near the end? Do these things really work? Or is it just that sunlight and the old stake are boring now, and the writers just make these things up? I feel a bit cheated when someone like Dracula can be beaten by lightning, drowned in a moat (NOT running water), or overcome in a church (whereas he had already killed a girl and placed her body in a full blown God worshipping church.) This film, when it gets going, is a pleasing finale to the Christopher Lee years as Dracula, and to boot, Peter Cushing delivers a really good performance too.
No Fog, No Old Castles, No Stone Walls
LanceBrave30 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
"Dracula 1972 AD" failed to set the box office ablaze but Hammer wasn't ready to give up on its biggest franchise. Despite the public's disinterest, the studio pushed ahead with another Dracula film set in the modern day. The gamble didn't pay off the second time either. "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" would be the final Dracula film to feature Christopher Lee.
Hammer's line of thinking clearly was that the public was sick of Gothic horror. "Satanic Rites" jettisons any trace of classic horror. Instead, the film is concerned with espionage action and conspiracy theories. The British Secret Service is investigating Satanic rituals. One features prominent members of society and claims to be raising people from the dead. The government brings in the modern day Van Helsing as a consultant. Van Helsing, teaming with his granddaughter and Detective Murray, quickly deduces that something sinister is afoot. A scientist, who mysteriously died, is connected to the Satanic circle. This traces back to reclusive millionaire D. D. Denham, who is none other then Count Dracula. Sick of his eternal life, Dracula intends to unleash a plague on the world, bringing upon the apocalypse.
There's not much I like about "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" but I'll give the movie one thing. Many of the Hammer Dracula films play fast and loose with continuity. This one is a direct sequel to "Dracula 1972 AD." Peter Cushing plays the same descendant of Van Helsing. He even lives in the same apartment. His granddaughter Jessica, though played by a different actress, is back too, who has matured some in the two years since the last film. Inspector Murray returns as well and is even played by the same guy. The film directly references the end of the last one by pointing out that "D. D. Denham's" business building is built upon the remains of the church where Dracula died last time. About the only plot thread left dangling is how the Count returned to unlife. And even that's easy to address, as a viewer can assume his clan of Satanic followers resurrected him.
Disappointingly, the returning characters are the only thing "The Satanic Rites" has in common with "1972 AD." The movie is not heavy on horror content. And what horror is there is totally different from what we expect. The Satanic rituals, which involve cultist in hoods standing in rooms pouring blood on a naked girl, feel totally of the time. Even Drac gets involved, as he lights black candles while a beautiful woman lies on an altar before him. There are other vampires in the movie. Two scenes take place in a basement where vampire maidens pop out of coffins. However, there's no fog, no old castles, no stone walls. Nothing about these scenes feels like a classic Hammer movie. It's not until the very end of the movie, when Cushing and Lee face off for the final time, that this film begins to feel anything like its predecessors. Van Helsing and Dracula have a stern face-off in a burning room before both flee. Walking into the woods, Dracula stumbles into a hawthorn bush, an obscure vampire weakness, allowing Van Helsing to stake the Count with a fencepost. It's a hugely dubious way to take Dracula out but at least it feels in line with the rest of the series.
Most of "Satanic Rites" doesn't even feel like a horror film though. The film is obviously beholden to "The Avengers" and Roger Moore's Bond films but on a fraction of the budget. The action in the film is mostly limited to guys in fuzzy, suede vest chasing people on motorcycles. One moments has similarly garbed henchmen shooting sniper rifles at the heroes. Despite these unusual action beats, much of the film's runtime is devoted to old British guys sitting around and talking in rooms. There is so much droll exposition in these scenes or long moments of guys reading, watching, or looking at pictures. It's dull and seriously drags the pacing down.
If nothing else, the film has the strength of its performers to fall back on. Peter Cushing is in a lot of the movie, bringing the same level of conviction to the role that he always does. Lee is given more to do then in his last appearance. The vampire count doesn't bite too many beautiful maidens on the neck, save for one scene. Instead, his best moments center on the Count delivering some harsh monologues. Dracula talking about his apocalyptic plans allows Lee to (if you'll excuse the pun) sink his teeth into the hammy dialogue. The final confrontation between the two, where Dracula prepares to bring about the end of the world and Van Helsing stares him down, is easily the best moment of the film. As for the rest of the cast, Michael Coles gets to do some cool stuff as Inspector Murray, staking vampires and throwing some punches. Future comedy superstar Joanna Lumley is less charming then Stephanie Beachum as Jessica and honestly given less to do. It's disappointing that the film reduces the character to a damsel in distress once again.
Director Alan Gibson, returning from "Dracula 1972 AD," is less sturdy this time. He employs rough zoom-ins far too many times. The funky score is pretty catchy though. "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" is a real off entry in the series. The pacing lags horribly, the plot isn't that interesting, and the film barely feels like a Dracula movie. The movie wasn't bad enough to kill the franchise, as Dracula would return in the next year's even odder "Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires." However, it was bad enough to finally make Christopher Lee yell enough. The iconic actor has never put the cape on since. He did not exit on a high note.
Hammer's line of thinking clearly was that the public was sick of Gothic horror. "Satanic Rites" jettisons any trace of classic horror. Instead, the film is concerned with espionage action and conspiracy theories. The British Secret Service is investigating Satanic rituals. One features prominent members of society and claims to be raising people from the dead. The government brings in the modern day Van Helsing as a consultant. Van Helsing, teaming with his granddaughter and Detective Murray, quickly deduces that something sinister is afoot. A scientist, who mysteriously died, is connected to the Satanic circle. This traces back to reclusive millionaire D. D. Denham, who is none other then Count Dracula. Sick of his eternal life, Dracula intends to unleash a plague on the world, bringing upon the apocalypse.
There's not much I like about "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" but I'll give the movie one thing. Many of the Hammer Dracula films play fast and loose with continuity. This one is a direct sequel to "Dracula 1972 AD." Peter Cushing plays the same descendant of Van Helsing. He even lives in the same apartment. His granddaughter Jessica, though played by a different actress, is back too, who has matured some in the two years since the last film. Inspector Murray returns as well and is even played by the same guy. The film directly references the end of the last one by pointing out that "D. D. Denham's" business building is built upon the remains of the church where Dracula died last time. About the only plot thread left dangling is how the Count returned to unlife. And even that's easy to address, as a viewer can assume his clan of Satanic followers resurrected him.
Disappointingly, the returning characters are the only thing "The Satanic Rites" has in common with "1972 AD." The movie is not heavy on horror content. And what horror is there is totally different from what we expect. The Satanic rituals, which involve cultist in hoods standing in rooms pouring blood on a naked girl, feel totally of the time. Even Drac gets involved, as he lights black candles while a beautiful woman lies on an altar before him. There are other vampires in the movie. Two scenes take place in a basement where vampire maidens pop out of coffins. However, there's no fog, no old castles, no stone walls. Nothing about these scenes feels like a classic Hammer movie. It's not until the very end of the movie, when Cushing and Lee face off for the final time, that this film begins to feel anything like its predecessors. Van Helsing and Dracula have a stern face-off in a burning room before both flee. Walking into the woods, Dracula stumbles into a hawthorn bush, an obscure vampire weakness, allowing Van Helsing to stake the Count with a fencepost. It's a hugely dubious way to take Dracula out but at least it feels in line with the rest of the series.
Most of "Satanic Rites" doesn't even feel like a horror film though. The film is obviously beholden to "The Avengers" and Roger Moore's Bond films but on a fraction of the budget. The action in the film is mostly limited to guys in fuzzy, suede vest chasing people on motorcycles. One moments has similarly garbed henchmen shooting sniper rifles at the heroes. Despite these unusual action beats, much of the film's runtime is devoted to old British guys sitting around and talking in rooms. There is so much droll exposition in these scenes or long moments of guys reading, watching, or looking at pictures. It's dull and seriously drags the pacing down.
If nothing else, the film has the strength of its performers to fall back on. Peter Cushing is in a lot of the movie, bringing the same level of conviction to the role that he always does. Lee is given more to do then in his last appearance. The vampire count doesn't bite too many beautiful maidens on the neck, save for one scene. Instead, his best moments center on the Count delivering some harsh monologues. Dracula talking about his apocalyptic plans allows Lee to (if you'll excuse the pun) sink his teeth into the hammy dialogue. The final confrontation between the two, where Dracula prepares to bring about the end of the world and Van Helsing stares him down, is easily the best moment of the film. As for the rest of the cast, Michael Coles gets to do some cool stuff as Inspector Murray, staking vampires and throwing some punches. Future comedy superstar Joanna Lumley is less charming then Stephanie Beachum as Jessica and honestly given less to do. It's disappointing that the film reduces the character to a damsel in distress once again.
Director Alan Gibson, returning from "Dracula 1972 AD," is less sturdy this time. He employs rough zoom-ins far too many times. The funky score is pretty catchy though. "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" is a real off entry in the series. The pacing lags horribly, the plot isn't that interesting, and the film barely feels like a Dracula movie. The movie wasn't bad enough to kill the franchise, as Dracula would return in the next year's even odder "Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires." However, it was bad enough to finally make Christopher Lee yell enough. The iconic actor has never put the cape on since. He did not exit on a high note.
A much better film than it's reputation suggests
Red-Barracuda15 May 2011
I definitely feel a bit out of synch with the general consensus here because this entry in the Hammer Dracula series is one of my favourites. I would say I even enjoy it more than the original, which is doubtless tantamount to sacrilege in some people's eyes. I don't know, this movie just successfully entertains as far as I'm concerned.
The setting is in contemporary times, early 70's London. The story has the evil count gathering together various industrialists, politicians and scientists as part of a nefarious plan to wipe out civilization. He bases his operations from a remote house where satanic rites are practiced, involving these aforementioned individuals plus a number of female vampires who are chained up in the basement. Professor Van Helsing is on hand as usual to attempt to thwart his nemesis's plans.
There's just so much going on in Count Dracula and His Vampire Bride that it simply never gets boring. While it may lack the lush Gothic setting of most of the other entries in the series, I actually think it gains a reasonable amount from the 70's vibe. The idea of Dracula living under a false name in a tower block in the middle of London is a strangely good one, and some of the other locations are well utilized too, like the basement full of vampires for example – the scene where Van Helsing's grand-daughter comes into contact with these creatures is well orchestrated. There's a pleasing over-all smattering of action, nudity and gore throughout the picture to keep genre fans happy, while the film is on occasion quite stylish as in the scenes of the satanic ceremony. And of course it is never a bad thing to have Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing together in a film.
I would suggest that this is a movie that doesn't really deserve its poor reputation. I certainly find it a very enjoyable bit of fun. I do somewhat think that Hammer's 70's productions in general have been given a worse rap than they deserve. For anyone who enjoys British horror films from the period, I think this one is worth seeing.
The setting is in contemporary times, early 70's London. The story has the evil count gathering together various industrialists, politicians and scientists as part of a nefarious plan to wipe out civilization. He bases his operations from a remote house where satanic rites are practiced, involving these aforementioned individuals plus a number of female vampires who are chained up in the basement. Professor Van Helsing is on hand as usual to attempt to thwart his nemesis's plans.
There's just so much going on in Count Dracula and His Vampire Bride that it simply never gets boring. While it may lack the lush Gothic setting of most of the other entries in the series, I actually think it gains a reasonable amount from the 70's vibe. The idea of Dracula living under a false name in a tower block in the middle of London is a strangely good one, and some of the other locations are well utilized too, like the basement full of vampires for example – the scene where Van Helsing's grand-daughter comes into contact with these creatures is well orchestrated. There's a pleasing over-all smattering of action, nudity and gore throughout the picture to keep genre fans happy, while the film is on occasion quite stylish as in the scenes of the satanic ceremony. And of course it is never a bad thing to have Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing together in a film.
I would suggest that this is a movie that doesn't really deserve its poor reputation. I certainly find it a very enjoyable bit of fun. I do somewhat think that Hammer's 70's productions in general have been given a worse rap than they deserve. For anyone who enjoys British horror films from the period, I think this one is worth seeing.
Poor end to Lee's time as Dracula
pemartin-230 December 2001
This is, objectively speaking, a bad movie. It is rendered watchable by a few good preformances and one or two interesting ideas. By the end, however, it looks like the budget ran out or the makers lost interest. As I mentioned, there are a couple of good ideas - particularly that Dracula wishes to end it all by destroying the world. The nudity is less cheesy than in some other Hammer films of the period which is a relief. The biggest letdown, given that the film tries to be as much a thriller as a horror, is that the action scenes are very poor. The climax in particular leaves poor Drac looking very dim and impotent. He's a far cry from the dynamic figure who revolutionised the character's image in Dracula (AKA Horror of Dracula).
Christopher Lee's final Dracula
futes2-127 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Direct sequel to the strangely enjoyable 'Dracula AD 1972', The Satanic Rites is a far better film than it really deserves to be. Gone are the misguided hippies; those responsible for Dracula's reappearance and ongoing success in this one are a cult whose members include leading politicians, business men and scientists. The actual resurrection is glossed over save for a fleeting mention of Satanist Chin Yang (Barbara Yu Ling) having something to do with it. Dracula has the left the confines of the now demolished St. Bartolph's Church and taken up residence in a chic London office building. Not only this but, in what may now seem a slightly shallow metaphor, his vampirism has extended to the financial for he now heads a hugely successful property development company. It has been mentioned that the movie resembles a New Avengers episode so there's no need to rehash that particular speculative route here so lets concentrate on a couple of other factors. For once, Christopher Lee is given a little more dialogue, speaking with a Romanian accent in his guise as D D Denham but reverting to his aristocratic English accent once his true identity becomes clear. Both Lee and Cushing are, of course, excellent and they are well supported by the other key players. Stephanie Beacham has become Joanna Lumley but that doesn't seem to matter and Michael Coles reprises his role as Inspector Murray. The other most significant cast members are William Franklyn as Torrence and Freddie Jones as Professor Julian Keeley. Much has been made of Dracula's desire to destroy the entire human race in this one, some remarking on the ultimate pointlessness of such action from Dracula's perspective whilst others suggest it is some kind of suicide bid by the jaded and bitter King Vampire. I think, however, that it may be related to the unfilmed aspect of 'Dracula AD 1972' in which the Count reveals himself to be the Devil (see my 'Dracula AD 1972' comment for the missing dialogue). Seen in this light it could be suggested that, in his Luciferian role, Dracula is fulfilling his destiny by bringing about the apocalypse and doing so by seizing upon the evil that men are capable of; in this instance their ability to create a new, and seemingly unstoppable, strain of plague. Presumably devils and demons, even vampiric ones, would have some kind of contingency in place to sustain their supplies of fresh blood! Whilst such speculation may seem pointless, it may help explain the core of Dracula's curious dream. Technically the film is somewhat more assured in its direction than AD 1972, director Alan Gibson perhaps having learnt some lessons from the previous outing. Even though Dracula makes an appearance in the oddly charming 'Legend of the Seven Golden Vampires' (1974) thanks to a weak performance by John Forbes Robertson in lurid makeup, 'Satanic Rites' is, from my perspective the last of Hammer's genuine Dracula movies; 'Seven Golden Vampires' is just some other story that has nothing to do with the series in the same way that 'Horror of Frankenstein' (1970) has nothing to do with the Frankenstein series. In some ways a sad farewell to Dracula, in others a way of opening the door for future interpretations, 'The Satanic Rites of Dracula' is nonetheless well worth viewing and certainly deserves to be considered with reference to subsequent attempts to reinvent the Count by other film makers.
Lee and Cushing - One Last Time
bensonmum25 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Hammer's Dracula series started with a bang. THE HORROR OF Dracula is one of the best Dracula movies ever made. Hammer followed it with a number of sequels, including Dracula: PRINCE OF DARKNESS which some feel even exceeds the original.
Hammer's Dracula run with Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing ended with THE SATANIC RITES OF Dracula (SROD). It should have been fun to see Lee and Cushing reprising their roles one last time. But, it's not.
What went wrong? Several factors make SROD the worst of the series:
1. The modern setting. With very few exceptions, Dracula is better played as a Gothic/historical drama.
2. Age. By the time SROD was made, neither Lee nor Cushing was a young man. There are scenes where the aging Cushing is roughed-up and I actually worried about Cushing the man, not Van Helsing the character.
3. Script. Dracula with a death wish? Sure!
4. The ending. Without giving it away, I'll just say the new means of dispatching Dracula in SROD is, well, goofy. Dracula basically walks right into it.
This is not to say there aren't good moments (the vampire brides in the cellar, the office meeting between Dracula and Van Helsing), but they are too few and too far between.
It's too bad that a series that started out with such a bang went out with a whimper.
Hammer's Dracula run with Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing ended with THE SATANIC RITES OF Dracula (SROD). It should have been fun to see Lee and Cushing reprising their roles one last time. But, it's not.
What went wrong? Several factors make SROD the worst of the series:
1. The modern setting. With very few exceptions, Dracula is better played as a Gothic/historical drama.
2. Age. By the time SROD was made, neither Lee nor Cushing was a young man. There are scenes where the aging Cushing is roughed-up and I actually worried about Cushing the man, not Van Helsing the character.
3. Script. Dracula with a death wish? Sure!
4. The ending. Without giving it away, I'll just say the new means of dispatching Dracula in SROD is, well, goofy. Dracula basically walks right into it.
This is not to say there aren't good moments (the vampire brides in the cellar, the office meeting between Dracula and Van Helsing), but they are too few and too far between.
It's too bad that a series that started out with such a bang went out with a whimper.
Somewhat disappointing wrap-up to this series.
Hey_Sweden14 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This viewer sensed that for this final entry in Hammers' long-running Dracula series that most people involved were just going through the motions. Certainly the spark had left. The story here is not terrible - it does have an interesting twist - but the novelty of seeing Dracula in a different period, the London of the 1970s, does wear off. It's just not the same without that irresistible atmosphere of the Gothic entries.
Making it all worthwhile is old pro Peter Cushing. His long time co-star Sir Christopher Lee was definitely looking bored by this point but you'd never know if Cushing felt the same. He's as believable, likable, and authoritative as he's ever been. When he speaks, you want to listen.
The tale has Scotland Yard detectives infiltrating a cult, knowing that some important people are involved. One of them is scientist Julian Keeley (Freddie Jones), who gives up some mighty weighty information: he was enlisted to create a plague virus that could destroy all of mankind. The person who ordered this done was a mysterious, reclusive billionaire named D.D. Denham, whose identity Cushing (playing Lorrimer Van Helsing, current descendant of the original Van Helsing) is able to correctly deduce. But "Denham" has an ace up his sleeve when he is able to abduct Van Helsings' lovely granddaughter Jessica (Joanna Lumley, taking over the role from Stephanie Beacham) and dedicated police inspector Murray (Michael Coles).
One good thing that must be said is that Cushing and Lee still work well together. As the film goes on, it does get better, and their big confrontation in Denhams' office is fun - first when Van Helsing forces him to reveal himself, and later when he informs his adversary that he has a special kind of bullet for the occasion. The climactic action is fairly exciting, and the filmmakers (including screenwriter Don Houghton and director Alan Gibson) devise yet another means of disposing with their famous villain. There's a good amount of sex and violence here, and some very attractive vampire woman. The music score by John Cacavas is a thunderous, grandiose one.
All in all, this isn't a bad swan song for the series. While one wishes that it could have been better, it's still enjoyable enough for Hammer devotees.
Released years later in America in an edited version titled "Count Dracula and His Vampire Bride".
Six out of 10.
Making it all worthwhile is old pro Peter Cushing. His long time co-star Sir Christopher Lee was definitely looking bored by this point but you'd never know if Cushing felt the same. He's as believable, likable, and authoritative as he's ever been. When he speaks, you want to listen.
The tale has Scotland Yard detectives infiltrating a cult, knowing that some important people are involved. One of them is scientist Julian Keeley (Freddie Jones), who gives up some mighty weighty information: he was enlisted to create a plague virus that could destroy all of mankind. The person who ordered this done was a mysterious, reclusive billionaire named D.D. Denham, whose identity Cushing (playing Lorrimer Van Helsing, current descendant of the original Van Helsing) is able to correctly deduce. But "Denham" has an ace up his sleeve when he is able to abduct Van Helsings' lovely granddaughter Jessica (Joanna Lumley, taking over the role from Stephanie Beacham) and dedicated police inspector Murray (Michael Coles).
One good thing that must be said is that Cushing and Lee still work well together. As the film goes on, it does get better, and their big confrontation in Denhams' office is fun - first when Van Helsing forces him to reveal himself, and later when he informs his adversary that he has a special kind of bullet for the occasion. The climactic action is fairly exciting, and the filmmakers (including screenwriter Don Houghton and director Alan Gibson) devise yet another means of disposing with their famous villain. There's a good amount of sex and violence here, and some very attractive vampire woman. The music score by John Cacavas is a thunderous, grandiose one.
All in all, this isn't a bad swan song for the series. While one wishes that it could have been better, it's still enjoyable enough for Hammer devotees.
Released years later in America in an edited version titled "Count Dracula and His Vampire Bride".
Six out of 10.
OK, the real truth
rams_lakers5 August 2004
I loved monster movies as a kid, and Christopher Lee's Dracula has always been my favorite. Way back then I had read monster magazines showing still photos of "The Satanic Rites" and now that I've seen the movie (a 2nd time) I am convinced that it was a lot cooler to look at those pics and yearn to watch it back then than to have seen it. There probably won't be a third time, unless it is to view a better copy. The cheap DVD I bought looks like a 2nd generation VHS copy, and I have older movies in this Dracula series that are rendered beautifully on DVD. Why some of these commenters liked this movie puzzles me because I am the biggest Dracula/Lee fan and this was really bad. They must be Avengers/Dr. Who fans.
Yes, Lee portrays a Howard Hughes/Dr. No type of vampire in this one. He admitted to despising these later films because it went so far away from Stoker's novel it was ridiculous. Dracula was also given very little to do in most of these movies and in this one they decided to make him a recluse. Wow, one commenter even said that this added 'mystery' to the film! What bull. Just another bad story with Dracula in almost a cameo. Because of the outstanding way Lee portrays the Count we want to see him more, not less. No, we don't want him to break off in his own TV series like the Fonz, just more to say and do in these flicks. Another commenter says he is killed by a Hawthorne bush. Wrong! First, Dracula follows Van Helsing's shouts like a naive child. "Count Dracula...Over here!!!" He walks into the bush and is subdued, then Van Helsing stakes him. A Hawthorne bush, now? At this point vampires in general have become so weak that they can't handle daylight, garlic, running water, or thorny plants. Do they run away when you show the cross sign with 2 index fingers?
This movie is simply...bad! The evil biker guards were skinny wimpy looking British blokes with white fur lined jackets, and are neither intimidating nor effective. Van Helsing's granddaughter is unconvincing as her character meddles in his affairs for no good reason. "Why sometimes I think she knows more about the occult than I myself do..." says Van Helsing. Yeah.....riiiiiight. The opening sacrifice scene features the most skinny and unattractive nude female ever in movies. The choice is puzzling considering all the beautiful, voluptuous and talented Hammer Horror actresses they had. I'm thinking of going back to Borders and getting my $5.99 back for the bad quality of both the DVD and the content. Take it from a big Dracula/Lee expert....this one sucks! 3 stars thanks to Lee and Cushing, without them it would have been a 1.
Yes, Lee portrays a Howard Hughes/Dr. No type of vampire in this one. He admitted to despising these later films because it went so far away from Stoker's novel it was ridiculous. Dracula was also given very little to do in most of these movies and in this one they decided to make him a recluse. Wow, one commenter even said that this added 'mystery' to the film! What bull. Just another bad story with Dracula in almost a cameo. Because of the outstanding way Lee portrays the Count we want to see him more, not less. No, we don't want him to break off in his own TV series like the Fonz, just more to say and do in these flicks. Another commenter says he is killed by a Hawthorne bush. Wrong! First, Dracula follows Van Helsing's shouts like a naive child. "Count Dracula...Over here!!!" He walks into the bush and is subdued, then Van Helsing stakes him. A Hawthorne bush, now? At this point vampires in general have become so weak that they can't handle daylight, garlic, running water, or thorny plants. Do they run away when you show the cross sign with 2 index fingers?
This movie is simply...bad! The evil biker guards were skinny wimpy looking British blokes with white fur lined jackets, and are neither intimidating nor effective. Van Helsing's granddaughter is unconvincing as her character meddles in his affairs for no good reason. "Why sometimes I think she knows more about the occult than I myself do..." says Van Helsing. Yeah.....riiiiiight. The opening sacrifice scene features the most skinny and unattractive nude female ever in movies. The choice is puzzling considering all the beautiful, voluptuous and talented Hammer Horror actresses they had. I'm thinking of going back to Borders and getting my $5.99 back for the bad quality of both the DVD and the content. Take it from a big Dracula/Lee expert....this one sucks! 3 stars thanks to Lee and Cushing, without them it would have been a 1.
Not the usual Hammer Dracula but I like it anyway
TheEdge-429 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I yield to no one in my liking for the standard Hammer Gothic horror set in the Mittel Europe Carpathian mountains complete with villagers who refuse to go near to Castle Dracula unless armed with flaming torches to burn the place down. But every so often, Hammer tried something different, with varying degrees of success. "The Devil Rides Out" was set in 1930s England and is generally regarded by many (including me) as being one of Hammer's very best films. Others such as "Dracula A.D. 72" (often known unofficially as Dracula meets the hippies) and this one, "The Satanic Rites of Dracula", which drag Dracula into modern seventies London, were less critically regarded.
Any film set in present day will always date quicker than a film set in the past. "Dracula A.D. 72" suffers in this respect more than "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" as the former features a supposedly wild gang of hippies who are in fact nothing of the kind (one of which includes a very young Michael Kitchen, years before "Foyle's War"). "The Satanic Rites" of Dracula", however, largely escapes this fate (apart from the motorcycle hit men with a dodgy preference for fur-lined waist coats and long sideburns). I still enjoy "Dracula A.D. 72" nonetheless even though I would class it as very much a guilty pleasure. The "Satanic Rites of Dracula" is literally another story however.
One of the highpoints of "Dracula A.D. 72" however is the stylish direction of Canadian director Alan Gibson and Hammer brought him back to helm this final Hammer Dracula (unless you count (sorry) Dracula's cameo appearance in "The Legend of the Seven Golden Vampires"). Thanks to Gibson, several scenes here work wonderfully (the scene in which Joanna Lumley is menaced in the cellar by the female vampires is particularly well done and the scene in which William Franklyn's character is shot in slow motion was obviously Gibson's idea of an homage to Sam Peckinpah which I promise you you will never see in another Hammer film).
In fact, this film is different from nearly all the other Hammer films in a number of ways. It's probably one of the best photographed of all the Hammer films, thanks to cameraman Brian Probyn who had photographed some of Terence Malick's seminal masterpiece "Badlands". The film has a glossy look the belies the small amount of money that was probably spent on making it. In fact, the whole style of the film is different. One of the previous posters here has likened it to an episode of "The Avengers" (rather appropriate as Joanna Lumley, here playing Peter Cushing's granddaughter, Jessica Van Helsing, would go on to play Purdey in "The New Avengers" just a few years later). I'd agree with that and as a result the story plays more as a thriller rather than the standard Hammer Gothic horror. I always thought that bringing Dracula into the present day is a spectacularly bad idea, but if you are going to do it, then the way it is done here works fine. The idea of presenting Dracula as a present day Howard Hughes, hardly seen by anyone is a good idea (a real bloodsucking businessman, that has to be a first). And John Cacavas' music is effective, even though it is completely different to Hammer regular James Bernard's usual style (then again so was Mike Vickers' music in "Dracula A.D. 72").
Acting wise, Lee and Cushing are the usual class acts (Lee as usual has little to do other than quote a few lines from Stoker's original when given the chance). Michael Coles, William Franklyn, Freddie Jones and Joanna Lumley are good in support (even though Lumley's responsible character of Jessica Van Helsing seems to have changed radically from Stephanie Beacham's rebellious portrayal in "Dracula A.D. 72" - still perhaps nearly falling victim to a vampire does that to a girl). And Valerie Van Ost makes a great vampire (once she takes those glasses off, she's beautiful - who knew?) If you approach this film as a thriller rather than the traditional Hammer fare, I think you will enjoy it. Just as long as you don't expect any villagers with torches to turn up in the third act (although Pelham House does go up in flames anyway - unlike certain vampires, some traditions never die).
Any film set in present day will always date quicker than a film set in the past. "Dracula A.D. 72" suffers in this respect more than "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" as the former features a supposedly wild gang of hippies who are in fact nothing of the kind (one of which includes a very young Michael Kitchen, years before "Foyle's War"). "The Satanic Rites" of Dracula", however, largely escapes this fate (apart from the motorcycle hit men with a dodgy preference for fur-lined waist coats and long sideburns). I still enjoy "Dracula A.D. 72" nonetheless even though I would class it as very much a guilty pleasure. The "Satanic Rites of Dracula" is literally another story however.
One of the highpoints of "Dracula A.D. 72" however is the stylish direction of Canadian director Alan Gibson and Hammer brought him back to helm this final Hammer Dracula (unless you count (sorry) Dracula's cameo appearance in "The Legend of the Seven Golden Vampires"). Thanks to Gibson, several scenes here work wonderfully (the scene in which Joanna Lumley is menaced in the cellar by the female vampires is particularly well done and the scene in which William Franklyn's character is shot in slow motion was obviously Gibson's idea of an homage to Sam Peckinpah which I promise you you will never see in another Hammer film).
In fact, this film is different from nearly all the other Hammer films in a number of ways. It's probably one of the best photographed of all the Hammer films, thanks to cameraman Brian Probyn who had photographed some of Terence Malick's seminal masterpiece "Badlands". The film has a glossy look the belies the small amount of money that was probably spent on making it. In fact, the whole style of the film is different. One of the previous posters here has likened it to an episode of "The Avengers" (rather appropriate as Joanna Lumley, here playing Peter Cushing's granddaughter, Jessica Van Helsing, would go on to play Purdey in "The New Avengers" just a few years later). I'd agree with that and as a result the story plays more as a thriller rather than the standard Hammer Gothic horror. I always thought that bringing Dracula into the present day is a spectacularly bad idea, but if you are going to do it, then the way it is done here works fine. The idea of presenting Dracula as a present day Howard Hughes, hardly seen by anyone is a good idea (a real bloodsucking businessman, that has to be a first). And John Cacavas' music is effective, even though it is completely different to Hammer regular James Bernard's usual style (then again so was Mike Vickers' music in "Dracula A.D. 72").
Acting wise, Lee and Cushing are the usual class acts (Lee as usual has little to do other than quote a few lines from Stoker's original when given the chance). Michael Coles, William Franklyn, Freddie Jones and Joanna Lumley are good in support (even though Lumley's responsible character of Jessica Van Helsing seems to have changed radically from Stephanie Beacham's rebellious portrayal in "Dracula A.D. 72" - still perhaps nearly falling victim to a vampire does that to a girl). And Valerie Van Ost makes a great vampire (once she takes those glasses off, she's beautiful - who knew?) If you approach this film as a thriller rather than the traditional Hammer fare, I think you will enjoy it. Just as long as you don't expect any villagers with torches to turn up in the third act (although Pelham House does go up in flames anyway - unlike certain vampires, some traditions never die).
A Lost Opportuntiy
Hammerfanatic4622 February 2015
Warning: Spoilers
My feeling when watching "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" (1973), is always one of disappointment at a lost opportunity.
"Satanic Rites " is a near miss. Please don't misunderstand me :it is not a bad movie, in fact, it is a huge step up from it's predecessor, "Dracula A.D.1972 , in every sense. However, with just a little more imagination , it could have been ,not only a great genre entry , but may have taken the Dracula franchise in a whole new exciting direction.
The central concept is very promising, instead of simply having the Prince of Darkness nibble maidens necks, TSROD takes the Dracula myth a stage forward to it's logical conclusion. Here we see the Count as the Anti-Christ , ( although this idea is never explicitly stated ), seeking to visit annihilation upon mankind. Even more interesting is his intended method of achieving his goal. He employs a group of corrupted Establishment figures, to act as the "Four Horsemen of his own created Apocalypse", spreading a plague across the Globe. A suggestion is even mooted that a jaded Dracula would welcome his own demise when he ceased to have the blood of the living to feed upon.
This intriguing plot is extended by having Dracula pose as a property developer, a metaphorical blood-sucker ; D.D. Denham.
Sadly , this is as far as the interesting developments go. The idea of Dracula as Satan Incarnate, is side-lined for well-staged, but conventional, action involving vampires in the cellar of a country house and climactic pyrotechnics . Worse , in order to conform to then-contemporary audience tastes, we get an uncomfortable blend of horror movie and police thriller , with a hint of James Bond and The Avengers.
Alan Gibson's direction is much more assured than it was in "Dracula A.D.1972, and the performances are more than adequate. As one would expect, Lee and Cushing play it for all it is worth. Michael Coles Detective Inspector Murray is good enough to suggest he would have merited a gritty TV cop show of his own and Joanna Lumley makes a spirited replacement for Stephanie Beacham as Van Helsing's Granddaughter .
Of it's self, "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" is fairly entertaining, and an interesting cinematic artifact of the period. Still , if only Hammer had exercised a larger measure of ambition , they might have initiated the cycle of "Satan Movies " that were to dominate the Horror Genre in the 1970's .
"Satanic Rites " is a near miss. Please don't misunderstand me :it is not a bad movie, in fact, it is a huge step up from it's predecessor, "Dracula A.D.1972 , in every sense. However, with just a little more imagination , it could have been ,not only a great genre entry , but may have taken the Dracula franchise in a whole new exciting direction.
The central concept is very promising, instead of simply having the Prince of Darkness nibble maidens necks, TSROD takes the Dracula myth a stage forward to it's logical conclusion. Here we see the Count as the Anti-Christ , ( although this idea is never explicitly stated ), seeking to visit annihilation upon mankind. Even more interesting is his intended method of achieving his goal. He employs a group of corrupted Establishment figures, to act as the "Four Horsemen of his own created Apocalypse", spreading a plague across the Globe. A suggestion is even mooted that a jaded Dracula would welcome his own demise when he ceased to have the blood of the living to feed upon.
This intriguing plot is extended by having Dracula pose as a property developer, a metaphorical blood-sucker ; D.D. Denham.
Sadly , this is as far as the interesting developments go. The idea of Dracula as Satan Incarnate, is side-lined for well-staged, but conventional, action involving vampires in the cellar of a country house and climactic pyrotechnics . Worse , in order to conform to then-contemporary audience tastes, we get an uncomfortable blend of horror movie and police thriller , with a hint of James Bond and The Avengers.
Alan Gibson's direction is much more assured than it was in "Dracula A.D.1972, and the performances are more than adequate. As one would expect, Lee and Cushing play it for all it is worth. Michael Coles Detective Inspector Murray is good enough to suggest he would have merited a gritty TV cop show of his own and Joanna Lumley makes a spirited replacement for Stephanie Beacham as Van Helsing's Granddaughter .
Of it's self, "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" is fairly entertaining, and an interesting cinematic artifact of the period. Still , if only Hammer had exercised a larger measure of ambition , they might have initiated the cycle of "Satan Movies " that were to dominate the Horror Genre in the 1970's .
Dracula meets James Bond.
steelcorpfilms3 September 2001
Well, my DVD says, `Count Dracula and His Vampire Brides' but IMDb says `The Satanic Rites of Dracula.' I don't think it really matters, since it's the same flick. This is one of the many Hammer films featuring Lee as Dracula and Cushing as Van Helsing. This was more of a James Bond flick with a vampire and satanic rituals than a real horror movie.
There's a secret spy organization, an evil cult with members from the London government, even James Bond-ish music. The only real difference is that occasionally you'll see a vampire or two. Another thing, the vampire brides were hardly in the flick at all. Inappropriate story forgiven, the acting was good and it's always fun to watch Lee and Cushing play off of each other.
There wasn't much gore, just a little chicken's blood and a couple stakes through the heart. Of course, there was the obligatory nudity scene and all the vampire slaying tools were assembled. The plague only infected one person and the make-up effects were decent, but still pretty lame.
Didn't the Count ever watch a Bond film? You're never supposed to reveal your entire scheme, ever. Oh well, too late now. I'd recommend this flick to hardcore Hammer fans only.
There's a secret spy organization, an evil cult with members from the London government, even James Bond-ish music. The only real difference is that occasionally you'll see a vampire or two. Another thing, the vampire brides were hardly in the flick at all. Inappropriate story forgiven, the acting was good and it's always fun to watch Lee and Cushing play off of each other.
There wasn't much gore, just a little chicken's blood and a couple stakes through the heart. Of course, there was the obligatory nudity scene and all the vampire slaying tools were assembled. The plague only infected one person and the make-up effects were decent, but still pretty lame.
Didn't the Count ever watch a Bond film? You're never supposed to reveal your entire scheme, ever. Oh well, too late now. I'd recommend this flick to hardcore Hammer fans only.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
