Sexually frustrated swingers spend a weekend of sexual explorations in Sir Aubrey's mansion. When one of them tries leaving early after even rejecting hostess Lady Amanda herself, she spikes his drink and rapes him till emission.
The students Kate and Lisa present a medallion to their professor, but his wife spikes their drinks and rapes them with her servant Bane. The professor masters up the courage to stop it only after imagining himself in an adventure.
Valerie, the wife of a successful attorney, is the picture of sophistication and elegance and impresses her husband's friends and colleagues. However, it turns out that she is really ... See full summary »
This is a comic look at the fast food business and rates one of the best films ever. John Holmes operates a pizza delivery service that adds very special toppings provided by the delivery ... See full summary »
High executive Champagne hires Harry as a chauffeur for her sex trips. The job provides Harry with women...too many of them. But his boss Gladys Whitmore is so horny that she asks him for the same thing when he comes by to complain.
While Barbara is ashamed of having had sex with her son, Joyce has completely accepted her-own incestuous side. When Barbara starts craving for her other son, she visits Joyce to seek advice only to find her in bed with her-own other son.
The reporters June Winters and Alice investigate a health spa that employs "sexercise". Alas, their boss Mr. Martin reconsiders after being photographed having sex with the worker Nina who forced herself on him.
By night Jane Smith is a happily married housewife, satisfied with taking care of her husband Bill, a pilot. But by day she's Molly Flame, a porn star with a reputation for doing anything, anywhere, anytime, with anybody.
Dracula (Jamie Gillis) tries to find fresh bait at a sanitarium while Dr. Van Helsing (Reggie Nalder) tries to find and destroy him.
This porno spoof of Tod Browning's Dracula was originally made in a 108-minute version but apparently none or at the most a couple theaters got this version. The XXX version was edited down to 82-minutes and released as LUST AT FIRST BITE while a softcore/horror version was released a couple years later as Dracula SUCKS and clocking in at 86-minutes. Which of these two versions you choose to watch will be up to your taste in terms of wanting to see hardcore sex or something closer to Bram Stoker's novel done in a more serious tone.
Both versions are clearly the same movie but whereas in the hardcore version we'll get sex in the softcore instead of that we'll cut to scenes of violence. This often means that Dracula attacks his female victims and quite often just bites their breasts. It's funny because in the hardcore version he's usually doing something else to the breasts if you know what I mean. I think both versions contain some good things but most of the credit has to go to Gillis who is actually pretty good spoofing Bela Lugosi. I thought the actor looked quite natural in the role of Dracula but he's also clearly viewed the Lugosi version because of the speech pattern. I was really surprised to see how well the line delivery was and this is especially true for the "Children of the Night" speech. The supporting players are also pretty good in their roles with Richard Bulik doing a memorable turn as Renfield. The horror version features quite a few scenes that you're not going to see in the hardcore one. For starters, the before mentioned scenes of the breasts either bleeding or squirting blood. It appears that these scenes were shot after the original movie because quite often they feature a jump cut to where we get a quick view of the blood and then it's back to the normal scene. There are also a few other horror elements in this version including Dracula's red glowing eyes and another sequence where he "sees" people in a burning red flame. The hardcore version features a few added scenes with John Holmes that I didn't spot in the softcore version.
The film even has the guts to credit Stoker at the start of the film. Both versions feature some humor thrown in but most of the time it's just wacky dialogue featuring a lot of cussing. It sounds as if this too was added to the film after the production. Even in their shorter running times both versions seem to run way too long at both become rather tiresome as they move along. With that said, I think both versions are still pretty fascinating especially to those who would like to compare them. Who knows how the original version would have ran but I'm going to guess that it was cut down for good reasons.
2 of 4 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?