In this darkly humorous vampire offering directed by Paul Morrissey and Antonio Margheriti and produced by Andy Warhol, Count Dracula (Udo Kier), desperately requiring the life-force sustaining sustenance of virgin's blood travels to Italy on the advice of his servant, Anton (Arno Juerging), in order to take advantage of strong religious beliefs and pray upon innocent young women.
Bearing stylistic similarities with the cycle of Hammer vampire films of the time, Blood for Dracula differentiates itself from the former with sharp mood changes, graphic violence and a slight but notable change in traditional vampire lore. The result of this is a suitably distinct new direction for the perhaps now-tired Dracula formula, and consequently a more fulfilling experience than one might at first expect. Perhaps the most surprising accomplishment of Blood for Dracula is in the perspicacious use of dialogue, negating the requirement for tedious, protracted sequences to explain and develop and therefore allowing the film to progress at a steady pace. The explorative dialogue coupled with an adept technical ability succeed in producing a vastly altered image of the monstrous Count Dracula and contrary to conventional dogma, this incarnation of the inhuman abomination is actually a weak, feeble and pathetic specimen devoid of the awesome presence viewers are accustomed to; instead laughable in inferiority. It is in this singular likeness that horror looms, for this apparently vulnerable figure is still not without the ability to commit heinous acts of pure, malevolent evil and impatiently waits to strike.
Aesthetically the film is stunning, mixing gloomy, foreboding Gothic visuals with lighter, playful sequences and even in the darkness, there is still an unequivocal beauty to be found in the presentation. It is perhaps the most daring feat of this unconventional film that the truly horrifying actions undertaken by the demonic being are not confined to the dark. As haunting as the gloomy, brooding and atmospheric darkness may be, it is in the traditionally safe light, amidst the majestic splendour that the awesome and malicious power of Dracula can be felt the most. However, the horror can be unleashed at any time as the directors are happy to build the tension, misleading the audience and only when the end credits roll can one be assured that it is over. In essence, one has to look to Udo Kier as the foremost reason for this, as his performance blends extravagance with subtlety; occasionally subdued, occasionally forthcoming. He is complimented perfectly by the devilish Arno Juerging who is always forcibly commanding as the Count's malicious assistant. Sadly, a mixture of tragic overacting and horrible non-acting from the other cast members (particularly the highly annoying Joe Dallessandro) harm the atmosphere and production and seem to have prejudiced more than a few against an otherwise fine work.
To call Blood for Dracula a classic would be a misnomer, but to call it an accomplishment would easily be justifiable. In spite of some poor performances, comical pro-socialist ramblings and one or two poor effects, Blood for Dracula remains one of the foremost examples of how to create an intriguing and entertaining vampire film outside the confines of the traditional story. Those who want to see something a little different should certainly watch this one. Look out for a brief appearance from Roman Polanski! 7½/10
Bearing stylistic similarities with the cycle of Hammer vampire films of the time, Blood for Dracula differentiates itself from the former with sharp mood changes, graphic violence and a slight but notable change in traditional vampire lore. The result of this is a suitably distinct new direction for the perhaps now-tired Dracula formula, and consequently a more fulfilling experience than one might at first expect. Perhaps the most surprising accomplishment of Blood for Dracula is in the perspicacious use of dialogue, negating the requirement for tedious, protracted sequences to explain and develop and therefore allowing the film to progress at a steady pace. The explorative dialogue coupled with an adept technical ability succeed in producing a vastly altered image of the monstrous Count Dracula and contrary to conventional dogma, this incarnation of the inhuman abomination is actually a weak, feeble and pathetic specimen devoid of the awesome presence viewers are accustomed to; instead laughable in inferiority. It is in this singular likeness that horror looms, for this apparently vulnerable figure is still not without the ability to commit heinous acts of pure, malevolent evil and impatiently waits to strike.
Aesthetically the film is stunning, mixing gloomy, foreboding Gothic visuals with lighter, playful sequences and even in the darkness, there is still an unequivocal beauty to be found in the presentation. It is perhaps the most daring feat of this unconventional film that the truly horrifying actions undertaken by the demonic being are not confined to the dark. As haunting as the gloomy, brooding and atmospheric darkness may be, it is in the traditionally safe light, amidst the majestic splendour that the awesome and malicious power of Dracula can be felt the most. However, the horror can be unleashed at any time as the directors are happy to build the tension, misleading the audience and only when the end credits roll can one be assured that it is over. In essence, one has to look to Udo Kier as the foremost reason for this, as his performance blends extravagance with subtlety; occasionally subdued, occasionally forthcoming. He is complimented perfectly by the devilish Arno Juerging who is always forcibly commanding as the Count's malicious assistant. Sadly, a mixture of tragic overacting and horrible non-acting from the other cast members (particularly the highly annoying Joe Dallessandro) harm the atmosphere and production and seem to have prejudiced more than a few against an otherwise fine work.
To call Blood for Dracula a classic would be a misnomer, but to call it an accomplishment would easily be justifiable. In spite of some poor performances, comical pro-socialist ramblings and one or two poor effects, Blood for Dracula remains one of the foremost examples of how to create an intriguing and entertaining vampire film outside the confines of the traditional story. Those who want to see something a little different should certainly watch this one. Look out for a brief appearance from Roman Polanski! 7½/10