After six Dracula movies, Hammer, indeed, seemed in need of a change, if they were to continue the franchise. But, not this. Not hippies. About the only thing going for this addition is that Peter Cushing returns from a 12-year hiatus to the role of Van Helsing--actually, two Van Helsings. And, he teams up for the first time since the original 1958 "Dracula" with Christopher Lee.
"Dracula A.D. 1972," however, doesn't place itself within the rest of the series. It begins in 1872 with the supposed last clash between Dracula and Van Helsing before they both die. Hammer's first "Dracula" was set in 1885, though, and its sequels, as apparent from a coffin date in "Dracula has Risen from the Grave" (1968) went on into the early 20th Century. Although, perhaps, the filmmakers merely had a poor grasp of time, as indicated by Jessica Van Helsing referring to Lawrence Van Helsing as her great grandfather, which would make her present-day grandfather Van Helsing maybe nearly 100 years old.
Despite this lack of recognition for its predecessors, the film rehashes some of the narrative elements from prior films in the series, particularly "Taste the Blood of Dracula" (1970). As with that film, this one focuses largely on young adults or teenagers. Both films have a character who collects Dracula's powdered blood after his death, which will later be used in a ceremony mixing fresh blood with the blood powder to bring Dracula back to life (as it were). In "Taste the Blood of Dracula," however, this storyline made sense. Here, there's no reason given for the initial blood collection and disposal of it at Van Helsing's grave. Nor is there an explanation for Johnny's last name of "Alucard," a semordnilap taken from "Son of Dracula" (1943), where it was also nonsensical. One of the more laughable scenes in this update has Van Helsing carefully diagraming "Alucard" out on paper to establish that in reverse it spells "Dracula."
Then, there's the young hippies. Ironically, they're introduced as invaders--throwing an unwelcome party in an upper-class home. In Bram Stoker's novel, Dracula was the invading force. In other Dracula movies, including the 1931 Bela Lugosi version, a suave Dracula invades polite and posh English society. Here, it's the hippies doing just that, and it's also them who raise Dracula from the grave. Unfortunately, the film doesn't do much otherwise with this connection besides refashioning the usual Hammer Dracula soundtrack with some groovy tunes instead. A detective mentions cult murders in the U.S., thus connecting Dracula and the Hippies here to the Manson Family. Moreover, the youth-culture dialogue is laughable. The young characters are annoying. Johnny looks like he just got back from being a droog in "A Clockwork Orange" (1971), and he acts a bit like it, too. And Jessica is the kind of damsel-in-distress I wish would just be killed already.
(Mirror Note: Mirrors appear in uses not involving vampires not casting reflections. Van Helsing casts a few reflections, including a mirror on the floor that shows him when he'd otherwise be out of frame. Van Helsing also employs that mirror to reflect sunlight on Johnny vamp.)
"Dracula A.D. 1972," however, doesn't place itself within the rest of the series. It begins in 1872 with the supposed last clash between Dracula and Van Helsing before they both die. Hammer's first "Dracula" was set in 1885, though, and its sequels, as apparent from a coffin date in "Dracula has Risen from the Grave" (1968) went on into the early 20th Century. Although, perhaps, the filmmakers merely had a poor grasp of time, as indicated by Jessica Van Helsing referring to Lawrence Van Helsing as her great grandfather, which would make her present-day grandfather Van Helsing maybe nearly 100 years old.
Despite this lack of recognition for its predecessors, the film rehashes some of the narrative elements from prior films in the series, particularly "Taste the Blood of Dracula" (1970). As with that film, this one focuses largely on young adults or teenagers. Both films have a character who collects Dracula's powdered blood after his death, which will later be used in a ceremony mixing fresh blood with the blood powder to bring Dracula back to life (as it were). In "Taste the Blood of Dracula," however, this storyline made sense. Here, there's no reason given for the initial blood collection and disposal of it at Van Helsing's grave. Nor is there an explanation for Johnny's last name of "Alucard," a semordnilap taken from "Son of Dracula" (1943), where it was also nonsensical. One of the more laughable scenes in this update has Van Helsing carefully diagraming "Alucard" out on paper to establish that in reverse it spells "Dracula."
Then, there's the young hippies. Ironically, they're introduced as invaders--throwing an unwelcome party in an upper-class home. In Bram Stoker's novel, Dracula was the invading force. In other Dracula movies, including the 1931 Bela Lugosi version, a suave Dracula invades polite and posh English society. Here, it's the hippies doing just that, and it's also them who raise Dracula from the grave. Unfortunately, the film doesn't do much otherwise with this connection besides refashioning the usual Hammer Dracula soundtrack with some groovy tunes instead. A detective mentions cult murders in the U.S., thus connecting Dracula and the Hippies here to the Manson Family. Moreover, the youth-culture dialogue is laughable. The young characters are annoying. Johnny looks like he just got back from being a droog in "A Clockwork Orange" (1971), and he acts a bit like it, too. And Jessica is the kind of damsel-in-distress I wish would just be killed already.
(Mirror Note: Mirrors appear in uses not involving vampires not casting reflections. Van Helsing casts a few reflections, including a mirror on the floor that shows him when he'd otherwise be out of frame. Van Helsing also employs that mirror to reflect sunlight on Johnny vamp.)