Udo Kier is without a doubt the sickliest of vampires in any director's interpretation of the Bram Stoker tale. Count Dracula knows that if he fails to drink a required amount of pure virgin's [pronounced "wirgin's"] blood, it's time to move into a permanent coffin. His assistant (Renfield?) suggests that the Count and he pick up his coffin and take a road trip to Italy, where families are known to be particularly religious, and therefore should be an excellent place to search for a virgin bride. They do, only to encounter a family with not one, but FOUR virgins, ready for marriage. The Count discovers one-by-one that the girls are not as pure as they say they are, meanwhile a handsome servant/Communist begins to observe strange behaviour from the girls who do spend the night with the Count. It's a race for Dracula to discover who's the real virgin, before he either dies from malnourishment or from the wooden stake of the Communist! —Jonathan Dakss <email@example.com>
Strange, but Weirdly Appetizing
I was intrigued when I heard about Andy Warhol producing 'Blood for Dracula,' and 'Flesh for Frankenstein.' I planned on watching both of them, starting with 'Blood for Dracula.' This movie is just very entertaining, strange, and artistic. The story is like no other Dracula film. With Udo Kier as Dracula this was bound to be good for me. I first saw Udo in Gus Van Sant's 'My Own Private Idaho,' (which many people probably had the same experience as me.) I thought he was good at first sight. Then I watched an interview with director Gus Van Sant, where he was talking about first seeing Udo in 'Flesh for Frankenstein,' and 'Blood for Dracula.' Naturally, I had to see them. It was exciting to know that this movie existed. So this was interesting. I don't think it was great, I don't think it could've been better, it's just good the way it is. You just kind of have to see it yourself.
- Jul 30, 2018
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content