Blood for Dracula (1974)

An ailing vampire count travels to Italy with his servant to find a bride.

Director:

Paul Morrissey

Writer:

Paul Morrissey

Stars:

Joe Dallesandro, Udo Kier, Vittorio De Sica

Cast

Complete credited cast:
Joe Dallesandro	...	Mario Balato - the Servant
Udo Kier	...	Count Dracula
Vittorio De Sica	...	Il Marchese Di Fiore
Maxime McKendry	...	La Marchesa Di Fiore
Arno Jürging	...	Anton - the Count's Servant
Milena Vukotic	...	Esmeralda
Dominique Darel	...	Saphiria
Stefania Casini	...	Rubinia
Silvia Dionisio	...	Perla
Inna Alexeievna	...	Old Woman in Tavern
Gil Cagne	...	Townsman (as Gil Cagnie)
Emi Califri
Eleonora Zani

Storyline

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!

---

Plot Keywords:

virgin | dracula | servant | italy | vampire | 

---

Taglines:

After Andy Warhol's "Frankenstein"...

---

Genres:

Horror

---

Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated R for horror violence and sensuality

Details

Country:

Italy France USA

Language:

English

Release Date:

6 November 1974 (USA)

Also Known As:

Andy Warhol's Dracula

Filming Locations:

Villa Parisi, Frascati, Rome, Lazio, Italy

Company Credits

Production Co:

Compagnia Cinematografica Champion, Yanne et Rassam, Andy Warhol Presentation

Technical Specs

Runtime:

103 min

Sound Mix:

Mono

Color:

Color (Eastmancolor)

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

Unlike the controversy over Flesh for Frankenstein (1973) the film suffered very minor cuts for its initial UK cinema release and was never listed as a video nasty. It was passed fully uncut for video in 1995 on the First Independent label.

---

Quotes

Count Dracula: Why did you take me on this hopeless... journey? let me go home and die in peace! what good is it to have tea when I can't find the right vegetable to go with it? I guess I have to eat the rest of the romanian lettuce... with lemon. Ze oil! Zey put zo much oil here on EVERYting! But there must be some cheese?

---

Alternate Versions

Although the UK cinema version didn't suffer as many cuts as Flesh for Frankenstein it was edited by around 4 minutes by the BBFC with extensive cuts to the sex scenes and edits to shots of the Count drinking and then vomiting up blood. The 1995 First Independent video version and all subsequent UK releases were fully uncut.

---

Connections

Version of Dracula: The Musical (2010)

User Reviews

Gory, sexy, witty and political updating of the classic tale.

'Blood for Dracula' began shooting the day principal photography for 'Flesh for Frankenstein' finished, and utilised the same three lead players: Udo Kier (as Dracula), Arno Jeurging (as his manservant) and Joe Dallesandro (as a socially conscious and randy farmhand). In comparison to the earlier film, 'Blood for Dracula' may appear somewhat more restrained, with less of the delirium and dementia which made it's sister movie so memorable, but in place of the outrageous black humour and OTT excesses it possesses a more subtle sense of satire and a frequently beautiful and poetic visual style.

Just a quick recap of the story: Dracula, who is here only able to feed from the blood of virgin girls, is forced to leave his ancestral home in Transylvania (apparantly he's exhausted the supply there) and travel to Italy with his manservant, under the pretence of seeking a 'suitable wife'. They come across a family of supposedly noble stock, whose daughters are not in fact as pure as they might seem to be. This is due to the presence of a hot-headed young farmhand, whose political ideologies have been much influenced by the recent revolution in Russia...

Morrissey's first image in the film is a mischievously existential sequence that immediately works to blur the distinction between the realm of the film and that of the filmmakers. Dracula, a bone white albino, is seen applying black dye to his hair, rouge to his cheeks and ochre to his lips in an effort to appear more robust and more human. The obvious parallel is that of an actor being made up in preparation for a scene; Dracula's 'scene' is the rest of the movie and therefore we do not see this process repeated. Opening with such an introspective shot, one that is entirely outside the narrative and which so successfully marries the worlds before and behind the camera, denotes the artistic sensibility which will lend the film a modernist flavour and throw the hokier aspects of vampire lore into sharp relief. Here Dracula merely has an aversion to sunlight, garlic and crucifixes, rather than crumbling to dust at the sight of them; if outside during the day he only shields his face with his hat, and in his room at the inn he simply takes down the cross on the wall and puts it away in a drawer. It's a good example of how rules of legend as interpreted through iconic cinema (think Bela Lugosi repulsed by a crucifix, or Max Shreck dissolving in the dawn's light) are not binding in any sense, and in any case such constraints on the character would sit badly with the plot of the film. The director's personal touch allows him to express his ideas with more structure and balance, which makes for a more satisfying and coherent picture.

In 'Flesh for Frankenstein', Morrissey used the basic set up of the Frankenstein story, itself heavy with Freudian overtones in the context of Man attempting to create life independently of Woman, to showcase and satirise a gallery of corrupting behaviour and sexual deviancy. Here the contemporary relevance is the political subtext of the Dracula myth. The Count as a wealthy aristocrat is presented as both a literal and metaphorical vampire: he drains the blood of innocents in order to perpetuate his existence, and his social class figuratively leeches off the lower orders for it's own survival. His sickly pallor and physical frailty is both representative of his caste's dying influence and perhaps also a comment upon the debilitating results of long term inbreeding; a sharp contrast to the youthful strength and virility of Joe Dallesandro. The character of the latter is a dedicated communist who despises the Count for being, as he sees him, the wasted product of an archaic and fading tradition of social inequality, and the perception of aristocracy as decrepit and defunct extends to, and is reinforced by, the Italian family upon who's daughters the count has set his sights. Clearly once wealthy and influential they have now fallen on hard times and are under financial strain; the daughters work in the fields and gardens and the house is in need of repair and redecoration which they cannot afford. Hence the Mother's desire to marry one of her children into a moneyed lineage, in spite of such an unattractive groom and her daughters' unsuitability for his requirements, is an act of both base greed and snobbish ambition.

The film also makes great use of the power of human sexuality. One character early in the film remarks, upon hearing of the Count's intention to marry: 'A wife? He doesn't look up to it!' Indeed the key to Dracula's undoing is ultimately sex. He cannot drink the blood of non-virgins, yet is tricked several times into drinking the contaminated blood of the family's daughters, which leads to bouts of copious vomiting. His servant's somewhat erroneous belief that Italy is a good place to find a chaste wife, because of that countries Catholicism, demonstrates his unfortunate reliance on, and faith in, the upholding of old fashioned principles. The girls' unrestrained sexual familiarity with Dallesandro is indicative of their embracing of a more modern and unconcerned attitude to sex, where the crumbling social climate and values of their parent's generation have little bearing. When Dracula reveals that due to his families' 'traditions' he can only marry a virgin, the Marchesa knowingly tries to palm him off with her daughters, whom she knows are experienced, anyway. There is little genuine sense of honour about such duplicity; the motivation is wealth even at the expense of her children's happiness. Morrissey is always quick to savage the supposedly sacred community of the family; in 'Flesh for Frankenstein' it was blighted by incest and depravity, and here the briefly seen relationship between Dracula and his sister (also a vampire) is more touching and heartfelt than the caustic behaviour of the Di Fiore's toward one another.

The film remains to the end a coruscating and biting take on human values. At it's conclusion the enforced tyranny of an autocratic society has symbolically been put to a bloody end and supplanted by another: that of communist oppression. It is not a happy ending, perhaps because Dracula here is a much more pitiable and ambiguous character than generally depicted in other films. He does not communicate a sense of being an evil and vicious monster; he comes across as a weak and highly strung aesthete, delicate, sensitive and refined (the fact that he can only drink the uncontaminated blood of virgins is an extension of his discerning tastes and a genuine reflection of the traditional requirements of well-bred families in matters of marriage). Violence is abhorrent to him, yet ironically it is concomitant with his survival, whereas Dallesandro's character is brutish, self righteous and far more morally dubious (he more or less rapes the youngest daughter so that Dracula cannot now feed from her impure blood).

The key performances here are perfectly realised and genuinely involving. Kier captures the lethargy and malaise of the ailing Count with inimitable panache, although in order to shed the necessary weight for the role he simply didn't eat anything and was therefore actually too weak to move most of the time anyway! Arno Jeurging here plays an authoritative, arrogant and controlling servant who is worlds away from the submissive and degenerate Otto character in 'Flesh for Frankenstein', while Maxime McKendry imparts a very real sense of desperation in her part as a declining aristocrat grasping at straws in a changing economic climate. Dallesandro here seems as out of place as he was in FFF, with a hilariously anachronistic Brooklyn accent despite supposedly being a second-generation servant to the family. You could look at this as the Director articulating his indifference to the conventional importance of verisimilitude, or merely the inclusion of a bankable international star for the purpose of returns at the box office (I suppose it depends on how cynical you're feeling). Whatever, Dallesandro endows his character with the sense of preening and aggressive self-importance that is vital for the film, where the intention is to have no clearly demarcated hero and villain. The girls are all achingly beautiful and shed their clothes at almost every opportunity, while two notable directors, Vittorio De Sica and Roman Polanksi (!) have brief parts as the Merchese and a cunning villager respectively. Jeurging's mother also plays a small role as a customer at the inn.

Gore wise, although the film, as noted, somewhat lacks the unrelenting intensity of FFF's flying entrails and severed heads, it is still not for the squeamish. The protracted scenes of Dracula throwing up unsuitable blood into the bath are pretty gross, as is his lying on the floor to sup at the remains of the youngest daughter's hymen after Dallesandro takes matters into his own hands. The conclusion takes the grotesquery to the heights of blackly comic inevitability, with a mess of severed limbs and a double puncture with a single stake. However, the elegance of the cinematography, despite the low budget, renders these scenes almost as beautiful in their own perverse way as the long establishing shots of the Italian countryside.

This film, like it's predecessor, remains a genuine cult classic, and in my opinion they are both valuable documents of the prevalent artistic attitudes of their day and two of the most important, literate, well composed and intelligent horror films of the last thirty years. Maybe someday Morrissey and Kier may make another. Here's hoping.