NOTE IMDb
6,6/10
12 k
MA NOTE
Dracula est ressuscité et s'en prend à quatre visiteurs sans méfiance de son château.Dracula est ressuscité et s'en prend à quatre visiteurs sans méfiance de son château.Dracula est ressuscité et s'en prend à quatre visiteurs sans méfiance de son château.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Charles 'Bud' Tingwell
- Alan
- (as Charles Tingwell)
Peter Cushing
- Doctor Van Helsing
- (images d'archives)
- (non crédité)
Alistair Dick
- Monk
- (non crédité)
Lee Fenton
- Monk
- (non crédité)
George Holdcroft
- Monk
- (non crédité)
Avis à la une
(76%) A brilliant sequel and a true horror classic that every horror fan should watch at least once. The first unlucky victims murder is really quite strong and brutal, and when one takes into account the 1966 release date it must have really shocked a lot of people back in the day. A great film with top direction and fantastic set design, only let down by the lack of Peter Cushing and the poor decision not to give any lines at all to Christopher Lee, I kind of see what they were going for, but Lee should have been treated a lot better and given something to say. Dracula spoke a lot in the book so there is little reason to mute him here, still a solid movie though and worthy of anyone's time.
Four English tourists: Charles Kent (played by Francis Matthews), his wife Diana (played by Suzan Farmer), his brother Alan (played by Charles Tingwell) and his wife Helen (played by Barbara Shelley) arrive in the Carpathians for a climbing holiday. Despite warnings from the superstitious locals they spend the night at Castle Dracula. Here, Dracula's sinister manservant, Klove (played by Philip Latham), uses the blood of one of them as a life force to resurrect his master...
Dracula Prince Of Darkness was the official sequel to Hammer's Dracula (1958). Hammer had made two follow-ups to their box-office hit with The Brides Of Dracula (1960) and Kiss Of The Vampire (1964), but neither featured Christopher Lee. Some say that Lee refused to repeat his role through fear of becoming typecast, while others say that Hammer dropped him because he wasn't a big enough star. He got billed fourth in the first film. Whatever the reason, Lee finally returned to his original role after seven years and Dracula Prince Of Darkness made it into the top twenty money-spinners of 1966. You will notice in this film that Christopher Lee has no lines, he has always maintained that the lines he was given were so bad that he wouldn't speak them. On the other hand screenwriter Jimmy Sangster (who penned the screenplay under the pseudonym John Samson) swears that he didn't write any.
Dracula Prince Of Darkness stands as one of the best sequels to Hammer's 1958 film, which is regarded by many as a classic. While Christopher Lee has no dialog, he still manages to create a feeling of lurking evil which lasts long after the movie's over. Whereas in later films he was little more than a supporting character with very little to do. The supporting cast which includes Francis Matthews, Andrew Kier and Barbara Shelley is excellent and Thorley Walters does a fine job of portraying the fly-eating Renfield, an original character from Bram Stoker's novel who is renamed here as Ludwig. Philip Latham is also noteworthy as the creepy retainer, Klove. Director Terence Fisher does a fine job of staging the build-up to the Count's resurrection. This first half of the film is genuinely atmospheric, gothic stuff with the camera tracking around the darkened corridors of the castle to suggest that although Dracula himself is dead, his malevolent spirit is present all the time.
Dracula Prince Of Darkness was the official sequel to Hammer's Dracula (1958). Hammer had made two follow-ups to their box-office hit with The Brides Of Dracula (1960) and Kiss Of The Vampire (1964), but neither featured Christopher Lee. Some say that Lee refused to repeat his role through fear of becoming typecast, while others say that Hammer dropped him because he wasn't a big enough star. He got billed fourth in the first film. Whatever the reason, Lee finally returned to his original role after seven years and Dracula Prince Of Darkness made it into the top twenty money-spinners of 1966. You will notice in this film that Christopher Lee has no lines, he has always maintained that the lines he was given were so bad that he wouldn't speak them. On the other hand screenwriter Jimmy Sangster (who penned the screenplay under the pseudonym John Samson) swears that he didn't write any.
Dracula Prince Of Darkness stands as one of the best sequels to Hammer's 1958 film, which is regarded by many as a classic. While Christopher Lee has no dialog, he still manages to create a feeling of lurking evil which lasts long after the movie's over. Whereas in later films he was little more than a supporting character with very little to do. The supporting cast which includes Francis Matthews, Andrew Kier and Barbara Shelley is excellent and Thorley Walters does a fine job of portraying the fly-eating Renfield, an original character from Bram Stoker's novel who is renamed here as Ludwig. Philip Latham is also noteworthy as the creepy retainer, Klove. Director Terence Fisher does a fine job of staging the build-up to the Count's resurrection. This first half of the film is genuinely atmospheric, gothic stuff with the camera tracking around the darkened corridors of the castle to suggest that although Dracula himself is dead, his malevolent spirit is present all the time.
Dracula Prince Of Darkness is in many ways as good as the first of the Hammer Draculas. It isn't actually the first sequel they made- that being The Brides Of Dracula- but that did not have Dracula in it, it actually being another adventure for Peter Cushing's Van Helsing, the vampire hunter. This film is hardly a classic, but it's extremely effective in what it sets out to do.
Rather disappointingly, Dracula is not revived {in startlingly gory fashion}until half the film is over, and even after that only puts in brief appearances. Although this has been heavily criticised, in some ways it makes the film more effective ,as you don't always know when he is going to appear. He doesn't even speak ,just hisses. The leisurely first half is nonetheless full of creepy atmosphere, while the second half is pretty much all action. The scene where a writhing Barbara Shelley is held down and staked remains astonishingly effective, and only Dracula's icy demise seems a little unconvincing technically.
Of course the sexual element is hardly worth thinking about- prudish Shelley becomes'eroticised'as a vampire and than has to be killed, and why were the Hammer ladies always far more attractive in their vampiric form? Still, this film shows many of the Hammer elements at their best.
Rather disappointingly, Dracula is not revived {in startlingly gory fashion}until half the film is over, and even after that only puts in brief appearances. Although this has been heavily criticised, in some ways it makes the film more effective ,as you don't always know when he is going to appear. He doesn't even speak ,just hisses. The leisurely first half is nonetheless full of creepy atmosphere, while the second half is pretty much all action. The scene where a writhing Barbara Shelley is held down and staked remains astonishingly effective, and only Dracula's icy demise seems a little unconvincing technically.
Of course the sexual element is hardly worth thinking about- prudish Shelley becomes'eroticised'as a vampire and than has to be killed, and why were the Hammer ladies always far more attractive in their vampiric form? Still, this film shows many of the Hammer elements at their best.
Hammer brought Christopher Lee back after an eight year absence to play Count Dracula once more in this film, also directed by Horror of Dracula director Terrence Fisher. Fisher does a fine job creating tension as two English couples pay no heed to a priest's advice and go to Carlsbad AND to the unmarked castle in the forest. There a servant of the evil count kills one of the men(admirably played by Charles Tingwell) and uses his blood to ressurect his master. From there on, Lee creates havoc among the house guests. The typical Hammer touches are all here: bright colours, beautiful scenes and sets, great music by James Bernard, and a fine, talented acting group. Lee is very menacing as the count, yet the real star of the film for me is Andrew Keir as an outspoken Van Helsing-like priest. The Hammer girls are as always very easy on the eyes. Barbara Shelley makes a beautiful vampire. Though the script comes up a bit short to make this one of Hammer's best vampire films, all the rest certainly make it very entertaining.
Dracula (Christopher Lee) rides again in yet another Hammer entry in the Dracula franchise. This film is enjoyable horror hokum, but it has an awfully shallow story, fleshed out with a slow opening stretch and some amusing vampire lore in between the sporadic vampire attacks.
Four British travellers are journeying through the Carpathian Alps in the 1800s. They are repeatedly cautioned to steer clear of Carlsbad Castle but, being typically stuffy and stubborn, they end up going there anyway. The castle is deserted apart from a rather zombified manservant. During the night, one of the travellers is slain by the manservant, and his blood is used to resurrect the long-dead Count Dracula. Time for another bout of blood-sucking mayhem....
Christopher Lee has a small role this time around, but gets across a good performance due to his commanding presence in the title role. Andrew Keir is also good as a priest-cum-vampire-slayer, though he has to overcome some dumb dialogue. The slow build-up is rather damaging, as it generates more tedium than chills. The opportunities for real terror are somewhat fudged too, since most would-be "shock" moments are telegraphed too far in advance. However, Hammer buffs and vampire addicts will doubtless feel more than satisfied.
Four British travellers are journeying through the Carpathian Alps in the 1800s. They are repeatedly cautioned to steer clear of Carlsbad Castle but, being typically stuffy and stubborn, they end up going there anyway. The castle is deserted apart from a rather zombified manservant. During the night, one of the travellers is slain by the manservant, and his blood is used to resurrect the long-dead Count Dracula. Time for another bout of blood-sucking mayhem....
Christopher Lee has a small role this time around, but gets across a good performance due to his commanding presence in the title role. Andrew Keir is also good as a priest-cum-vampire-slayer, though he has to overcome some dumb dialogue. The slow build-up is rather damaging, as it generates more tedium than chills. The opportunities for real terror are somewhat fudged too, since most would-be "shock" moments are telegraphed too far in advance. However, Hammer buffs and vampire addicts will doubtless feel more than satisfied.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIn the scene where Dracula is being "resurrected" from a coffin into which his ashes have been spread, from blood dripping down from a poor victim (provided by Klove) Dracula is made to "manifest himself" over a period of about a minute. This was achieved by overlapping "dissolves" of a series of twelve locked-down camera shots, involving first the ashes, then a skeleton, then some body-fat on the skeleton, et cetera, along with swirling mist, until we finally perceive the full form of Dracula. He doesn't appear fully dressed as is usually the case. The shot moves to outside the coffin and a bare arm reaches out. The vampire's clothes were seen in earlier scenes awaiting his return.
- GaffesDiana holds the crucifix out towards Dracula twice in successive camera shots from the back whilst front shots don't show her holding it at all.
- Citations
Alan Kent: You forget about all of this in the morning, you'll see.
Helen Kent: There'll be no morning for us.
- Versions alternativesThe UK cinema version was cut by the BBFC with edits to blood flows during the resurrection scene, a closeup shot of Helen's staking, and a shortening of the seduction scene where Dracula pulls a hypnotized Diana towards his chest wound. Video releases featured the cut cinema print though all widescreen DVD releases feature the fully uncut version.
- ConnexionsEdited from Le Cauchemar de Dracula (1958)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Dracula: Prince of Darkness
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 100 000 £GB (estimé)
- Durée1 heure 30 minutes
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant