NOTE IMDb
5,8/10
1,4 k
MA NOTE
Un médecin avale par erreur des pilules à base de sang de chauve-souris et se transforme en monstre assoiffé de sang.Un médecin avale par erreur des pilules à base de sang de chauve-souris et se transforme en monstre assoiffé de sang.Un médecin avale par erreur des pilules à base de sang de chauve-souris et se transforme en monstre assoiffé de sang.
Chet Brandenburg
- Restaurant Patron
- (non crédité)
Arthur Gardner
- Anesthetist
- (non crédité)
Raymond Greenleaf
- Autopsy Surgeon
- (non crédité)
Hallene Hill
- Mrs. Carrie Dietz
- (non crédité)
Mauritz Hugo
- Joe, the Waiter
- (non crédité)
Michael Jeffers
- Bartender
- (non crédité)
Louise Lewis
- Mrs. Miller
- (non crédité)
Natalie Masters
- Ruth
- (non crédité)
Walter Merrill
- Carl James
- (non crédité)
Avis à la une
The film begins with a nice town doctor being called to the lab or a strange chemist who is dying. It seems that the chemist has developed something that he considers important but when the nice doctor arrives, the dying chemist mentions some pills he created and then dies. What these pills are for, the doctor has no idea but he sticks them in his pocket. Later, when the doc has a headache, he accidentally takes one of these pills and it makes him into a blood-sucking monster with really lousy makeup.
While it's obvious that United Artists did not break the bank to make this film, despite its low price tag, it was reasonably interesting and is worth a peek to horror fans. Sophisticated patrons will most likely find the whole thing rather silly, but what sort of sophisticated or snobby viewer would watch a film like this in the first place?
While it's obvious that United Artists did not break the bank to make this film, despite its low price tag, it was reasonably interesting and is worth a peek to horror fans. Sophisticated patrons will most likely find the whole thing rather silly, but what sort of sophisticated or snobby viewer would watch a film like this in the first place?
Dr. Paul Beecher, a respected small-town physician and all-around nice guy, ingests some mysterious pills given to him by his annoying daughter. It seems the li'l brat has foolishly mistaken them for his migraine medication! After Beecher develops a chemical dependency for the drug, he slowly realizes that he was responsible for a series of bizarre murders committed while he was under the influence of these pills. Apparently, these harmless-looking tablets have the power to make their user mutate into a hairy, bloodthirsty vampire at nightfall, leaving him with no recollection of what he has done after the effects have worn off. How could these pills be so powerful? Easy! Because they contain a chemical extracted from a vampire bat!!
This fun, fast-paced horror flick was made in that classic monster-movie style that we have all come to love, yet at the same time it has some very unique and clever twists. The vampire, who is played excellently by John Beal, really looks nothing like you'd expect. Rather than having the bloodsucker portrayed as the standard well-dressed, intelligent, and graceful DRACULA lookalike, THE VAMPIRE depicts him as a hairy, ugly, clumsy beast who ambles aimlessly after his targets. In my opinion, the interpretation of a vampire as being angry, primitive, and relentlessly brutal is much more frightening than the notion of a slick, attractive, intellectual vamp.
The characters in this film are eccentric, likeable, and very well-acted; and the special effects, although simple and outdated, are surprisingly effective. Despite the fact that THE VAMPIRE's story may contain a few glaring inconsistencies, it still succeeds as a suspenseful yet down-to-earth creature feature.
This fun, fast-paced horror flick was made in that classic monster-movie style that we have all come to love, yet at the same time it has some very unique and clever twists. The vampire, who is played excellently by John Beal, really looks nothing like you'd expect. Rather than having the bloodsucker portrayed as the standard well-dressed, intelligent, and graceful DRACULA lookalike, THE VAMPIRE depicts him as a hairy, ugly, clumsy beast who ambles aimlessly after his targets. In my opinion, the interpretation of a vampire as being angry, primitive, and relentlessly brutal is much more frightening than the notion of a slick, attractive, intellectual vamp.
The characters in this film are eccentric, likeable, and very well-acted; and the special effects, although simple and outdated, are surprisingly effective. Despite the fact that THE VAMPIRE's story may contain a few glaring inconsistencies, it still succeeds as a suspenseful yet down-to-earth creature feature.
I continued my winter horror film viewings today with 'The Vampire'. A more descriptive name for it might have been 'Dr. Jeykll and The Vampire' or 'The Vampire Virus'. I'm kidding of course, yet it does borrow heavily from the Jeykll and Hyde story. Here a kindly small town Dr. Accidentally takes an experimental drug. He becomes addicted to it. Each night at about 11PM it causes him to change into a hideous creature with a taste for blood. I thoroughly enjoyed this one. It's right down my alley. The kind of movie that must have been shown on double features at 50s drive-ins. I can imagine it playing with 'Frankenstein's Daughter' on the marquee. Teenage boys probably loved it cause their girl would want to be hugged tight during the show. These horror films have a special place with me, they bring back childhood memories. I was too young to have seen it at theaters during its first run. It was the sort of movie I'd watch on the late night horror shows in the 60s and early 70s. Yet, I some how missed ever catching this gem. It's the type of late night movie my mom would complain "You're going to have nightmares if you watch that !". Of course I would watch it anyway if I could. The feature monster had silly yet scary makeup that looks like the boogeyman kids imagine in the bedroom closet. Kenneth Tobey gets a chance to once again hunt down the monster like he did in 'The Thing'. He makes a good no nonsense type tough-guy any self respecting monster should hide from on sight. My only regret was we didn't wait till after dark to watch it. That would have been more fun than an afternoon viewing. If you are a fan of 50s drive-in horror films, and I sure am, you should love this. I give it a 6 out of 10 rating.
This obscure 1957 horror movie has been overlooked as far as I am concerned. It has an interesting twist to the "man turns into bloodsucking monster" premise. John Beal plays a kindly small town doctor who turns into a vampire after accidentally ingesting pills that a deceased scientist had invented and had been experimenting on with vampire bats (the winged variety!) before he died. 1950's horror stalwart Kenneth Tobey portrays the granite-jawed town detective who is investigating a sudden rash of mysterious deaths in the town. Colleen Gray is the requisite pretty love interest/possible victim. Although the vampire make up is pretty hilarious and not at all scary, there are some scary moments in the movie and all in all shouldn't be missed, especially if you are a lover of the old "drive-in" horror movies of the 1950's.
A small town doctor (John Beal) mistakenly ingests an experimental drug made from the blood of vampire bats which transforms the kindly medic into a bloodthirsty monster.
I really enjoyed this movie a lot. Great plot, great acting and a very interesting looking monster. There is some odd sexism present (the doctor apparently cannot do his own laundry or cook so he has his 10-year old daughter do it for him). But, hey, it is the 1950s.
Not much to say beyond that. I was a bit confused on whether the pills brought on the monster or kept it in check. It seems like pills or no pills the monster was going to kill someone, but maybe I was just confused.
I really enjoyed this movie a lot. Great plot, great acting and a very interesting looking monster. There is some odd sexism present (the doctor apparently cannot do his own laundry or cook so he has his 10-year old daughter do it for him). But, hey, it is the 1950s.
Not much to say beyond that. I was a bit confused on whether the pills brought on the monster or kept it in check. It seems like pills or no pills the monster was going to kill someone, but maybe I was just confused.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesDirector Paul Landres apparently liked the character name "Dr. Paul Beecher" so he used it twice - as the main lead in this film and as a small supporting character in his follow up "The Return of Dracula" (1958) starring Francis Lederer.
- GaffesAt movie's end, when the detective departs; he doesn't retrieve his revolver.
- Citations
Willy Warner: Buck, you can't go around diggin' up people's graves. To get a court order you got to have some good reason.
Sheriff Buck Donnelly: I got plenty of reasons, Willy. Three deaths in three days.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Chillerama: Godzilla/Mark of the Vampire (1962)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Vampire?Alimenté par Alexa
- What is 'The Vampire' about?
- Is 'The Vampire' based on a book?
- How does the movie end?
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- El hombre vampiro
- Lieux de tournage
- Motor Avenue at Woodbine Street, Los Angeles, Californie, États-Unis(Doctor passes police station, doesn't enter.)
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 115 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée1 heure 15 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was The Vampire (1957) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre