NOTE IMDb
6,3/10
7,3 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAfter killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.After killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.After killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 nomination au total
Anthony Higgins
- Paul Paxton
- (as Anthony Corlan)
Madeline Smith
- Dolly
- (as Maddy Smith)
Avis à la une
The story concerns three middle-aged men seeking thrills, making a pact with a devil's disciple, backing out of that pact at the last moment, and then dying as well as their progeny for their lack of commitment. The story has some big holes, but is one of the better Dracula films in the Hammer series. You get what you generally can expect from Hammer: good character acting, lush cinematography, dutiful direction(ably done by Peter Sasdy), Christopher Lee(alas no Peter Cushing), beautiful young girls showing lots of cleavage, wonderful period costumes, and the film's shining grace is the score by James Hermann which is simply poetry put to music. Ralph Bates stands out as a Lord Courtly living a life of sin and debauchery. Good Hammer Fun!
It's funny how I really wasn't into this movie at first but still ended up really liking it!
Thing that makes this movie a bit unusual and different is that it's being a part of the Hammer studios Dracula series but it really doesn't feel or look like a Hammer movie at all! Director Peter Sasdy did an handful of movies for the Hammer studios but only in its later years and he never impressed with any. He obviously wasn't that accustomed to its approach and style of film-making, or perhaps he simply really preferred to do his own thing. But anyway, if you're really into Hammer films, just prepare yourself for something totally different. You might end up disliking it at first, just as I did but don't give up on it! It's really a worthwhile and original enough little horror movie. I can also honestly say that this was the best movie I had seen, that got directed by Peter Sasdy.
The movie and story all first starts out as something very simplistic and formulaic but as the movie goes along, you actually start to realize how great its premise is. It has a premise that really adds to the movie its tension and for once isn't all about Dracula and the horror that he does. It might very well be true that this movie would have a better reputation if it didn't featured the character of Dracula in it, since this movie really doesn't feel like a typical Dracula movie at all and its story and atmosphere perhaps called for something totally different, outside of the Dracula universe.
And as often is the case with these late Hammer Dracula movies, Dracula himself is hardly in it at all. It was because Christopher Lee got fed up with the role and was also afraid he was going to get typecast because of it, for the rest of his life. He still needed a paycheck, so he kept on playing the character for a couple of years, under the condition that his role got limited down and in some cases he doesn't even have any lines. In this movie he does still speak however and once more shows why he was such a great and charismatic Dracula at the time.
It's the more slower sort of horror movie, which doesn't really work out that great for the movie at first but about halfway through it picks up some more pace and things start to get far more interesting and original. It's then that the movie suddenly starts to take form and makes its intension clear. It also provides the movie with some really solid horror moments and the movie has a very constant horror like atmosphere to it as well, that really adds to the tension and mystery of the overall movie.
Once you start to realize that this isn't being your average formulaic and simplistic Dracula production, the movie becomes surprisingly good, effective and original to watch!
7/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Thing that makes this movie a bit unusual and different is that it's being a part of the Hammer studios Dracula series but it really doesn't feel or look like a Hammer movie at all! Director Peter Sasdy did an handful of movies for the Hammer studios but only in its later years and he never impressed with any. He obviously wasn't that accustomed to its approach and style of film-making, or perhaps he simply really preferred to do his own thing. But anyway, if you're really into Hammer films, just prepare yourself for something totally different. You might end up disliking it at first, just as I did but don't give up on it! It's really a worthwhile and original enough little horror movie. I can also honestly say that this was the best movie I had seen, that got directed by Peter Sasdy.
The movie and story all first starts out as something very simplistic and formulaic but as the movie goes along, you actually start to realize how great its premise is. It has a premise that really adds to the movie its tension and for once isn't all about Dracula and the horror that he does. It might very well be true that this movie would have a better reputation if it didn't featured the character of Dracula in it, since this movie really doesn't feel like a typical Dracula movie at all and its story and atmosphere perhaps called for something totally different, outside of the Dracula universe.
And as often is the case with these late Hammer Dracula movies, Dracula himself is hardly in it at all. It was because Christopher Lee got fed up with the role and was also afraid he was going to get typecast because of it, for the rest of his life. He still needed a paycheck, so he kept on playing the character for a couple of years, under the condition that his role got limited down and in some cases he doesn't even have any lines. In this movie he does still speak however and once more shows why he was such a great and charismatic Dracula at the time.
It's the more slower sort of horror movie, which doesn't really work out that great for the movie at first but about halfway through it picks up some more pace and things start to get far more interesting and original. It's then that the movie suddenly starts to take form and makes its intension clear. It also provides the movie with some really solid horror moments and the movie has a very constant horror like atmosphere to it as well, that really adds to the tension and mystery of the overall movie.
Once you start to realize that this isn't being your average formulaic and simplistic Dracula production, the movie becomes surprisingly good, effective and original to watch!
7/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Three wealthy gentlemen go out during one night of the month for pleasure seeking (supposedly for charity the wives think) and are becoming incredibly bored in what they do in that time, as they think that they've done everything. That's until they meet Lord Courtley (Ralph Bates) who claims he can give them power if they join him in some ritual to recreate his dead master, but first they have to buy a certain item off a shopkeeper to perform this task. So, with the help of Dracula's servant Lord Courtley they meet in a rundown chapel to revive Dracula (Christopher Lee) from his ashes, but they chicken out of fulfilling their end of the bargain and to keep this quiet they kill the servant. Thinking that it will just blow over, but there wrong as now Dracula has been revived through his servants' corpse and he plans to take vengeance on those three for killing his servant.
Decent latter-day hammer effort that has very good production valves and some solid performances on show. The polished Victorian sets standout with sharp detail and great use of shadowy and dim lighting for its Gothic atmosphere. Though, the atmosphere was good it wasn't that grand in stature and it's not terribly suspenseful as we've seen it all before. The overall feel might come across a rather glum, but it has its lively parts and an undertone of pervading sexuality and flesh for some added boost. The compellingly clever plot is well thought out to begin with (great intro) and there are some unpredictable moments, but then it does seem to follow the usual pattern of the earlier Hammer Dracula's and ends rather unconvincingly after it looked like there was going to be an exciting finale. After a promising first half it does kind of drag in parts after the resurrection of Dracula and comes up with an uninspiring romance tale. The script is utter ham and quite stilted. Christopher Lee as Dracula doesn't really get that much too do, but whenever on screen his presence or quick flashes has some hypnotic pull making you wish he had more screen time. Most of the time his sneaking about in the background, counting down his victims in a husky voice (1,2 & 3) and giving orders to others (their children) to do his dirty work. Most of the performances were good (some deadpan) from the likes of Geoffrey Keen, Peter Sallis and John Carson as the three gentlemen and Ralph Bates as Lord Courtley is incredibly over-the-top, but seemed well suited for it. The ladies of the film or you should say Dracula's victims Isla Blair and the ravishing Linda Hayden give fair performances and some added eye-candy. The direction by Peter Sasdy is top-notch in delivery and he adds in some great sequences. The fine camera-work had sprawling crane and ground shots. While not forgetting the look into my eyes camera zooms too. Even the make-up and gore effects (nice flowing rich blood) were pretty well conceived and didn't come across as too wretched. Another highlight of the film would have to be piercing, but also moody music score.
Anyway maybe the formula was starting to wear thin in this film? Well, it does rehash certain elements and the usual clichés follow, but what do you expect from these campy hammer films. Its their trademark and has been a winning formula for them.
A mildly enjoyable hammer film, even if it's by the books.
Decent latter-day hammer effort that has very good production valves and some solid performances on show. The polished Victorian sets standout with sharp detail and great use of shadowy and dim lighting for its Gothic atmosphere. Though, the atmosphere was good it wasn't that grand in stature and it's not terribly suspenseful as we've seen it all before. The overall feel might come across a rather glum, but it has its lively parts and an undertone of pervading sexuality and flesh for some added boost. The compellingly clever plot is well thought out to begin with (great intro) and there are some unpredictable moments, but then it does seem to follow the usual pattern of the earlier Hammer Dracula's and ends rather unconvincingly after it looked like there was going to be an exciting finale. After a promising first half it does kind of drag in parts after the resurrection of Dracula and comes up with an uninspiring romance tale. The script is utter ham and quite stilted. Christopher Lee as Dracula doesn't really get that much too do, but whenever on screen his presence or quick flashes has some hypnotic pull making you wish he had more screen time. Most of the time his sneaking about in the background, counting down his victims in a husky voice (1,2 & 3) and giving orders to others (their children) to do his dirty work. Most of the performances were good (some deadpan) from the likes of Geoffrey Keen, Peter Sallis and John Carson as the three gentlemen and Ralph Bates as Lord Courtley is incredibly over-the-top, but seemed well suited for it. The ladies of the film or you should say Dracula's victims Isla Blair and the ravishing Linda Hayden give fair performances and some added eye-candy. The direction by Peter Sasdy is top-notch in delivery and he adds in some great sequences. The fine camera-work had sprawling crane and ground shots. While not forgetting the look into my eyes camera zooms too. Even the make-up and gore effects (nice flowing rich blood) were pretty well conceived and didn't come across as too wretched. Another highlight of the film would have to be piercing, but also moody music score.
Anyway maybe the formula was starting to wear thin in this film? Well, it does rehash certain elements and the usual clichés follow, but what do you expect from these campy hammer films. Its their trademark and has been a winning formula for them.
A mildly enjoyable hammer film, even if it's by the books.
William Hargood (Geoffrey Keen), Samuel Paxton (Peter Sallis) and Jonathon Secker (John Carson) are respectable gentlemen in the community and they are devoted to charitable work. But they are actually a trio of hypocrites that go to brothels instead of charity. One night, they meet the arrogant Lord Courtley (Ralph Bates) in the brothel and they decide to invite him for a drink. They tell that they have boring lives and are looking for excitement. Courtley promises him pleasure if they make a pact with the devil and asks them to buy some Dracula's belongings from the merchant Weller (Roy Kinnear), including dried blood. They go to a derelict church where Courtley asks them to drink the blood of Dracula. They refuse to drink but Courtley drinks and falls on the ground, and Hargood, Paxton and Secker beat him to death. They leave the church and Courtley's body transforms in Dracula (Christopher Lee) that promises to kill them. Meanwhile Hargood has a friction with his daughter Alice (Linda Hayden) because she is in love with Paxton's son Paul (Anthony Corlan). When she leaves home, Dracula meets her and controls her mind. What will happen to Alice?
"Taste the Blood of Dracula" is another great vampire movie from Hammer. The story is very conventional as usual, with Christopher Lee in the role of Dracula and the vampire afraid of crosses and holy water. The explanation for Dracula's appearance is confused but his revenge using the sons and daughters of the men that killed his servant is dark. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): Not available on DVD or Blu-Ray
Note: On 03 September 2017 I saw this film again.
"Taste the Blood of Dracula" is another great vampire movie from Hammer. The story is very conventional as usual, with Christopher Lee in the role of Dracula and the vampire afraid of crosses and holy water. The explanation for Dracula's appearance is confused but his revenge using the sons and daughters of the men that killed his servant is dark. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): Not available on DVD or Blu-Ray
Note: On 03 September 2017 I saw this film again.
This was the only Dracula/Lee movie that I saw on the huge theater screen and it was pretty cool. My mom would never take me to these things so I had my dad drop me and my friend off, then pick us up later. It was a double feature along with Trog. The theater was not packed, but it had been playing for at least a week. Now some kids are going to rate this lower because they've all seen much bloodier and scarier stuff. No kidding, really????? When this came out it was very good in terms of gore and horror.
My most memorable scene was when the hardened dust broke in half and Dracula's face filled the screen with those red eyes. I just purchased the DVD and it includes some restored footage of the brothel T&A and during each victim's death they look up at the standing figure of Dracula. The first victim's shovel-gashed face was restored on the DVD, the second victim's bloody face and the third victim too. This version was never released in the US. It would have been rated R, instead it was GP (before they called it PG).
I think it's bull for another commenter to say it's obvious that Dracula was never intended to be in this. No, what is obvious is that a certain commenter read some of these movie facts before claiming they "knew all along." Yeah, they were going to have Bates as Dracula, thank god that fell through. Lee was talked into it again. They had to rewrite it to insert Dracula in there, and his presence was awesome though some of his lines were bad. Hmmm, Dracula can count to 3. I'll give this one 7 stars. The DVD quality is spectacular.
My most memorable scene was when the hardened dust broke in half and Dracula's face filled the screen with those red eyes. I just purchased the DVD and it includes some restored footage of the brothel T&A and during each victim's death they look up at the standing figure of Dracula. The first victim's shovel-gashed face was restored on the DVD, the second victim's bloody face and the third victim too. This version was never released in the US. It would have been rated R, instead it was GP (before they called it PG).
I think it's bull for another commenter to say it's obvious that Dracula was never intended to be in this. No, what is obvious is that a certain commenter read some of these movie facts before claiming they "knew all along." Yeah, they were going to have Bates as Dracula, thank god that fell through. Lee was talked into it again. They had to rewrite it to insert Dracula in there, and his presence was awesome though some of his lines were bad. Hmmm, Dracula can count to 3. I'll give this one 7 stars. The DVD quality is spectacular.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe film was originally not going to feature Dracula at all, much like Les Maîtresses de Dracula (1960), due to Christopher Lee becoming increasingly reluctant to reprise the role and the producers not expecting to be able to convince him to do so. Lee's increasing salary demands were also a factor. Ralph Bates would have played the lead. The script was re-written to include Dracula after the producers were finally able to coax Lee back to the role after "Warner-Seven Arts" refused to back this movie without the actor's participation.
- GaffesLucy's front door has a Yale lock.
- Versions alternativesThe UK cinema version was cut by the BBFC to edit blood spurts from the staking of Paxton, a closeup of Dracula's bloodstained teeth and a brief shot of a brothel customer with a topless woman. The 1989 Warner video release featured the heavily edited U.S cinema print which runs around 4 minutes shorter and is missing shots of Dracula's blood becoming powder during the opening scene, the violent beating to death of Courtley, and a snake charmer's dance in the brothel. The 2004 DVD is the original UK cinema version, minus the BBFC cuts which may no longer survive.
- ConnexionsEdited from La déesse des sables (1968)
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
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Taste the Blood of Dracula
- Lieux de tournage
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure 31 minutes
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Une messe pour Dracula (1970) officially released in India in English?
Répondre