Dracula, principe delle tenebre

(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.

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.

There is a cult in this world that are die-hard fans of Hammer films and "Dracula: Prince of Darkness" is another one to whet your appetite. Hammer Studios made their reputation in the horror film genre and all the films have a cetain look that is their trademark. The sets are rather lavish, it always seems to be winter and Christopher Lee or Peter Cushing are lurking around somewhere.

This film, missing Mr. Cushing, is probably one of the best of the "series". The charismatic Mr. Lee, however, does not utter a word and has fairly limited screen time which may dismay some fans. But he is still menacing and still biting necks with abandon. The story centers more around the 4 travelers and the priest (very well played by Andrew Keir). As usual, the innocents in the film stay at a castle which they have been warned to avoid by half the population of Transylvania. And then they pay the price. One scene worth mentioning, which is a little more gory than most in films of the 1960's is the discovery of Charles Tingwell, hanging upside down like a side of beef in the basement. You might jump at little at that point. But generally the film pretty much sticks to the Hammer formula.

So, if you are a Hammer fan, this one's for you. If you are not a Hammer fan, don't think for a moment that the story resembles Bram Stokers "Dracula"........well, maybe the fly eating Thorley Walters, modeled on the Renfield character from the book. Howevwer, it is a satisfying entry in the Hammer oeuvre and worth a watch.

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 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.