VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,6/10
11.519
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Dracula è resuscitato, depredando quattro ignari visitatori del suo castello.Dracula è resuscitato, depredando quattro ignari visitatori del suo castello.Dracula è resuscitato, depredando quattro ignari visitatori del suo castello.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Charles 'Bud' Tingwell
- Alan
- (as Charles Tingwell)
Peter Cushing
- Doctor Van Helsing
- (filmato d'archivio)
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Alistair Dick
- Monk
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Lee Fenton
- Monk
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
George Holdcroft
- Monk
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
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.
Watching it again as I write this, I'm reminded of the numbers of us that flocked to see this and other Hammer offerings in the '60's. It was a preferred film type then, and until Roger Corman introduced psychedelia to the genre it was all comfortably predictable.
Remember, we had all heard of Aleister Crowley (a real satanist of recent times, supposedly), and were all reading Denis Wheatley (The Devil Rides Out, etc). So Hammer obliged and provided the visuals, with surprisingly lush colour and good enough effects.
The "chaps" were all exemplary gentlemen, and it's difficult to imagine how you can traipse around deepest Romania/Transylvania in broken-down horse drawn carriages and keep the crease in trousers / not get plastered in mud. Someone else mentioned that Hammer's "vampire" women always looked better than the real thing, but I have to disagree - the older woman of the foursome group looks extremely good to me (when not stressed and screaming).
It's all good fun, and entertainment for the masses - who responded favourably.
The genre has been revamped time and time again, since Nosferatu, and for the collector this one would have to be in it for completion. Add "Bram Stoker's Dracula" and "Shadow of the Vampire" to the already mentioned Nosferatu and you'd have the Transylvania style covered.
Mind you it's metamorphosed again with the likes of Twilight, with another cult following. Didn't have CGI back in the '60's!.
Remember, we had all heard of Aleister Crowley (a real satanist of recent times, supposedly), and were all reading Denis Wheatley (The Devil Rides Out, etc). So Hammer obliged and provided the visuals, with surprisingly lush colour and good enough effects.
The "chaps" were all exemplary gentlemen, and it's difficult to imagine how you can traipse around deepest Romania/Transylvania in broken-down horse drawn carriages and keep the crease in trousers / not get plastered in mud. Someone else mentioned that Hammer's "vampire" women always looked better than the real thing, but I have to disagree - the older woman of the foursome group looks extremely good to me (when not stressed and screaming).
It's all good fun, and entertainment for the masses - who responded favourably.
The genre has been revamped time and time again, since Nosferatu, and for the collector this one would have to be in it for completion. Add "Bram Stoker's Dracula" and "Shadow of the Vampire" to the already mentioned Nosferatu and you'd have the Transylvania style covered.
Mind you it's metamorphosed again with the likes of Twilight, with another cult following. Didn't have CGI back in the '60's!.
(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: Prince Of Darkness' isn't technically the sequel to Hammer's 'Dracula' (a.k.a. 'Horror Of Dracula'), 'The Brides Of Dracula' is, but considering Dracula didn't even appear in the latter, this in my opinion is the REAL sequel. I actually enjoyed it a little bit more than 'Dracula' and it's one of the very best entries in the whole series, if not THE best. Dracula doesn't put in an appearance until about half way through the movie, but he's worth waiting for. Christopher Lee gives his most memorable performance as Dracula, which incidentally has no dialogue whatsoever. It's a great piece of acting, and Lee is an extremely underrated performer. Apart from Christopher Lee the rest of the cast is also first rate. Andrew "Professor Quatermass" Keir almost steals the movie as the unconventional Father Sandor, and the four English travellers who find themselves the guests of Dracula are Barbara Shelley, Francis Matthews, Suzan Farmer and veteran Aussie actor Bud Tingwell. All but the latter are familiar faces to Hammer fans. Shelley co-starred with Keir in the excellent 'Quatermass and the Pit" and she, Matthews and Farmer appeared with Christopher Lee in the wonderful 'Rasputin: The Mad Monk' released the same year as this movie. Pop culture obsessives will also remember that Francis Matthews voiced Captain Scarlet in the cult Gerry and Sylvia Anderson puppet show 'Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons' (a show that Bud Tingwell was also involved with). 'Dracula: Prince Of Darkness' is yet another wonderfully entertaining horror movie from Hammer studios. I suggest watching 'Dracula' and then following directly with 'Dracula: Prince Of Darkness' for a fantastic vampire double bill that is pretty hard to beat! Long live Christopher Lee!
The plot is simple; four travelers are abandoned by their coach driver near an old castle. Mysteriously, another horse-drawn buggy arrives with no rider. Of course, they decide to take it and move on but the horses are set on taking them to the castle, which I thought was pretty cool. When they arrive, they find they were expected, a table set for four. Out comes Klove, the creepy caretaker, who informs them that the deceased owner's wish was that the castle stay open for travelers. They decide to take advantage of this
and the story takes horrific turns from there. The resurrection of Dracula was a very good scene and the ending was a rather original twist on the vampire mythos but I enjoyed it just because of that. This was the first film in which I had seen the great Christopher Lee play the role of Dracula and everybody was right; he's perfect as the bloodsucker
and he doesn't even utter a word in this one. His tall build, strong face, and piercing eyes are more than enough to inspire his character. Andrew Keir as Father Sandor, a Van Helsing type role, was also of note. All in all, this Hammer production mixes in a bit of blood, some terror, and a whole lot of classic atmosphere to make for one classy, enjoyable horror flick.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizIn 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.
- BlooperDiana 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.
- Citazioni
Alan Kent: You forget about all of this in the morning, you'll see.
Helen Kent: There'll be no morning for us.
- Versioni alternativeThe 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.
- ConnessioniEdited from Dracula il vampiro (1958)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Dracula: Prince of Darkness
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 100.000 £ (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 30 minuti
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti