User reviews

...from the standards of Blaxploitation movies of the time. The movie itself is more comical than scary (which is why I love it), but William Marshall brought a sense of dignity to his role of Mamawalde. In fact, it was his idea to change the main character from a jive-talking Black vampire to a tormented former king with a rich and tragic past. In the end, you actually feel sorry for him. This is an underrated film that is much better than it's avertizements would suggest. Though it may not be the best vampire/horror flick in the world, and it takes liberty with historical facts (a slave trade in Transylvania?!) it does contain a rather touching love story. With that being said, I have to admit that this movie also contains some of the most hilarious dialogue I've heard in a monster movie.

"Hey, man, that's a baaad cape!"

"A bat! A BAT! A GIANT BAAAT!!"

"Hey, where's that big dude with the cape?......AAAAH!"

"Suddeny I find your Congnac to be as...distasteful as your manner!"

And a load of others that, for censorship reasons, I probably cannot repeat here.

I recommend this movie to anyone who wants to have a spooky, retro good time.

"Blacula" - can there be a title that would sound more promising for fans of 70s cult-material? And cult-stuff this is indeed! While "Blacula" of 1970 is certainly no highlight of 70s blaxploitation cinema, this is about as entertaining as it gets for lovers of cult-cinema, and an absolute must-see for all the blaxploitation enthusiast's out there. Plot and suspense are secondary, of course. This film is pure style and coolness, which is delivered in a highly entertaining manner.

In 1780, the African Prince Mamuwalde (William Marshall) is on a visit at Count Dracula's castle in Transsylvania with his wife Luva (Vonetta McGee). Mamuwalde, who wants to put an end to slave trade, falls on deaf ears with the evil Count who supports slavery. After a subsequent argument, Dracula bites Mamuwalde, turning him into a vampire, and locks him in a coffin for eternity. Almost two centuries later, a black/white couple of (very) gay interior decorators buy several pieces of furniture from Dracula's castle, including the coffin in which Mamuwalde was locked. Back in the United states, they open the coffin, releasing Mamuwalde, who has become a vampire... Blacula! And he subsequently runs into the beautiful Tina (also Vonetta McGee) who is the spitting image of his wife...

I did not expect extreme suspense, but what i was (a bit) disappointed with was the lack of gore. Whenever Blacula bites someone, I thought to myself that the whole thing wold be quite a bite cooler if he'd rip little pieces of flesh out (or do something else of the kind). The make-up is very cool, however. The atmosphere is generally very cool and typical for the funky 70s. William Marshall fits perfectly in the role of Blacula, and so does Thalmus Rasulala, who plays the hero character as a super-cool Shaft-style forensic specialist. For me personally, however, the absolute highlight is the sexy Vonetta McGee. I've been a fan of Vonetta McGee since I first saw her in Sergio Corbucci's Italian Western masterpiece "The Great Silence" of 1968 (one of my all-time favorite movies), and she sure is amazing here. Denise Nicholas is equally sexy as her sister. The movie is as sleaze-less as it is non-gory, however, so don't expect the amount of sex and nudity that you're probably used to from blaxploitation cinema. All things considered I have only one regret with "Blacula" - it should have been nastier! With more sex and violence, this could have been a great blaxploitation flick, but it is sadly too mild for my tastes. It is still a classic, however, and the funky soundtrack and super-cool 70s style make it even more enjoyable. Highly recommended to all the fans of blaxploitation and cult-cinema out there!

I didn't see Blacula until 2006, 34 years after it was made, and I found it very entertaining. The lead actor, William Marshall, is really something special and gives the role some authenticity. So if you've made it this far without seeing Blacula, I would recommend it even more.

Blacula is portrayed as a somewhat sympathetic character, which I like. Blacula was an African prince in his previous, non-vampire life, who unfortunately travels to Transylvania. There, he attempts to win support from Count Dracula to end the international slave trade. Dracula is not exactly helpful, needless to say.

William Marshall is well-cast as a vampire. Charming and debonair one moment, he can turn nasty pretty fast. Marshall is a good actor whose performance here raises what could have been mediocre schlock horror into a pretty good movie.

A must-see for horror fans and recommended for just about everybody else too. 7/10

It seems that a lot of people dislike this film due to weak contextual restraints. Superficical gripes towards the actors' fashions or the homosexual lampooning in the film are myopic at best. This film came out in 1972- before Halloween, before Star Wars, and before the postmodern scare irony of the Scream franchise. It also seems that people do not take into account that this film is from the Black filmic canon, which is important to note when comparing it to other horror films.

Blacula was an early entry into the non-action field of 70's Black film. Forays in different directions were rare and notable entries few and far between. However, in the Black horror subgenre, Blacula is probably the most notable. It's a straight up vampire story with some well-conceived twists. The intro depiction of Mamuwalde as an African prince contesting slavery makes for a solid grounding and entry into the modern day. And then it's clear that AIP spent more than usual to grace this film just by the opening credits. The outstanding montage, with a considerable Saul Bass influence, are striking and instantly memorable. So too is the score, provided by Barry White collaborator Gene Page and his brother. The Hues Corporation contribute what could be one of their best songs, "There He Is Again", alongside 2 others. The act even sings them live in the movie to the characters ala "Superfly".

The superb acting and sturdy plot cannot be glossed over. The classically trained William Marshall proves a genteel, suave yet emotional main character. Vonetta McGee is graceful as the beauty easily swayed into Mamuwalde's charms. And staple actor Thalamus Rasulala's strength and authority are in full impact here as the skeptical doctor on the case. The plot might not break too many horror conventions, but it doesn't have to- who would have imagined a Black vampire story in 1962, just 10 years earlier? The love theme in the story provides excellent character development, something that many genre screenwriters skimp on.

A great film for the 70's and still a worthwhile viewing. Avoid the sequel, where Pam Grier is the only attraction.

When you consider the fact that this movie was saddled with a low budget, a title that--while certainly apropos--is essentially a punch line, and all the constraints that low budget-dom entail... this is a pretty good movie. William Marshall is very good (the 'this will be your tomb' line is delivered as convincinly as any Chris Lee utterance) and was certainly worthy of the role of Bl(Dr)acula. The era of the film provides its own fun. 7/10. The sequel is better on all counts: more scary, campy, funny, visually interesting and sexy.

The blaxploitation genre is now 40 years old, and many films that were big hits back in the day come off as dated and hokey. This one stands up fairly well, despite a limited budget and formula story, thanks to the strong central presence of the deep voiced and dignified William Marshall, plus a good supporting cast that included Denise Nicolas and Vonetta McGee. Plus, the production values are actually quite decent for a low budget, quickly shot movie, thanks to effective use of shadow- filled urban settings that create good nightmare landscapes. A chance meeting with Dracula turns an African prince (Marshall) into a bloodsucker and a further series of plot contrivances release him into modern (or at least modern for 1970) California. Marshall is a reluctant bloodsucker, however, horrified at what he has become and yet powerless to resist his vampiric thirst. Plus, even in the 20th century, vampires are still hunted, just as they must hunt to survive. Again, Marshall's strong presence as an actor saves the more overtly silly aspects of the movie from getting out of hand. Indeed, he is the most interesting and magnetic presence in the film despite being, in essence, the killer. This presents an unusual dilemma to the audience: should we root for the killer or the less compelling types who want him dead? Watch and enjoy, and then try to put that deep resonating voice of Marshall's out of your head. It lingers.

If you take this film very seriously, you'll no doubt hate it and turn it off after a few minutes. However, if you have an open mind and are willing to just accept the cheesy aspects of this movie without criticism, then you'll probably find that beneath its silly plot is a moderately interesting horror film/blaxploitation film. My wife thinks I am crazy to have watched it several times (as well as the sequel, SCREAM BLACULA SCREAM), but I think it's a silly little trip back to the 70s and a welcome relief from many movies that take themselves way too seriously.

The sad thing about these two movies is that William Marshall was a really good actor with a beautiful voice--it's a shame he didn't get more starring opportunities in Hollywood other than this, an episode of Star Trek and a few other odd jobs.

1780: African prince Mamuwalde (William Marshall) and his wife Luva (Vonetta McGee) visit Count Dracula to enlist his help in the fight against slavery. When Dracula reveals that he is not only in favour of slavery, but wants to buy lovely Luva for himself, Mamuwalde and his wife try to leave but are restrained by the Count's men. Enraged, the vampire bites Mamuwalde, and locks him in a coffin, entombing Blacula (as Dracula names him) and Luva in a crypt.

Present day: two hilariously camp antiques dealers buy the contents of Dracula's castle, including the coffin containing Blacula, and ship it to Los Angeles, where they break off the padlock securing the casket. Released from his prison, Blacula sates his thirst with the two antiques dealers, before heading for the streets of L.A. where he encounters Tina, the reincarnation of his beloved wife, who he proceeds to woo whenever he's not biting necks. Meanwhile, scientific investigator Gordon Thomas (Thalmus Rasulala) comes to believe that the spate of recent deaths are the work of a vampire and tries to convince the police of what is happening.

The first example of Blaxploitation horror, Blacula succeeds in being both scary and silly, with a side order of camp. Marshall plays his role surprisingly straight, but the general atmosphere is one of lightheartedness, the film even taking time out for a couple of funky musical interludes courtesy of The Hues Corporation (who would later top the charts with their disco hit 'Rock The Boat'). Notable fun frights include the exhumation of a victim who leaps from his grave to attack Gordon, and the creepy return from the dead of a female vampire taxi driver. Also adding to the enjoyment are the stylish opening credits, some cool animated transitions to bat form, the sight of Blacula's hairy face in full on vamp mode, and a touching ending as Blacula ends his own life after losing his love once again.

Although I believe that "The Thing With Two Heads" with Rosey Grier came out first, it was "Blacula" that fully meshed horror with blaxploitation. As a stand alone vampire movie, the best thing about it is William Marshall's strong performance as the title character and the lovely Vonetta McGee, one of the more popular starlets in the blaxploitation genre. In terms of transplanting a Gothic style monster in a contemporary setting, it is less awkward than Hammer's "Dracula A.D." but not as good as "Count Yorga, Vampire".

Nevertheless, "Blacula" was a hit and this led to a small wave of average to truly bad horror films featuring black casts including "Abby", "J.D.'s Revenge", a sequel to Blacula and the wonderfully awful "Blackenstein".

You would be hard pressed to find a decade that had a greater variety (but not necessarily quality or quantity) of horror films than 70's and "Blacula" is an example of a movie that came from the same decade that gave horror fans "The Exorcist", "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Alien".

At the end of the 18th century, the African prince comes to Europe to negotiate the abolition of slavery. After receiving, he remains a guest at the Count Dracula's castle, who kills his wife and turns him into a vampire. Two centuries later, in Los Angeles, he encounters a girl he believes is the incarnation of his wife. The story is quite original, full of interesting details and well-told, but everything else in the movie is cheap (budget $ 500,000), lousy and unconvincing. There is a lot of idling and a good part of the movie we watch club performances of the soul band "The Hues Corporation." The film was, at least to me, mostly boring, and it does not deserve more than four, but for the quality story I will honor it with

5/10

At the time of Blacula's release, studios such as American International and Hammer were pumping out cheap horror flicks for an ever-thirsting legion of young fans (myself included). At the same time, blaxploitation films were also making big bank . . . so why not combine the two genres? It was pure marketing genius, backed by some of the biggest box office of 1972. The great Shakespearean actor William Marshall (Dr. Daystrom to you original Star Trek fans) plays the tormented African prince magnificently; asleep for 200 years, he awakes to find an African-American culture riddled with blaxploitation cliches. It's bad enough such a dignified man has the hunger -- he also has to deal with these people in giant heels and 'fros. The juxtaposition works as a statement about what slavery did to African culture, but is never overtly mentioned. . .after all, this is a horror flick too! Extra points for a musical appearance by The Hughes Corporation (before their big hit, "Rock the Boat") and a fine supporting performance by Denise Nicholas, a wonderful actress who should have had a bigger career. More silly than scary, Blacula endures as a unique film and pop-culture time capsule worth seeing.

Blacula is a film that bridges the gap between Blaxploitation and the classic horrors films of the early 1940s. The film is centered around an 18th century African prince who after being bitten by Count Dracula is cursed to live with being a vampire in the 1970s Los Angeles. William Marshall stars as the titular character Blacula, also known as Prince Mamuwalde. The movie also stars Denise Nicholas as Michelle, Vonetta McGee as Tina/Luva (Blacula's love interests), Thalmus Rasulala as Dr. Gordon Thomas, and Gordon Pinsent as Lieutenant Jack Peters. The film is directed by William Crane, serving as the second and most notable movie in his filmography.

The story of the film is cut and dry, however it serves as a sharp contradiction to the stereotypical portrayals of the Dracula character. Mamuwalde is the film's protagonist. He is a noble man served a cold fate. In contrast to the traditional depictions of Dracula, Mamuwalde is not a villain. Rather, he's an innocent man burdened by the trauma displaced on him by a colonial Dracula. His goal is to reunite with his wife and live in peace. However, external factors force his hands to act against his better judgment. The brightest spot of Blacula is the dialogue writing. Each character is clever and dynamic. The titular character is written the best. Often it feels unnatural for Mamuwalde to be the "monster." Additionally, Dr. Gordan Thomas is written to be very intelligent. The character's "no nonsense" attitude balances the wackiness of the film's heavy Blaxploitation elements. Much of the film's depth comes from Mamuwalde and Dr. Gordon Thomas. The film successfully builds toward a conflict between both parties. Neither are "antagonists," rather each are fighting for the security of their loved ones. Narratively, the film is far from horror. The horror and gore serve as a "action" to the Blaxploitation tropes, as well as the drama-esque tone. Blacula is an amalgamation of genres. At times, the genre-bending works. Other times, it does not work. Largely, the film has an identity crisis.

The acting is relatively average. The cast's chemistry ranges from solid to awkward. Scenes where Mamuwalde joins Tina, Michelle, and Dr. Thomas are typically awkward. However, scenes where each character spends time one-on-one showcases the group's allure. The side characters of the film add humor and depth. Background characters such as Sam, Skillet, Bobby, Billy, Juanita, and Nancy lend support to the main cast of characters. Each background character adds a different emotional element toward the film's central plot. Additionally, each actor lends believability to their character. Portrayals are not ground breaking. The acting is not a masterwork. However, it is simple and effective nonetheless.

The cinematography is average. At times, the film suffers from choppiness and amateur editing. Tension building is well crafted. The scenes with horror elements are technically the film's best moments. The film's makeup and costume design ranges from great to terrible. The makeup used from Black actors works well, whereas their white counterparts suffer from looking too green/gray. Blacula does not excel in the realm of cinematography, however there are engaging moments in the film.

Overall, Blacula is an average Blaxploitation flick that adds to the horror genre in terms of the representation of Black culture. However, it is an combination of genres that does not entirely work. The film is guided by dynamic characters and solid dialogue, while simultaneous lacking from a technical standpoint. It is an undead contradiction that is cursed with an identity crisis.

Yeah, I know, it sounds ridiculous. There is, however, quite a lot beneath the hilarious surface of "Blacula." This is a unique take on the vampire legend. It is the first Dracula film I have seen in which the lead vampire is driven by rage, not by lust or blood lust. Blacula is a tragic figure, a man who is angry about his condition. One could even view this film as a microchosm of race and civil rights issues in the seventies. Yes, I know, that's pushing it. Oh, well, even if you don't go in for the sociological aspects of Blaxploitation horror, check this movie out. It's funny and campy--a great party movie. Also, believe it or not, there is a film called "Blackenstein" though I have been unable to find a cop

"Blacula" can be seen either as the next step in the evolution of the blaxploitation genre or perhaps the first instance of soul cinema jumping the shark. Just one year earlier the world was greeted with the "official" start of the genre in the historic Melvin Van Peebles helmed, consonant stealing Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song. The same year gave the gift of Shaft and suddenly a large black man was whippin' whitey at every turn, with lower and lower budgets. These films were all relatively similar, but had they yet involved vampires!? Now then…

"Blacula" began the trend of simply inserting black characters into formerly white stories. This can seem like a cheap cash-in effort to yank excess funds out of black audiences looking for something to identify with in the 70's, and perhaps this is true, but when imbued with enough zeal on the part of the cast and crew, the product can become a truly entertaining pulp riff. In essence there is no excuse for a film with an incredible title such as "Blacula" to be anything other than vapid parody, but there is something endearing about this one, and it is mainly due to the exceptional and restrained performance of William Marshall as the title character. He could easily have devolved into a chaotic jive talking Lugosi doppelganger, but instead imparts wisdom and reverence this lonesome beast. There is always an air of dignity surrounding him that keeps the audience interested. Director William Crain knows when the material becomes absurd enough to spring an insane slow-mo-scream-sprint or some hardcore funk sounds during a chase, but is level headed enough to keep the tone generally serious. This is all the more admirable when one sees the total lack of a budget for this film. It is guerilla film-making in every sense, where a casket in front of a curtain becomes a respectable funeral home and Blacula's climactic chase is through some random chemical plant. Somehow even Elisha Cooke shows up (a long way from Kubrick and Huston, eh?) as an incompetent mortuary doctor, only to be mocked by the brother man. This is a film that manages to have fun with an insane premise without ever going falling off the cliff into a pool of overly self aware silliness.

(Note: This is a film that can only be fully enjoyed when witnessed in beat to hell 35mm glory. If you are lucky enough to find a screening of such, as this humble reviewer was, move mountains if you must to see it.)

I'm not (yet) an expert in the field of blaxploitation-cinema but, being a huge horror fan, I was particularly interested in the "black" interpretations of classic horror tales. "Blacula" is supposed to be a lot better than the other ones (like "Blackenstein", "Dr. Black and Mr. Hyde" and "Abby"), but still this film couldn't really fascinate me. The pre-credits opening sequence is terrific and hugely atmospheric, as it involves a flashback set in Transylvania during the year 1780, where the black prince Mamuwalde and his adorable fiancée Luva visit Count Dracula's castle, hoping he'll support them in their quest to end slavery. Unfortunately for them, Dracula is a big supporter of slave trade and the dinner party ends in horror. Mamuwalde is eternally cursed with Dracula's bite and doomed to sleep in a coffin for the next two centuries. The script lowers in quality as soon as the action is transferred to Los Angeles; present day. Two extremely gay interior decorators purchase the relics of Dracula's ancient castle and resurrect Blacula from his coffin. Instead of running amok in the crime-infested ghettos and/or using his newly gained vampire-talents to continue fighting the white man's tyranny, Blacula just acts like a pitiful romanticist and stalks the gorgeous Tina, who he considers to be the reincarnation of his lost fiancée Luva. Perhaps the plot leans much closer to Bram Stoker's original novel, but I assumed these Blaxploitation-films are all about bad-ass brothers, groovy action and sheer 70's camp? The sequences in the local morgue, where Blacula's victims return to life as vampire slaves, are mildly suspenseful and creepy, but Blacula himself is a colorless (pun intended) anti-hero with no menacing charisma whatsoever. The make-up effects are ingenious and groovy, though. Whenever his thirst for blood becomes unbearable, not only does Blacula's teeth grow pointy and longer, also his sideburns and eyebrows grow to enormous proportions! And, as to be expected, the scenes in the nightclub perfectly capture the ambiance of the early 70's, with groovy music, flamboyant clothes and sympathetic black guys who just join your drinking table for no specific reason. "Blacula" is worth seeing for its occasionally humorous dialogs and vivid portrayal of the 70's, but you certainly shouldn't expect a nail-biting horror gem.

Among the films of the Seventies that were classified as black exploitation Blacula still has quite the cult following. No doubt due to William Marshall's voice and commanding presence in the title role. Marshall outside of the two Blacula films is best known for an appearance on Star Trek as Doctor Dengstrom who invents a super computer. Had he come along a little later Marshall would have been giving James Earl Jones stiff competition for the roles Jones got.

Marshall plays an African prince who comes over with his wife Vonetta McGee and is entertained by the famous Count Dracula. Marshall is on a mission to stop the African slave trade, but Charles Macauley who plays the infamous count defends the institution and then he and his vampire minions attack the visiting prince and make him a vampire in a sealed coffin with McGee locked in a sealed tomb.

Two centuries go by and a pair of gay and flamboyant antique dealers buy the contents of Dracula's castle and unloose Marshall on 20th century Los Angeles. Marshall is one hungry vampire and after 200 years of no feeding.

Worst of all he spots Vonetta McGee who is a reincarnated version of his bride. Worse for Marshall she's the sister of Denise Nicholas who is the wife of his Van Helsing Thalmus Rasulala.

My reaction to the two stereotypical gay guys was at first to be offended. But on further reflection these two stereotypes and all represent a hopeful future.

Blacula follows along the lines of the Dracula legend with all the characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses of the vampire. In the end one of those weaknesses bring his demise about, but not after he wreaks havoc in Los Angeles.

And the film is quite a picture of seventies culture, especially black culture. The voice of Marshall, simply marvelous.

A movie with a funny racist name that does not really treat the character differently from any other colored character. The movie starts with a cliché thunderclap and castle, where we are introduced to the infamous count Dracula himself and the soon to be blacula. The opening quickly establishes an initial set up and a good first impression of our main character. While the count provides us with the racism expected from the title. The fight scenes – if one can call them that – have poor choreography and are an embarrassment but taking the release date of this film in account (1972) could be considered nostalgic. Almost all the supporting vampires have zero to none acting ability or are overacting on purpose. The music is horrible in creating any kind of suspense but succeeds in other scene's when cutting to African groovy street music. Not 5 min in the movie, we have our first title drop after the count dooms Mamuwalde (Blacula) to his fate. The movie then cuts to what I personally found the most awkward opening ever. After which a flash forward to 150 years later follows. The first scene goes 180° in regards to the opening, where we see a mixed gay couple making the unfortunate purchase of blacula in his coffin and shipping said coffin to Los Angeles where the entire movie takes place. While at first thinking that the title might have been misleading and the movie would be about progress: being open to people of color and partner choices. This presumption is however quickly stomped back in the ground when the above mentioned couple is later multiple times referred to as the 'faggots'. Throughout the movie we have a black main cast with a supportive white cast including generic stormtrooper like cops. The only 2 fleshed out characters are blacula and his nemesis the doctor. Blacula is a funny poetic bitch slapping vampire and the doctor is a smart badass. The movie does a good job keeping the vampire mythos classic with the only missing element being garlic but this would have solved the vampire problem too easy. What was supposed to be a monster movie turns out to be a love tragedy about our beloved blacula missing his deceased wife but having no problems choosing the first black woman he sees as a substitute. The substitute in question is Tina, a character who is very fast love struck by the smooth count to a point of going against her friends. Another remark is that blacula is very OK with being in the future and adapts really well. Without any spoilers the movie is a better love story than twilight but the ending could have been handled much better. Overall the movie isn't bad, passing is good even though it feels like it's missing something. The current rating of 5.6/10 at IMDb fits this movie well. Recommend watching this with friends and/or alcohol.

Given the cheesy title, any viewer would go into "Blacula" expecting a laughable blaxploitation flick. But in fact, not only is "Blacula" well-made, it ranks as one of the best vampire films of all time.

"Blacula" certainly doesn't age very well; the music, clothes, and Afros alone drive a stake into the movie's hip status! But the movie is a lot of fun to watch. William Marshall is a great vampire, with a suave deep voice and quite a brooding presence on screen. He definitely challenges Christopher Lee as most memorable screen vampire. Vonetta McGee and Denise Nicholas provide screams and a love interest and both became very popular in the blaxploitation film industry. I loved them both!!! Everyone else in the cast does a rather good job; one noteworthy bit part is Ketty Lester as the cabbie Juanita Jones. She is great and is only on-screen (alive, that is) for a few minutes! She, too, would continue in a prosperous blaxploitation career!

The Hues Corporation ("Rock the Boat") provide some pretty good music in a club; their three songs and the "Blacula" theme song are good excuses for buying the soundtrack CD! Overall, "Blacula" does deliver the goods. It's got some nice campy parts (jive talk, the forementioned Afros and fashions), but is also filled with hair-raising scare scenes (Juanita Jones attacking the undertaker Elisha Cook, Jr., the warehouse filled with vampires). The ending is certainly a surprise and finishes off a great moviegoing experience. Skip "Blackenstein" and get this, it is certainly worth any horror fan/psychotronic fan's money!

P.S., The term "Blaxploitation" does not mean the exploitation of black actors/actresses, it means advertising schemes exploiting the fact that black people are in the films to lure black moviegoers into the theatres!

William Marshall (remember him as Dr. Daystrom from original Trek's "The Ultimate Computer") is the best part of this movie. He handles the role with a dignity and power that is ill-served by a character named "Blacula" which grows enormously absurd (or absurdly enormous) sideburns whenever the bloodlust overtakes him. He also adds depth to what is basically a vampiric romance that most other actors would have looked silly trying to pull off.

The rest of the movie is basic blackploitation, however. Making Blacula an old-style vampire in the real "hip" world doesn't work well - he just looks goofy. Again, Marshall _just_ manages to pull this off through sheer screen presence. But there's no sense that they're trying to update the genre (as later movies such as Fright Night and Lost Boys tried and succeeded). Instead, they just put all the old vampire cliches in a more update (for 1972) setting in toto, and that's about it.

So watch this movie if you want to see an excellent performance by the lead, but otherwise I wouldn't bother.