Draculax

I first saw this in the early 90s on a vhs. I will never forget the rental shop's name n the incident surrounding the film's title. Growing up in the 80s n 90s was pure fun. I picked up the vhs thinking it to be a horror film but when i sat with my bunch of pals n started the vhs on the player, we all were laughing our guts out. One fella even suggested that the name shud hav been Dracula fucks n not sucks. Revisited the 94 mins version recently on a fast forward mode aft reading Ba_Harrison's review of this one. There is nothing horror bah this film apart from the comedic bite on the dick, tits n pussy. Here prof. Helsing played by Reggie Nalder (later he gets to play the vampire in Salem's Lot) looks more like a great grandpop due to the disfiguring burns on his face.

Recently saw the 74 mins version for the first time known as Lust at First Bite on a fast forward mode. It has more hardcore n lengthier sex scenes n that too with copious amt of close up shots n does gets gross at times. This version is nothing but pure xxx stuff and without the bites of the vampires. This version starts with the sex scene from the original version's ending scene where Dracula is performing cunnilingus n sex in his cave. The endings r different though.

This flick came out way before the VHS rage and is still unavailable on any format. You can try to track it down on VHS but even then you will have some care to take to find an excellent copy. Why? If you just look at the names of the actors than you know enough, Jamie Gillis (Dracula), Anette Haven (Mena) and Selena (Lucy) are all well known for their performances in porn flicks and that's exactly what Dracula Sucks is.

But Dracula Sucks do had it's problems. Before going to the theaters it was released as a 108 minutes Dracula spoof. But that version never made it and it was cut down to 82 minutes. Most XXX theaters showed this version under the name Love At First Bite. It was later that it was re-edited to a version without the XXX scene's as Dracula Sucks (87 minutes). So both versions are interesting because combined you will see the whole movie as it was in his 108 minute version.

Made in a period were porn was the big thing it do had a story. It is loosely based on the story of Bram Stoker's Dracula. The opening credits of Dracula Sucks even mentioned his name. Seen both versions the Dracula Sucks story is easier to follow. LAFB jumps from one scene to another but the opening sequence says enough, we see Dracula go lickety-split. The XXX scene's are a bit tame for the time it was made. There are almost no pussies shown, just one in a lesbian scene. It's funny to see the difference in one notorious scene. Lucy is going for a pee and Dracula appears. In the DS version he just bites her breast but in the LAFB version he also bites her breast but before that he gives her his love juice all over her face. And the human juices do flow everywhere. The effects used are simply done with lighting of editing effects but the flying bat is really Ed Wood style.

Also notable is the way they made use of the lighting. It do has his creepy moments and when Dracula bites it's really like Bela Lugosi is talking. It isn't a roughie like Forced Entry or a brutal porn like Waterpower. As I said it before, for being made in the era of roughies it's rather tame but still watchable, there's a scene of necrophilia in it and an incest scene.

And just for the 70's porn lovers, Seka (Nurse Betty) has a small performance and went further to the classic Ultraflesh (1980) as Ultraflesh as did Serena as the Blond Fleshette. She also just performed as Lorelei in The Abduction of Lorelei (1977) but was credited as Jenn Gillian. Jamie Gillis died in 2010 and was seen in his last flick made Die You Zombie Bastards (2005) as Stavros. Maybe he was one of the best known porn actors even playing in a full soda-masochistic gay porn not performing but still. He also was seen in Ultraflesh as Sugarman and had a small cameo in Nighthawks (1981), yes the Stallone flick.

Overall, worth mentioning if you can track it down. To find an official release you have to search the VHS copy. Not a classic but with classic porn actors. There's acting in it but not Oscar worthy. A must have.

Gore 0,5/5 Nudity 5/5 Effects 0/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5

Having seen the full, 95 minute version of "Dracula Sucks," I was impressed by the professional job they did here. Yes it is a sex film, but you will be surprised to see just how faithful this flick is to Bram Stoker's book. And while there is some comic elements to be found, it doesn't go overboard in that department. Of course the best thing about the film is Jamie Gillis and his very good portrayal of the Count. With his black hair and chalk white skin and piercing eyes, Gillis was the perfect choice to play the part. And there is no doubt that this hardcore film performer had genuine acting skills. He could have easily crossed over into mainstream film. John Holmes turns up in a minor role as a doctor who is changed into a bloodsucker after being bitten on the penis by a female vampire. That probably had something to do with the fact that Holmes' penis is larger than some people's necks. In this sexualized retelling (of an already very sexually erotic tale), the Count must mix his semen with the blood of his victim in order to change them into the living dead. Apparently urine works too, as Dracula is shown urinating on one victim, depending on which version you see. Jamie Gillis was known to be an adventurous performer and no strange fetish was off the table for him. Basically following the Bram Stoker tale from start to finish, this one is on par with some of the Hammer productions of Dracula filmed throughout the 70's. This is a very entertaining movie for adult audiences with a sense of humor, and who have higher standards than what most Adult films offer. Of the genre, "Dracula Sucks" is among the best..

Basically it's all you could expect from a hardcore porn flick, meaning that there are lots of sexual acts are performed in this movie. Yet this movie offers still something extra as well.

Thing I can really appreciate about this movie is how professionally it got done. The movie almost gets approached like a 'normal' and more serious movie, meaning that it has some good camera-work and some great settings and costumes. It's an erotic take on the Dracula story, that's definitely not original or anything groundbreaking within its genre but the film-makers still did a good job at making it a quality production, with lots of time and effort put into it, which eventually all pays off for the movie in the end.

A great touch as well was the addition of some comedy. Lets face it, the movie porn industry often takes itself far too serious, while this movie seems to realize all too well that what they are doing is quite ridicules and nothing that would win them any awards, so they decided simply to have some fun with it. It really makes this movie quite an entertaining one.

It even makes you forget that the movie itself is far from a well constructed or told one. The movie does try to feature a sort of story in it but basically all there is to this movie, is the one sex scene after the other. It doesn't ever really makes much sense but than again, I wasn't looking for this movie to make sense, so I wasn't bothered that much by it. Besides, it's entertainment value compensates a lot and truly ensures that this is a good watch throughout.

Seriously, normally these type of movies start to annoy me after a while, also since it too often starts to repeat itself over and over again. I really didn't had this problem with this movie at all. It was divers enough with its settings and characters and besides also had some of the best use of classical music I have ever seen in a porn production (What a compliment to give!).

And it's definitely a '70's genre flick alright, featuring some of the typical '70's stars. So expect lots of facial hair and hair at other places. Also the dubbing during all of the sex scenes are present in this movie but again, it doesn't take itself too serious and you'll probably get a couple of, intentional, laughs out of it.

It was also awesome to see Reggie Nalder in this. This old guy had a real special look to him, with burn scars all around his mouth and a thick Hungarian accent, which made him perfect for the horror genre. I had seen this guy before in several other more serious horror flicks and at one point in his career he even starred in a Hitchcock movie. No idea how he got mixed up into this movie but I'm sure he still had lots of fun with it. And don't worry, he doesn't star in any of the sex sequences, that would had been just too creepy!

For its genre this is simply a more than good movie!

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Excellent spoof of Dracula/1931. Jamie Gillis is great as Dracula and there is a non-credited actor in the role of Prof. Abraham Van Helsing who is a dead ringer for Edward Van Sloan in the original.

Serena, as Lucy Weston and Annette Haven, as the virginal lead are perfect. I think this was shot on location at Scottie's Castle, in Death Valley.