Draculax

A very entertaining spoof of Tod Browning's Dracula. I'd recommend this low budget porn film over Paul Morrissey's version. Jamie Gillis does an excellent portrayal of Dracula, giving superb homage to Bela Lugosi, "Children of the night, what music they make". Richard Bulik has Renfield's insane laugh down, "My cries at night, they might disturb Miss Mina." Even the fake flapping bat on a string is perfect. Reggie Nalder plays an excellent Dr. Van Helsing, and the music score, largely classical, is well chosen. Periodically an intercom interjects with odd comments, "Dr. Silver report to room 22 for a lobotomy".

Apparently a few scenes involving urination have been cut, but be prepared for incest scenes between John Leslie and 'sister' Kay Parker, as well as a necrophilia scene with Mike Ranger and the 'undead' Serena. These are all played tongue in cheek, and work well within the context of the film. Seka has a brief, but luminous, appearance. John Holmes, whose acting is limited to his impressive endowment, has two scenes. Annette Haven is lovely as always, Serena is superbly sexy, and John Leslie is the suave lead. Apparently filmed at Scotties Castle in Death Valley. Highly recommended.

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.

Bram Stoker's Dracula has long been considered a tale of repressed eroticism, and horror cinema has frequently exploited this aspect of the classic story to get bums on seats. It was only a matter of time before an enterprising porn director took the sexuality of the vampire to its logical conclusion. Dracula Sucks see the infamous Count going hardcore, no longer satisfied with just biting his victims on the neck. Jamie Gillis takes the titular role, the vampire resurrected by the crazed Renfield (Richard Bulik), who has been admitted to the Seward Sanitarium, a castle-like structure in the middle of a desert (Castle Ranch in California, also the location for Al Adamson's Blood of Dracula's Castle) neighbouring the Count's home of Carfax Abbey. One by one, the staff and patients of the sanitarium fall foul of vampirism, but Dracula has his sights set on one particular person: the lovely Mina (Annette Haven).

Director Phillip Marshak's movie is equal parts horror and sex, one of those rare pornos where a proper story drives the bump and grind. Of course, the acting, direction and production design isn't quite up to Hammer standards, but it's not as terrible as it might have been, the visuals reasonably atmospheric and the cast acquitting themselves surprisingly well even when they're not hard at it. Gillis makes for a very effective Dracula (even though the beard is a little off-putting), delivering his dialogue with relish (yes, even the famous "Children of the night..." line), while Bulik tries his utmost to match Dwight Frye (Renfield in the 1931 Universal version of Dracula) in terms of sheer madness. Comedy relief comes in the form of black taxi driver Jarvis (David Lee Bynum), who mercilessly lampoons the black stereotype of the frightened servant, stuttering and rolling his eyes like crazy after seeing a vampire. The unmistakable Reggie Nalder, who so memorably played the vampire Mr. Barlow in Salem's Lot, is on the side of good in this film, as legendary vampire hunter Dr. Van Helsing (thankfully, he doesn't indulge in any of the sexy shenanigans).

In terms of horror, the action consists of some biting and a staking -- not particularly gory or nasty. The sex scenes are certainly more graphic, although far shorter than one would expect, and frequently bereft of the customary 'money shot'. Paul Thomas, as Jonathan Harker, receives oral from Lucy Webster (Serena); Dr. John Stoker (the legendary John Holmes) sees to a maid on a billiard table (and gets a bite on his member for his trouble); Stoker rapes a blonde nurse (Seka); a taboo-busting scene sees Dr. Arthur Seward (John Leslie) having sex with his sister Sybil (Kay Parker); and Dr. Peter Bradley indulges in necrophilia, making it with Lucy's body in a coffin. Gillis gets his big scene in the final act, where he finally diddles Mina, before being destroyed by the sun's rays (in what is, rather ironically, something of an anti-climax).

N.B. Not to be confused with vampire comedy Love At First Bite (1979), which had the working title of Dracula Sucks, or XXX horror Dracula Exotica (1980), which also stars Jamie Gillis as Count Dracula.

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

Lust at First Bite (1978)

Dracula Sucks (1980)

** (out of 4)

Dracula (Jamie Gillis) tries to find fresh bait at a sanitarium while Dr. Van Helsing (Reggie Nalder) tries to find and destroy him.

This porno spoof of Tod Browning's Dracula was originally made in a 108-minute version but apparently none or at the most a couple theaters got this version. The XXX version was edited down to 82-minutes and released as LUST AT FIRST BITE while a softcore/horror version was released a couple years later as Dracula SUCKS and clocking in at 86-minutes. Which of these two versions you choose to watch will be up to your taste in terms of wanting to see hardcore sex or something closer to Bram Stoker's novel done in a more serious tone.

Both versions are clearly the same movie but whereas in the hardcore version we'll get sex in the softcore instead of that we'll cut to scenes of violence. This often means that Dracula attacks his female victims and quite often just bites their breasts. It's funny because in the hardcore version he's usually doing something else to the breasts if you know what I mean. I think both versions contain some good things but most of the credit has to go to Gillis who is actually pretty good spoofing Bela Lugosi. I thought the actor looked quite natural in the role of Dracula but he's also clearly viewed the Lugosi version because of the speech pattern. I was really surprised to see how well the line delivery was and this is especially true for the "Children of the Night" speech. The supporting players are also pretty good in their roles with Richard Bulik doing a memorable turn as Renfield. The horror version features quite a few scenes that you're not going to see in the hardcore one. For starters, the before mentioned scenes of the breasts either bleeding or squirting blood. It appears that these scenes were shot after the original movie because quite often they feature a jump cut to where we get a quick view of the blood and then it's back to the normal scene. There are also a few other horror elements in this version including Dracula's red glowing eyes and another sequence where he "sees" people in a burning red flame. The hardcore version features a few added scenes with John Holmes that I didn't spot in the softcore version.

The film even has the guts to credit Stoker at the start of the film. Both versions feature some humor thrown in but most of the time it's just wacky dialogue featuring a lot of cussing. It sounds as if this too was added to the film after the production. Even in their shorter running times both versions seem to run way too long at both become rather tiresome as they move along. With that said, I think both versions are still pretty fascinating especially to those who would like to compare them. Who knows how the original version would have ran but I'm going to guess that it was cut down for good reasons.