jacobjohntaylor1 This is one of the scariest movies of all time. It about a vampire who great grand son if Dracula. He not a wear of it. Till the day becomes a vampire. If this movie does not scary you no movie will. This is one of the better Dracula sequels. This movie is a must see. It has great acting. It also has a great story line. It also has great special effects. 4.8 is just underrating it. It is no 4.8. It is a 10. I mean that. This is one of the best horror movies of all time. I can not imagine why any one would not like it. It is a true horror classic. You should see this movie. It is a great movie. You need to see this awesome movie. It is so scary.

scott88-4 First off, I'm a HUGE fan of Mr. Lewis and have enjoyed many of his films over the years (2000 Maniacs, Blood Feast, Gruesome Twosome, She Devils On Wheels, Colour Me Blood Red, etc). Admittedly, I enjoy low budget schlockfests and B-movies. I am able to somehow find the good in even the worst exploitation films.However, while I loved and still love Lewis' 1960s gore films, "Taste of Blood" is EASILY the weakest effort in the Lewis horror library. The acting is truly laughable, the plot inane, and the trademark Lewis gore is tame and bland. Vampire Stone is a dork and in the end, goes down in a pitiful display that would make Chris Lee red with rage.If you are a new fan to Herschell Gordon, steer clear of this film until you've seen his "classics" ("2000 Maniacs" a must see). This is a very weak entry, and one that made even this die-hard Lewis freak wince........not in a "good" way.

gweegweeisgood PRobably HG's most ambitious project even more so than 200 maniacs, and I really loved it. It is very talky but unlike other HG and exploitation flicks the acting from bill rogers and willy kerwin is quite good and makes you care about the characters and what they have to say. Since its an HG flick we have some gore but its not one of his intensive gore flicks. There is a great scenes where the vampire stone takes a nice chunk out of a stripper dancer. I do have to point out however that almost all of HG Lewis flicks have a certain style to them to make you know its an HG Lewis flick. There's the out of focus closeups, lingering gore scenes, but there is also these horrendous day-for-night shots. This movie is no exception to that as the last 20 minutes feature some of the worst day-for-night shots ever filmed. Bad movie lovers and exploitation fans should be very pleased.

cultfilmfan A Taste Of Blood, is about a businessman named John Stone, who one day receives a package in the mail. In the package are two bottles of brandy and the letter that comes with it says he is a great relative of a rather famous family. John, starts to drink the brandy and soon his wife Helene, notices how much he has changed. He is very cold and distant from her and he sleeps all day and works only at nights. John, soon travels to London where the package came from and learns that he is a descendant of Count Dracula, the vampire and now he is going to kill off everybody who tried to or is related to somebody who tried to kill Count Dracula. Meanwhile back home a man named Dr. Howard Helsing, visits Helene and her friend Dr. Hank Tyson, and tells them that Helene is in great danger and he is too because John wants to kill him too because his ancestor killed Dracula. Not believing at first soon Hank follows Howard, because he notices changes in Helene and does not want to see any more people dead. A Taste Of Blood, is directed by cult filmmaker Herschell Gordon Lewis, who is known as "The Godfather Of Gore" for giving us such films as Blood Feast, 2000 Maniacs, Color Me Blood Red and The Gruesome Twosome. I have seen many of Herschell's films (and have liked them all) but A Taste Of Blood, is different than his usual horror films. One reason is because there is hardly any gore in this film at all. There is maybe three scenes with some very light blood so gore fans might have to look elsewhere for some of his regular gore. Also most of Herschell's films are under 90 minutes running time and this one is 118 minutes, just two minutes short of two hours. The film is well done but it is quite slow moving and doesn't have the same camp value as Herschell's other films and plays more like a straight faced horror film. It is very slow moving but at the same time I was interested in the film and wanted to see how it would carry out. It is not my favorite Herschell film but I still liked it and die hard fans of Herschell will probably like it as well if they don't mind the slowness of the film or it's no violence.