Smoreni Zmaj 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 with5/10

jonathanwoollard 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.

DarthVoorhees With a title like 'Blacula' one goes into the film with certain expectations of exploitation and tongue in cheekiness. Viewers might actually be surprised to find a film that is actually very faithful to the vampire mythology and a title character who has a great deal of dignity and pathos. 'Blacula' has it's moments of exploitation for exploitation's sake but at it's heart this is an interesting take on the vampire myth with a compelling lead character played by the exceptionally charismatic William Marshall.Don't let my introduction scare you too much 'Blacula' still is a B movie with B movie quirks. Sometimes these quirks work to it's advantage. The soundtrack is exceptional and yet so stereotypical that it could really fit any movie made at this time. The vampire make-up and special effects showcase the low budget and yet it actually adds character and nuance simply because the film is so sincere. The problems come when we see some of the side characters, particularly the gay interior designers in the beginning of the film who are played for all the cheap laughs their stereotypical characterization can milk. I think this was inappropriate even for the times. It's just cheap titillation, getting a reaction for the sake of one. Fortunately although 'Blacula' has moments of cheap B movie exploitation in other regards none of them come in dealing with our main character.This film is so fortunate in having William Marshall in the title role. He elevates the whole thing to another level. He is so charismatic and that deep baritone voice has such resonance and power. I would have found it hard not to like him even if the film didn't give offer anything interesting with his character. It does however. The back story and character arch for this vampire are very in tune with the best of vampire stories. 'Blacula' is a lot more complex and tragic than a great deal of vampires. With a title like 'Blacula' one would expect this film to play up all the rape aspects of vampirism. 'Blacula' actually goes back to Stoker and shows vampirism as a curse. Nowhere is this point driven more home than in Marshall's performance. There comes a moment in the end of the film where Mamuwalde curses the vampire hunters for destroying his bride. I don't think Lugosi or Lee could have delivered the material better than Marshall.Occasionally these A.I.P pictures were able to honor the old Gothic horror films while still being hip and edgy. 'Blacula' is a prime example. The funkiness is to be enjoyed for it's camp value but vampire and horror lovers will not snicker as much as they thought they might. 'Blacula' has bite.

gwnightscream William Marshall, Vonetta McGee, Thalmus Rasulala, Denise Nicholas and Charles Macaulay star in this 1972 horror film based on Bram Stoker's character, "Dracula." This begins in 1780 where we meet Count Dracula (Macaulay) who has dinner with African Prince, Mamuwalde and his wife, Luva (McGee). After a disagreement, Dracula decides to turn Mamuwalde into a vampire like him calling him, Blacula. We move to present day L.A. where Blacula awakes and starts feeding on victims. He also meets a young woman, Tina (Also played by McGee) who resembles his late wife and tries to make her his bride. The late, Rasulala (Mom and Dad Save the World) plays Tina's brother-in-law, Gordon Thomas, a doctor who investigates the mysterious killings that eventually lead him to Blacula and Nicholas plays Tina's sister, Michelle. This is a good 70's vampire flick with a bit of humor, The late, Marshall was great in it and he & McGee had good chemistry. I recommend this.