marshrydrob
Continuing from where Horror of Dracula left off, Dracula Prince of Darkness opens with Vampire hunters aided by monks; transporting a young woman to perform a ceremony of rending her spirit free from vampirism.One mysterious holy man interrupts the process.The mood and setting of the movie is what you would expect from a good classic horror film. A little added humor, is an interesting addition, and aids in the introduction of one of the stories main characters.Road sign markers, suggesting of international locations stand as good attention getters. The score, when used; seems to work well with the story.The signature Hammer Horror sound relating to Dracula, draws easily on the regular attention of the viewer.A driverless coach, bridges this story with the original tale; the team of horses guiding the coach to Dracula's castle.Dracula is resurrected by a ritual of spilling fresh blood upon his ashes, and the vampire rises again.Great gathering of talent, and a good story; make for one of the greatest Dracula stories ever told.
rdoyle29
There's a lot of good you can say about Hammer's first Dracula sequel to actually feature Dracula again. It's great to have Lee back, and although Cushing is absent except in some footage at the beginning culled from "Horror of Dracula", Andrew Keir steps into a similar role in this film, and he's always an asset. On the downside, the plot is not terribly strong. The way in which Dracula is resurrected is fine, but the plot is largely driven by the main characters acting in unbelievably stupid ways. There's some dispute about why Dracula has no dialogue in this film ... Lee claimed he refused to read the terrible dialogue provided, but Jimmy Sangster claimed that no dialogue was ever written for him. Whatever the reason, it's a great move as the silent Dracula in this film seems as his most monstrous and feral.
jacobjohntaylor1
This is a sequel The brides of Dracula. It is one of the scariest movies you will ever see. It has a great story line. It also has a great acting. It also has great special effects. After being killed in the horror of Dracula. A man who has made packet with Dracula to become a vampire resurrects Dracula. This movie is very intense. Dracula has risen from the grave it better. But only by a little bite. This is a very scary movie. Taste the blood of Dracula is also better. But only by a little bite. This one of the scariest movies of all time. Scares of Dracula is better. But only by a little bite. This movie is great. Dracula A.D 1972 is a little better. But only be a little bite. This is a very scary movie.
JasparLamarCrabb
One of the more peculiar incarnations of the Dracula legend has a silent Christopher Lee once again playing the crazed bloodsucker. Two couples, refusing to heed the warning of wily priest Andrew Keir, find themselves in Dracula's Carpathian castle. Mayhem ensues. This classic has it all --- a creepy man-servant, a bloodletting, a bug eating lunatic and Barbara Shelley as a sexy she-vampire. It's all topped off with Lee's astounding work. He has no dialog but commands the screen with his presence. He always played Dracula as a deranged lunatic & it's very effective. Although Lee does not appear until 45 minutes into the film, director Terence Fisher keeps things moving briskly. The supporting cast, particularly Keir, Philip Latham (as Dracula's creepy henchman) and Thorley Walters as the loony Ludwig, is great. Hammer regular James Bernard supplied the suitably grim music score.
AD
