simeon_flake Well, Dracula usually had a servant in these films, no matter what & I can't quite remember if they usually crossed him, but the one here does- -or tries to anyway. This time, Hammer tries what may have been there first twist on the old themes--having the Count destroyed by fire. Of course, nothing ever holds him down forever, does it.Aside from the fiery climax, there is the twist of Dracula controlling bats and having them do some of his dirty work. Nice scenes of the bats destroying the villagers and that one scene near the end where the heroine's crucifix gets removed. The usual stalwart performances from all involved--and now that I think about it, another Bride of Dracula who gets destroyed by the master (nice work).The usual good Hammer entertainment....

utgard14 One of the more ho-hum entries in the Hammer Dracula series, but still worth a look for fans. The special effects are hokey as all-get-out, the continuity with the prior film isn't there, and Christopher Lee seems bored most of the time. Patrick Troughton is good as the wild-eyed bushy-haired Klove, Dracula's servant. Also, this one uses a lot of elements from the Bram Stoker novel, which is interesting considering it took them six movies to do that. Overall, there are some ridiculous scenes but it's fun for what it is. I disagree with those who claim this is the worst of the series. Satanic Rites and the kung-fu one are much worse.

classicsoncall I'm by no means an authority on vampire lore, but it seems to me a plain old cross shouldn't send Count Dracula (Christopher Lee) into a tizzy the way it does here when he's about to put the bite on poor gal Sarah (Jenny Hanley). I thought it had to be an actual crucifix with the image of Christ on the Cross. Oh, and another thing, it seemed to me that the cross that Sarah shows the Priest (Michael Gwynn) at the frontier inn was a bit smaller than the one Dracula experienced when he went for that mouthful. Oh well, no big deal I guess.I get a kick out of the reviewers on this board who make their claim that this is either the best or the worst of the Hammer/Lee Dracula flicks. I don't know, this one seemed pretty good to me as far as it goes, with Christopher Lee exuding absolute evil as the famed vampire. He takes quite a few victims in this story, some by himself and even more by way of that bat roaming around the countryside. In terms of visuals, I thought this one offered quite a few gruesome victims, like those at the desecrated church and the loyal but disaffected assistant Klove (Patrick Troughton). Man, the scars on his back looked quite nasty, but almost tame by comparison to victim Paul (Christopher Matthews), who's impersonation of a slab of beef was downright hideous.But it wasn't all horror. This might be the best Hammer flick when it comes to featuring women's cleavage in a prominent role. You had Julie (Wendy Hamilton) at the inn and Tania (Anouska Hempel) at the Count's castle, but Sarah had the most interesting camera angles making it a bit difficult to concentrate on the story. Maybe the cinematographer just couldn't help himself.Back to my earlier comment on vampire lore. I was a little surprised at the finale when Dracula got taken out by a bolt of lightning to the iron spike he was wielding, thereby going out in a blaze of vampire glory. While all the time Sarah's beau (Dennis Waterman) was trying to figure out a way to defeat the Count. When all was said and done, it actually looked pretty simple, Simon.

LeonLouisRicci Opinions Vary Wildly on this Ongoing Series Followup. It Straddles the Fine Line between Camp and Sadistic Bloodletting.The Poor "Bat". This Nocturnal Mammal is Easy Fodder for Ridicule in Pre-Modern Horror Films. Was there ever a Good or Respectable Rendition on Screen. Usually Seen as just what They are. Rubber, Awkward Props on a Wire. This is probably "Scars" Weakest element, and for Toppers, there are many Scenes with Dracula's Totem Dominion Displayed throughout.This is Hammer's most Gruesome and Gory of the "Dracula" Movies, one of the Things that puts the Film on its Supporters Side, and the "Bats" Carnage is Substantial. The Church Aftermath is Chilling.Chris Lee has a lot more to Say in Comparison to some of the others, so that is a Plus. The Budget for this one was Slashed and it Shows in Spots. Dracula's Subordinate and Whipping Post, "Living" with Him in the Castle, along with a "Bride", is Integral to the Plot and is Touchingly Portrayed by Patrick Troughton.Overall, if You Like Your Hammer "Draculas" with Plenty of the Red Stuff, and Cleavage Galore, You will Accentuate the Positive with this one. But if You have No Tolerance for Rubber Bats, Not So Much.No Matter the Divide among Outspoken Viewers, if it's a Hammer Movie, it's Worth a Watch. This one Rides the New Violence like No Other Hammer Film Before, for Better or Worse.