SCARS OF DRACULA!

[RCMerchant]

SCARS of DRACULA(Hammer!970)I LOVE this movie.Of all Christopher Lee's Dracula films,this one is tops for me.And the main reason is...Chris Lee.He gets alot more screen time.When he welcomes people into his home...he KNOWS he's going to kill them...and he goes through the perfunctunary motions of civility...ask him a question-no real answer-he don't care about you-he's just setting you up...to die.The sexy vampire women,the church massacre...all unforgettable.Patrick Troughton as Lee's tortured minion is great. When i first saw this in the early 70's at the Strand in Paw Paw MI. at the tender age of 9, I freaked. Lee is so evil and scary in this movie-climbing walls,swatting everyone like flies in his way.HORROR of DRACULA was just a setup...aaa(though it has beautiful photography) and in my eyes was more of a Peter Cushing vehicle. I saw it for the first time about 10 years ago,and it just does'nt stand up to it's rep.I guess it's because there was a lot of setup to establish the charecters and story before you get down to the nitty gritty...which is Chris Lee.Lugosi is creepy and stylish as Dracula.But Lee is a savage scary SOB. My favorite Chris Lee film...SCARS    of DRACULA!

[The Burgomaster]

I'm a big fan of the Hammer Dracula and Frankenstein movies starring Lee and/or Cushing.  I have all of them on DVD except for DRACULA: PRINCE OF DARNESS, which, for some reason, is not available.  SCARS OF DRACULA is one of the more violent movies in the series.  But it has those damned fake, stupid looking bats in it.  If Hammer had just spent a little more of the budget on bats . . .

[peter johnson]

See, I find the Rubber Bats of Hammer -- which would be a great name for a band -- to be part of the charm of these things --
    See also Brides of Dracula for really awful rubber bats on strings!  To my eyes, it doesn't detract from the film, it just underscores the "otherworldliness" of it all --
     And I can't find a single thing to fault about RC's rhapsodising over our Chris here -- hell, I could've written this myself -- and I won't criticise the view that Horror Of is more of a Cushing vehicle -- nothing wrong with that, and a unique viewpoint/hadn't thought of it that way before --
     What I DO still have trouble with is finding Horror Of to be -- in RC's words -- "boring" --
NO!  I own a lot of Hammer, and that one, with the soon-to-be patented Hammer Neon Red blood, is a doozy -- the acting is fine and it simply has THE BEST DEATH of all the other Hammerdracs:  That crumbling to dust at the very end -- Now THAT's horror!!
     Hey, I like your case for Scars here a lot, but I'll never desert Horror Of --
     Heck, I even like The Satanic Rites Of, which nobody else seems to enjoy -- I think the portrayal of Dracula as wishing death for himself -- as well as the whole world -- is a grand solipcism in the tradition of Wagner & other operatic/mythological worldviews.  So what if the effects are crappy -- ALL the Hammerdracs and Hammer Frankensteins have at least SOMETHING to recommend them to you --

peter johnson/denny crane

[RCMerchant]

I agree totally on the death scene inHORROR....I usta own an old MARVEL Monsters of the Movies mag which had a step by step photo  layout of the death scene,and it IS THEE ultimate Chris Lee Dracula death.

[RCMerchant]

While were on the subject of Hammer films that nobody seems to like ,I also love FRANKENSTIEN and the MONSTER from HELL,which I just bought on DVD about a week ago.Good God,this is a truly evil perfomance by Peter Cushing! Whatta cold basterd he is in this one.GREAT!

[peter johnson]

Cushing very like Karloff in this respect:
Everyone knew him as such a gentleman offscreen, that that fact tends to overshadow the genuinely nasty characters he was called upon to play onscreen.
Yes, his Dr. Frankensteins are cold, nasty, self-centered, and not a little looney.  You start to giggle at them, but after a bit you're going "Hey!  What a $*%&^ this guy is!" --
peter johnson/denny crane

[Scott]

These three Hammer Dracula films always confused me because I can't seem to tell them apart. When I think of these films I can hardly recall anything except a few scenes and then I don't know which movie that I'm remembering. Which is the better of the three and what makes them distinct from each other?

1) DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE
2) TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA
3) SCARS OF DRACULA

[RCMerchant]

I get TASTE and RISEN messed up too.AD 1972 is easy,being set in...well...1972!

[peter johnson]

Out of the 3 you list, Scott, I'd have to say they all have their unique charms --
The Common Wisdom is that the first one "Horror Of . . ." was the "best", and that the franchise went downhill from there -- I don't think this is so --
As I've said before, I'm even a fan of "The Satanic Rites of Dracula", the last one in the series, and the last with both Cushing and Lee together again -- Most reviewers find this the weakest/worst one of the bunch -- Not me!!
But then I'm crazy that way . . .
peter johnson/denny crane

[Scott]

I really like HORROR OF DRACULA, DRACULA 1972, BRIDES OF DRACULA, and even SATANIC RITES OF DRACULA. The other three I just have trouble remembering which film was which after seeing each of them. Some day maybe I'll view them again.