Must See Movie...

Don't Believe the Hype

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Direct sequel of "Horror of Dracula" from 1958. abounds in clichés in story that switches from predictable to already seen and back. Also it has serious lack of suspension and horror atmosphere. Though, if I didn't see all Dracula movies to date, this one would probably leave better impression, because it brings some completely new moments. At one hand, coachman leaving passengers in the middle of nowhere because he's afraid to go near the castle during the night is scene everyone know by heart, at the other hand, passengers that steal a coach to continue their journey, and then realize they can not control horses that run straight to the castle is pretty much original approach. Scenes in tavern, table made for them when they arrive in castle, their luggage waiting in made rooms, scenes with Dracula and his helpers, clichés ragged long time ago. And then great scene of chase and completely original and unexpected way to defeat Prince of Darkness. Movie is full of unconvincing scenes with counterweight in fantastic Barbara Shelley, whose beauty and acting are, in my opinion, highlights of this feature. I really like Christopher Lee, but to me he's ridiculous in this role. Few times during the movie I was thinking about giving up on it, and yet I'm very glad I did not miss awesome ending.I have really mixed impressions. Anyway, it's surely better than its prequel from 1958.6/10

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.

I thought the first Christopher Lee Dracula movie ("Horror of Dracula") was fine, so I thought I would take a look at the first follow up. Though other IMDb user commenters have found the movie to be good to great, I thought it was somewhat disappointing. If you are looking for a lot of Dracula here, forget it. After opening with a lengthy flashback to the previous film, we don't see Lee again until more than half the movie has passed. And not only does Lee make a few short and sporadic appearances in the latter half of the movie, he has absolutely no dialogue. I guess the movie isn't terrible - it doesn't have any dull spots, the production values are fine, and the acting by the cast is decent. Still, you'll get the sense that a lot of potential was wasted by the filmmakers.

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.