Nice effects though.

hyped garbage

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Grave of the Vampire (1972) *** (out of 4)A young couple leave a party and head to a cemetery where they begin to make out. At the same time Caleb Croft (Michael Pataki) is coming out of his grave. Caleb attacks the couple, killing the man and raping the woman. The woman ends up pregnant and delivers a young child who, you guessed it, needs blood and not milk. Thirty- years later the mom dies but the son, James Eastman (William Smith), goes out looking for his father.John Hayes' GRAVE OF THE VAMPIRE is without question one of the strangest vampire films that you're going to see. The vampire genre delivered countless movies throughout the 1970s and there were some very strange ones ranging from hardcore films like Dracula SUCKS to low-budget weirdos like VAMPIRE HOOKERS. This one here takes its subject very seriously and we've given a bizarre family drama dealing with vampires!Whereas a low-budget often harms films, it actually helps this one because there's no lavish scenes that couldn't be pulled off and instead the director works well with the low-budget and manages to build up an atmosphere that is terrific. The atmosphere of the film is quite wonderful and it's certainly the best thing about the picture. The opening scenes inside the cemetery have fog machines in overdrive and you really do get an eerie sense with the graveyard setting. The second half of the film is quite different but you've still got that atmosphere that leaves you feeling it as the picture moves along.I also thought the story, from David Chase, offers up a lot of twists and turns as far as the vampire myth goes. The film's story isn't a familiar one and I thought the screenplay did a very good job at offer up new ideas as well as a different way to work with the vampires. The performances are another plus and especially with Pataki who is wonderful in the lead role. I thought he managed to be quite menacing as the vampire and he certainly adds to the entertainment. Supporting players were all good as well.GRAVE OF THE VAMPIRE certainly isn't going to be for everyone but fans of the genre will find enough interesting things here to make this worth sitting through, despite Leonard Maltin's BOMB rating.

When a vampire comes out of his grave to find some fresh flesh, the last thing you expect him to look like is a businessman recovering the morning after. "What was that?", the first set if victims ask, as what sounds like a manhole cover being lifted up turns out to be the sound of the lid popping off of a cemetery coffin. Then, while the female is recovering in the hospital, they actually bring up the name of Bela Lugosi in the hint of vampirism. This just gets stranger as minutes going by, involving a phantom fetus that pops out of its mother in a later scene by her mother as if she were taking bread out of a toaster. The film just proceeds to get more bizarre and hideously disgusting, giving me the urge to burn the four film DVD it is on to prevent this from getting into further hands.

None other than David Chase, future creator of 'The Sopranos', is screenwriter of this not bad vampire tale, directed by John Hayes ("Dream No Evil", "End of the World"). Overall it has a good atmosphere going for it, an amusing story that throws a couple of twists into the mix, and the entertaining combo of tough guy William Smith as the hero and fellow B movie veteran Michael Pataki as his nemesis.The movie begins with vampire Caleb Croft (Pataki) crawling out of his grave and attacking two college students. He kills the boy and then goes on to rape the girl! While she is pregnant, the doctor warns her of the nature of her fetus, but she delivers the baby anyway. A few decades later, and the baby grows up to be James Eastman (Smith), who's all too aware of what his father was and vows revenge. He tracks Croft down, and finds him working as a night school professor named Lockwood. Eastman soon has to keep Croft / Lockwood from sinking his teeth into the lady he loves, Anne Arthur (Lyn Peters)."Grave of the Vampire" won't knock schlock movie lovers out of their socks, but it's still reasonably enjoyable. It's one thing to have a vampire character with raping on his mind, but the advertising also makes a big deal out of the fact that James as a baby sucks blood instead of milk, advising the viewer ahead of time that the movie isn't for the faint of heart. "Grave of the Vampire" is actually rather low key throughout, but it comes to life for a decent final fight between father and son. The acting from the principals is passable; Smith is certainly interestingly cast in the lead (he really is at his best when playing various bad guys) and Pataki delivers a decidedly aloof performance as the vampire. Things begin well with the opening credits sequence and the creepy prologue, and there are some fine moments along the way, especially when one unfortunate young woman discovers Croft in her basement. The tone is very serious, and Hayes's direction is efficient all the way to the kind of ending that was prevalent in 1970s cinema. There's no nudity, and use of gore is limited.All in all, this is worth a look for those exploitation and horror fans looking to discover the schlock cinema of yesteryear.Seven out of 10.

This is a very low-budget vampire movie and while it is far from great, at least it does have some original concepts that make it worth a look. First, unlike the 'nice' vampires in most films, the evil Croft is a convicted rapist who loves hurting women. This is, of course, unsavory but was original. Also original is his raping a young lady early in the film--and she subsequently gives birth to a hybrid human/vampire. This is a bit like the Marvel character, Blade, which appeared about the same time as this movie, though it's different enough that I doubt either influenced the other. Also, vampires in the film don't always bit their victims to drink but sometimes rip open their victims--something you see in some other vampire films but not the Dracula variety.Croft is a man who was supposedly accidentally killed, but instead runs about killing and molesting ladies instead of staying in his grace. His bastard son (William Smith) has made it his life's work to find and destroy his biological father--but determining who Croft is isn't that easy. And, along the way, Smith meets some interesting ladies--one who WANTS to be bitten and one whose English accent comes and goes with the wind--betraying bad acting and direction (isn't it the director's job to spot mistakes like this?!).Overall, the film has MANY lulls and the script could have used a re-write. But, considering how quickly and economically the film was made and how it is STILL watchable. Don't expect brilliance but it's still a lot better than the modern spate of whiny and gothy vampires!