The Worst Film Ever

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Taste the Blood of Dracula is directed by Peter Sasdy and written by Anthony Hinds (AKA: John Elder). Out of Hammer Film it stars Christopher Lee, Geoffrey Keen, Peter Sallis, Linda Hayden, Gwen Watford and Ralph Bates. Music is by James Bernard and cinematography by Arthur Grant.Trawling through all the sequels of Hammer's Frankenstein and Dracula series it becomes apparent that opinions differ greatly, a case in point is this, the fifth of the Dracula cycle. For her we have a Dracula film thought of very highly in some quarters, most notably in one of the Hammer Films' lauded literary bibles, myself, like the other 50% of Hammer film fans, just don't see that at all.Famously it's the Drac film where Christopher Lee had to be greatly coerced into reprising the role of the blood sucking count, financial rewards doth talk it seems. His apprehension with script and stale feelings were well grounded, with the final result begging the question as to how bad was the script before Lee's intervention?Story has three upstanding English gentlemen showing themselves to be model pillars of society by day, good stern parents/husbands and all that, but by night they are purveyors of a different sordid lifestyle, kind of like members of the naughty Hellfire Club! When decadent dandy Lord Courtley (Bates) offers then something tantalisingly more dangerous, they indulge and it results in murder and the rebirth of Count Dracula.After a neat opening which tags onto the ending of Dracula Has Risen from the Grave, we find Dracula once again on a daft revenge mission, being a bit part once again in a film bearing his name, and saddled with minimal lines that really aren't worth a suck of the neck. Some striking sequences apart (Dracula birth - bloody retributions etc) the film feels like a confused blend of ideas. On one hand it's taking a caustic peak behind the curtain of upper crust Victorian England, on the other it tries to be a period based revenger fronted by the iconic beast of the title.Under Sasdy's direction the look has been stripped back from the Gothic colourful splendour of previous Dracula entries, in place is a more earthy approach, which isn't as appealing. Of course there's a so-so romance simmering away, plenty of heaving bosom and blood shot eyes, and Bernard's musical score hangs around like a moody step-father. Which leaves us with a Hammer Dracula that's not bad at all, it's just ordinary and not all it can be, where they shoehorned Dracula into what is in truth a serial killer like revenge picture. 6/10

OK Hammer horror film. Three Victorian gentlemen (through some VERY convoluted circumstances) beat to death a servant (Ralph Bates REALLY chewing the scenery) of Dracula. This somehow revives Dracula (Christopher Lee) who vows vengeance on the men. He either hypnotizes or turns their children into vampires who kill their fathers.Not a bad film. It's handsomely produced and (with the sole exception of Bates) has good acting...but why is Dracula in it? He doesn't pop up until 50 minutes in and is hardly in it thereafter. He seems like a mere afterthought. The movie mostly concentrates on the romance between Alice Hargood (Linda Hayden) and Paul Paxton (Anthony Higgins). Still it's not bad with few bitings and bloody killings. However a bigger role for Lee could have only helped. So it's OK. Try to see the R rated 95 minute version. Avoid the edited 91 minute PG version.

When one walks into a Hammer 'Dracula' film there has to be a realization that the titular monster will be all but reduced to nothing more than a glorified cameo in some areas. I can absolutely see and understand Lee's frustration with the character. Most of the entries in the series feel as though they were written without the Dracula character given concrete reasons to do or say anything. 'Taste the Blood of Dracula' is no exception to this rule. Lee's Dracula is nothing more than a plot piece with stirring dialogue like "The first...". Part of me thinks Hammer should be embarrassed for wasting a talent like Christopher Lee's time. And yet 'Taste the Blood of Dracula' is one of the finest entries in the series. I dare say it's actually better than the 1958 original 'Horror of Dracula'. Why is that? Because even though Dracula is but a caricature, this film is filled with intriguing characters and an inspired plot which although not exploited to it's full potential plays with fresh ideas in a stale Dracula series that often didn't know what it wanted to do. Hammer had many strengths but developing characters was not one of them. If they didn't have talents like Christopher Lee or Peter Cushing in their roles I think the studio would failed to be remembered or endeared as much as it is. Hammer is famous for creating wooden heroes to combat their monsters. 'Taste the Blood of Dracula' does something inspired. It populates it's film not just with the Count and a wooden hero but also a cast of sinners. I get behind this inspired idea immediately. The thought of these old perverts dabbling in Satanism for erotic thrills is one of the most original horror plots of this time period. It plays exactly into Hammer's strengths of not so subtly teasing the juxtaposition of sex and horror. If anything I wish the film fell into the last cycle of Hammer films and had the hardcore exploitation aspects of 'Dracula AD 1972' and 'Satanic Rites'. What draws me to Hammer films are these kind of characters with dark secrets. I think that's why Peter Cushing's Frankenstein is still so endearing. These three old perverts are the perfect critique and parody of the kind of uptight British culture that these Hammer films were so perfect at rebelling against. I love the fact that Lee's Dracula is not the one to kill these creeps but instead Dracula turns their children against them. This is fresh and inspired material that perfectly encapsulates what Hammer was.The cast is damn good too and they turn in fine performances. Lee actually doesn't give the best performance in the film and he usually always does. I absolutely love Ralph Bates and think he is by far the most underrated Hammer performer. I sort of wish I could have seen the film as originally intended with Bates taking over the cloak as Lord Courtley. He has a mad fire and anger to his performance. He pretty blatantly chews the scenery in his black mass scene but it's so damn entertaining and sincere that I really loved it. Geoffrey Keen is also particularly good as William Hargood, the leader of this elderly perverts. He's sly and quiet in his delivery. He really embodies what one thinks a snake looks like. I would have wished he and Dracula had more of a confrontation. Unsurprisingly, our hero Paul and his beau Alice are the least interesting characters and get boring performances as well. Anthony Higgins is likable enough but the material is so boring and he just plays the straight laced hero as cut out as possible with no edge. This Dracula film is one of the better Hammer entries because it actually has the guts to take some risks. I think despite Lee's reservations about the Dracula series being stale and predictable that he can be proud here. This film is a darker and more morbid experience inhabited with the devilish characters Hammer did so well. It is a sufficiently entertaining treat.

It's funny how I really wasn't into this movie at first but still ended up really liking it! Thing that makes this movie a bit unusual and different is that it's being a part of the Hammer studios Dracula series but it really doesn't feel or look like a Hammer movie at all! Director Peter Sasdy did an handful of movies for the Hammer studios but only in its later years and he never impressed with any. He obviously wasn't that accustomed to its approach and style of film-making, or perhaps he simply really preferred to do his own thing. But anyway, if you're really into Hammer films, just prepare yourself for something totally different. You might end up disliking it at first, just as I did but don't give up on it! It's really a worthwhile and original enough little horror movie. I can also honestly say that this was the best movie I had seen, that got directed by Peter Sasdy.The movie and story all first starts out as something very simplistic and formulaic but as the movie goes along, you actually start to realize how great its premise is. It has a premise that really adds to the movie its tension and for once isn't all about Dracula and the horror that he does. It might very well be true that this movie would have a better reputation if it didn't featured the character of Dracula in it, since this movie really doesn't feel like a typical Dracula movie at all and its story and atmosphere perhaps called for something totally different, outside of the Dracula universe.And as often is the case with these late Hammer Dracula movies, Dracula himself is hardly in it at all. It was because Christopher Lee got fed up with the role and was also afraid he was going to get typecast because of it, for the rest of his life. He still needed a paycheck, so he kept on playing the character for a couple of years, under the condition that his role got limited down and in some cases he doesn't even have any lines. In this movie he does still speak however and once more shows why he was such a great and charismatic Dracula at the time.It's the more slower sort of horror movie, which doesn't really work out that great for the movie at first but about halfway through it picks up some more pace and things start to get far more interesting and original. It's then that the movie suddenly starts to take form and makes its intension clear. It also provides the movie with some really solid horror moments and the movie has a very constant horror like atmosphere to it as well, that really adds to the tension and mystery of the overall movie.Once you start to realize that this isn't being your average formulaic and simplistic Dracula production, the movie becomes surprisingly good, effective and original to watch!7/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/