What makes it different from others?

Just perfect...

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

There is nothing like a Dracula film based on a true story. It seems the British version of the Bilderbergs along with their Proctor & Gamble counter parts are satanic worshipers (something we all suspected because we all got the e-mail). The bad bikers wear animal skin vests. People who are held prisoner at the International House of Satan must have their left sleeve ripped (there are 3, count 'em.) They plan on taking over the world by releasing a deadly yeast infection, worse than the one my wife claimed she had for 10 years. This varmint was exposed to "radioactive neutrons."Only one man is strong enough to combat a Christopher Lee vampire, and that is a Peter Cushing Van Helsing. The film is campy in a modern sense.First off neutrons do not become radioactive. They are radiation. It is like saying "ammo bullets." Secondly, silver bullets made from melting down crosses are for werewolves, not really good vampire stoppers. And thirdly, the P&G thing is a joke. God knows they sued enough people.Parental Guide: No sex or f-bombs. Nudity.

The end of an era: Christopher Lee hangs up his cape in this, his final bow as star of Hammer Films' Dracula series--fitting, since he was unhappy with the direction in which the cycle of movies was heading (and critics at the time agreed with him). In modern-day London, the Secret Service investigates strange goings-on in an isolated manor in the British countryside. When an imprisoned agent escapes the compound with proof that four dignitaries (a government minister, a Novel Prize-winning scientist, a general and a peer in the House of Lords)--as well as a possible fifth person who is camera-shy!--are involved in satanic rituals, occult specialist Professor Van Helsing and his granddaughter are consulted. Van Helsing learns his friend the scientist was ensnared by the cult in order to produce a new strain of bubonic plague--and that his nemesis, Count Dracula, has been revived and is posing as a reclusive land developer with an insidious plan to spread the plague and start a new apocalypse. Hammer's immediate follow-up to the dismal "Dracula A.D. 1972" (featuring the same director, Alan Gibson, and writer, Don Houghton) is a much-improved bloodsucker, dispensing with the Chelsea teenagers and replacing them with assassins on motorcycles and a basement full of nubile vampires. If Lee doesn't have much to do, he still cuts a foreboding presence and gets a bloody good send-off; Peter Cushing again excels as Van Helsing and the supporting cast is solid. Still, this story doesn't bear close scrutiny; once the bacillus is introduced, no one knows quite what to do with it (Van Helsing has a point when he asks if the Count really wants to rule over a world devoid of life), and there are two conspirators in the plot who are unaccounted for at the finale. Stylishly photographed by Brian Probyn and scored by John Cacavas, the film is a flawed but decent addition to the series with several tight action scenes and a great deal of suspense. **1/2 from ****

This is one of the scariest movies ever made. It is the eight part to the Hammer Dracula series. And it is scary then that first seven. It has a great story line. It also has great acting. It also great special effects. This very intense. Dracula is killed by Lawrence Van H.e.l.s.i.n.g in Dracula A.D 1972. He is resurrected and this out for revenge. If this does not scary you then no movie will. I can't believe there are people who do not like this movie. I do not think they are a majority. This is a very intense. The hammer Dracula movies are some of the greatest horror movies ever. Christopher Lee who played the part of Dracula was one of the best actors of his time. Peter C.us.h.i.n.g who plays Van H.e.l.s.i.n.g was also also one of the best actors of his time. Joanna L.u.m.l.e.y who play Jessica Van H.e.l.s.i.n.g is a great actress. Also she was quit pretty when she was a young girl. This movie is a must see.

"Dracula 1972 AD" failed to set the box office ablaze but Hammer wasn't ready to give up on its biggest franchise. Despite the public's disinterest, the studio pushed ahead with another Dracula film set in the modern day. The gamble didn't pay off the second time either. "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" would be the final Dracula film to feature Christopher Lee.Hammer's line of thinking clearly was that the public was sick of Gothic horror. "Satanic Rites" jettisons any trace of classic horror. Instead, the film is concerned with espionage action and conspiracy theories. The British Secret Service is investigating Satanic rituals. One features prominent members of society and claims to be raising people from the dead. The government brings in the modern day Van Helsing as a consultant. Van Helsing, teaming with his granddaughter and Detective Murray, quickly deduces that something sinister is afoot. A scientist, who mysteriously died, is connected to the Satanic circle. This traces back to reclusive millionaire D. D. Denham, who is none other then Count Dracula. Sick of his eternal life, Dracula intends to unleash a plague on the world, bringing upon the apocalypse.There's not much I like about "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" but I'll give the movie one thing. Many of the Hammer Dracula films play fast and loose with continuity. This one is a direct sequel to "Dracula 1972 AD." Peter Cushing plays the same descendant of Van Helsing. He even lives in the same apartment. His granddaughter Jessica, though played by a different actress, is back too, who has matured some in the two years since the last film. Inspector Murray returns as well and is even played by the same guy. The film directly references the end of the last one by pointing out that "D. D. Denham's" business building is built upon the remains of the church where Dracula died last time. About the only plot thread left dangling is how the Count returned to unlife. And even that's easy to address, as a viewer can assume his clan of Satanic followers resurrected him.Disappointingly, the returning characters are the only thing "The Satanic Rites" has in common with "1972 AD." The movie is not heavy on horror content. And what horror is there is totally different from what we expect. The Satanic rituals, which involve cultist in hoods standing in rooms pouring blood on a naked girl, feel totally of the time. Even Drac gets involved, as he lights black candles while a beautiful woman lies on an altar before him. There are other vampires in the movie. Two scenes take place in a basement where vampire maidens pop out of coffins. However, there's no fog, no old castles, no stone walls. Nothing about these scenes feels like a classic Hammer movie. It's not until the very end of the movie, when Cushing and Lee face off for the final time, that this film begins to feel anything like its predecessors. Van Helsing and Dracula have a stern face-off in a burning room before both flee. Walking into the woods, Dracula stumbles into a hawthorn bush, an obscure vampire weakness, allowing Van Helsing to stake the Count with a fencepost. It's a hugely dubious way to take Dracula out but at least it feels in line with the rest of the series.Most of "Satanic Rites" doesn't even feel like a horror film though. The film is obviously beholden to "The Avengers" and Roger Moore's Bond films but on a fraction of the budget. The action in the film is mostly limited to guys in fuzzy, suede vest chasing people on motorcycles. One moments has similarly garbed henchmen shooting sniper rifles at the heroes. Despite these unusual action beats, much of the film's runtime is devoted to old British guys sitting around and talking in rooms. There is so much droll exposition in these scenes or long moments of guys reading, watching, or looking at pictures. It's dull and seriously drags the pacing down.If nothing else, the film has the strength of its performers to fall back on. Peter Cushing is in a lot of the movie, bringing the same level of conviction to the role that he always does. Lee is given more to do then in his last appearance. The vampire count doesn't bite too many beautiful maidens on the neck, save for one scene. Instead, his best moments center on the Count delivering some harsh monologues. Dracula talking about his apocalyptic plans allows Lee to (if you'll excuse the pun) sink his teeth into the hammy dialogue. The final confrontation between the two, where Dracula prepares to bring about the end of the world and Van Helsing stares him down, is easily the best moment of the film. As for the rest of the cast, Michael Coles gets to do some cool stuff as Inspector Murray, staking vampires and throwing some punches. Future comedy superstar Joanna Lumley is less charming then Stephanie Beachum as Jessica and honestly given less to do. It's disappointing that the film reduces the character to a damsel in distress once again.Director Alan Gibson, returning from "Dracula 1972 AD," is less sturdy this time. He employs rough zoom-ins far too many times. The funky score is pretty catchy though. "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" is a real off entry in the series. The pacing lags horribly, the plot isn't that interesting, and the film barely feels like a Dracula movie. The movie wasn't bad enough to kill the franchise, as Dracula would return in the next year's even odder "Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires." However, it was bad enough to finally make Christopher Lee yell enough. The iconic actor has never put the cape on since. He did not exit on a high note.