Dracula: Prince of Darkness

1966 "DEAD for Ten Years DRACULA, Prince of Darkness, LIVES AGAIN!"
Dracula: Prince of Darkness
6.6| 1h30m| en| More Info
Released: 09 January 1966 Released
Producted By: Seven Arts Productions
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Whilst vacationing in the Carpathian Mountain, two couples stumble across the remains of Count Dracula's castle. The Count's trusted servant kills one of the men, suspending the body over the Count's ashes so that the blood drips from the corpse and saturates the blackened remains. The ritual is completed, the Count revived and his attentions focus on the dead man's wife who is to become his partner; devoted to an existence of depravity and evil.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Seven Arts Productions

Trailers & Images

Reviews

rdoyle29 There's a lot of good you can say about Hammer's first Dracula sequel to actually feature Dracula again. It's great to have Lee back, and although Cushing is absent except in some footage at the beginning culled from "Horror of Dracula", Andrew Keir steps into a similar role in this film, and he's always an asset. On the downside, the plot is not terribly strong. The way in which Dracula is resurrected is fine, but the plot is largely driven by the main characters acting in unbelievably stupid ways. There's some dispute about why Dracula has no dialogue in this film ... Lee claimed he refused to read the terrible dialogue provided, but Jimmy Sangster claimed that no dialogue was ever written for him. Whatever the reason, it's a great move as the silent Dracula in this film seems as his most monstrous and feral.
classicsoncall The story takes a while to set things up but once the guests arrive at Castle Dracula, things take a quick and nasty turn. I thought the revival of Count Dracula (Christopher Lee) was quite creatively done, brought forth from his own ashes and mingled with the blood from the slit throat of Alan Kent (Charles Tingwell). You know, it's probably a good thing that the principals in these movies never take the advice of the one rational member of their entourage. Had everyone just listened to Alan's wife Helen (Barbara Shelley), things would have been okay but then we wouldn't have had a story.Most of the typical Dracula myth elements are provided here like the fear of a crucifix and the curse of daylight, but I was really scratching my head over the moving water business; I'd never heard of that one before. I guess if one wants to get technical, the moat around Castle Dracula wouldn't have been flowing water, but that's probably just being picky. Who wants to see Dracula flame out in daylight at the end of every picture?Hammer Films did a pretty good job with this installment of their Dracula franchise. I didn't really think about it till the end of the story, but Christopher Lee didn't speak at all in the picture, relying more on that nasty hiss as his calling card. He had that one great scene when his eyes popped while waking up in his coffin, and there was a great shot of his billowing cape down in the courtyard of the castle. Considering he had a ten year dirt nap waiting for his time to come around again, it might have been a good idea for Klove (Philip Latham) to pick up a bottle of Murine during one of his trips into town.
Rocketeer_Raccoon Dracula: Prince of Darkness is the second Hammer Dracula film to star legendary actor Christopher Lee as the iconic Dracula, although The Brides Of Dracula was the first sequel to Hammer's 'Dracula' (a.k.a. 'Horror Of Dracula') but since that film only had Peter Cushing reprising as Doctor Van Helsing and completely lacked the character of Dracula, Dracula: Prince of Darkness is the first direct sequel to feature the famous vampire in the Hammer Dracula series.Unfortunately it didn't quite turn out the way it should have, the biggest major fault with this film is that Dracula doesn't actually say anything apart from hissing, supposedly this was because Christopher Lee hated the dialogue in the film's script so he refused to say any of it and Hammer had no choice but to just go with it. But never the less when Dracula does finally appear at the half way point of the film, he pretty much steals the show. Acting wise I thought it was fine for 1960's standards and the movie has some real nice practical effects.Granted that the film could have been better if Dracula actually talked but with that said it's still a decent classic.
JasparLamarCrabb 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.