Martin Bradley "Dracula" (aka "The Horror of Dracula") was one of the first Hammer films to really make an impact and to this day it remains the best of the series, keeping reasonably close to Bram Stoker's original novel. It was also the film that turned Christopher Lee into a star; it was obvious he was born to play Dracula, something he continued to do in several 'sequels' of varying quality. It also made a star of Peter Cushing, excellent as Van Helsing, though Cushing was already a very well-known supporting player in Britain. It was also beautifully designed and photographed by that fine and underrated cinematographer Jack Asher and unlike many subsequent 'monster' movies from the studio this one still has the ability to give you the shivers, thanks again to Lee's superb performance and special effects of an unusually high quality.

GManfred Someone here recorded it, so I thought, 'what the heck'. This was a big surprise, as it was good! Ordinarily I would have passed on it, having seen other films like it which were junk movies, pure and simple. But the main role went to Peter Cushing playing Helsing, the vampire slayer (I borrowed that from a current popular entity), and I can report that neither he nor Christopher Lee overacted or hammed it up as they did in other over-the-top horror films. The story moved along, the color was natural and the plot was (almost) plausible, never descending into vaudeville. Good supporting acting and a thoroughly refreshing dip into the horror genre make this one worth recommending.

Eric Stevenson I guess I'm not the biggest Dracula fan out there, but I still appreciate all the many movie versions out there. This is one of my favorites, although it is hard to tell if I liked this more than the classic Bela Lugosi version. I guess my problem with that was that it was too anti-climatic. This, on the other hand, has a lot more action, but it unfortunately doesn't have nearly as much Dracula. Off the top of my head, I guess I'd probably say this version is better. It's mostly because of the side characters.I was seriously not expecting Dracula's bride to die so soon. I wasn't expecting her to try to attack Jonathan Parker either. I was confused because Van Helsing was advertised as being featured prominently, but it turns out Parker was just a decoy protagonist. Peter Cushing does a great job and I really do love the atmosphere of this movie. About half of it is devoted to a hunt for Dracula. I am sad that Christopher Lee wasn't on screen more! It still creates a powerful story with intelligent conversations and a good set up with the mythology of such a classic character. ***1/2

christopher-underwood With a copy of Peveril Publishing's wondrous, Hammer Dracula Scrapbook by Wayne Kinsey in my possession, the time seemed right to watch this much loved movie after a gap of many years. Having been encouraged to watch the early classic horrors by my father I subsequently spent the classic Hammer years watching European cinema and only returned to the genre with giallo. Watching this beautifully shot movie today is a strange experience. No, of course it is not as violent and bloody or sexy as it would be if shot today but I was still impressed by the way the film unfolded and proceeded with just enough blood and guts, plus vivid storyline to hold the attention. Others have criticised Michael Gough's performance and it is certainly very much lacking for me. Carol Marsh as his fiancé is OK whilst in bed but overacts once she's up and running. Christopher Lee is fine but it is Peter Cushing who really holds this together. Him and the assured direction and magnificent set design which make almost every scene a delight. It is restrained, even with the recently discovered and most illuminating extra footage. With this extra material and the evidence contained in the aforementioned book, it is clear that the makers were struggling against a draconian set of censors to make a horror film that was horrific.