Search
Search results
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) created a poll
Jul 18, 2019 (Updated Jul 22, 2019)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966) in Movies
Nov 10, 2020
King Not Prince
Dracula: Prince of Darkness- is a slowburn film. It takes it time to build of Dracula and once Dracula shows than it really gets started. Christopher Lee isnt in this movie very much even though he is Dracula himself, but once he is one screen, he stills the show.
The plot: Four English travellers arrive at a tiny hamlet in the Carpathian Mountains and ignore warnings from the locals not to travel to Carlsbad, the domain of Count Dracula. A dark, driverless carriage arrives to take them to the sinister castle, but they discover too late that they have been lured there to provide the blood which will allow Dracula to rise from the grave once more.
Dracula does not speak in the film, save for a few hisses. According to Christopher Lee: "I didn't speak in that picture. The reason was very simple. I read the script and saw the dialogue! I said to Hammer, if you think I'm going to say any of these lines, you're very much mistaken.
Screenwriter Jimmy Sangster disputed that account in his memoir Inside Hammer, writing that "Vampires don't chat. So I didn't write him any dialogue. Christopher Lee has claimed that he refused to speak the lines he was given...So you can take your pick as to why Christopher Lee didn't have any dialogue in the picture. Or you can take my word for it. I didn't write any.
The film was made back to back with Rasputin, the Mad Monk, using many of the same sets and cast, including Lee, Shelley, Matthews and Farmer. Shelley later remembered accidentally swallowing one of her fangs in one scene, and having to drink salt water to bring it back up again because of the tight shooting schedule, as well as there being no spare set of fangs.
Its a decent Dracula film.
The plot: Four English travellers arrive at a tiny hamlet in the Carpathian Mountains and ignore warnings from the locals not to travel to Carlsbad, the domain of Count Dracula. A dark, driverless carriage arrives to take them to the sinister castle, but they discover too late that they have been lured there to provide the blood which will allow Dracula to rise from the grave once more.
Dracula does not speak in the film, save for a few hisses. According to Christopher Lee: "I didn't speak in that picture. The reason was very simple. I read the script and saw the dialogue! I said to Hammer, if you think I'm going to say any of these lines, you're very much mistaken.
Screenwriter Jimmy Sangster disputed that account in his memoir Inside Hammer, writing that "Vampires don't chat. So I didn't write him any dialogue. Christopher Lee has claimed that he refused to speak the lines he was given...So you can take your pick as to why Christopher Lee didn't have any dialogue in the picture. Or you can take my word for it. I didn't write any.
The film was made back to back with Rasputin, the Mad Monk, using many of the same sets and cast, including Lee, Shelley, Matthews and Farmer. Shelley later remembered accidentally swallowing one of her fangs in one scene, and having to drink salt water to bring it back up again because of the tight shooting schedule, as well as there being no spare set of fangs.
Its a decent Dracula film.
Entertainment Editor (1988 KP) created a video about Turn Undead: Monster Hunter in Apps
Nov 4, 2017
Awix (3310 KP) rated Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979) in Movies
Jul 6, 2019 (Updated Jul 6, 2019)
Herzog's take on Dracula strikes some startlingly different notes while still being an authentic and memorable version of this much-told tale. The plot sounds very much like Stoker's: Jonathan Harker is packed off to Transylvania to close a real-estate deal with the reclusive Count Dracula and learns some uncomfortable truths about host, who then departs for Harker's home town having taken a fancy to his wife.
It's the tone of the thing which is striking: Klaus Kinski's Dracula is not a ferocious sexual predator but a pathetic, rat-like parasite, spreading plague both literally and metaphorically. He is cursed as much as a curse, trapped in a miserable state of immortality. Kinski's performance is genuinely eerie, and the atmosphere of the rest of the film matches it. It is a bit on the slow side, and the relentlessly morbid atmosphere will likewise not be for everyone, but this is one of the better big-screen adaptations of Dracula.
It's the tone of the thing which is striking: Klaus Kinski's Dracula is not a ferocious sexual predator but a pathetic, rat-like parasite, spreading plague both literally and metaphorically. He is cursed as much as a curse, trapped in a miserable state of immortality. Kinski's performance is genuinely eerie, and the atmosphere of the rest of the film matches it. It is a bit on the slow side, and the relentlessly morbid atmosphere will likewise not be for everyone, but this is one of the better big-screen adaptations of Dracula.
Erika (17788 KP) rated Dracul in Books
Oct 1, 2018 (Updated Oct 1, 2018)
I received an copy of Dracul from the Penguin, First to Read program.
****
Dracul is a nice prequel to Stoker's Dracula. It did take a little while for me to get into the book, but once I reached part 2, I was hooked. The format was the same as Dracula, written in the form of journals and letters, which was effective. It makes me want to go back and read Dracula again. The material for this novel was source from Bram Stoker's own journals, and by far, that was the most terrifying thing to realize after reading this story. The Author's Note goes into detail, and shows some of the handwritten notes of Stoker.
****
Dracul is a nice prequel to Stoker's Dracula. It did take a little while for me to get into the book, but once I reached part 2, I was hooked. The format was the same as Dracula, written in the form of journals and letters, which was effective. It makes me want to go back and read Dracula again. The material for this novel was source from Bram Stoker's own journals, and by far, that was the most terrifying thing to realize after reading this story. The Author's Note goes into detail, and shows some of the handwritten notes of Stoker.
The Chocolate Lady (94 KP) rated The Historian in Books
Oct 7, 2020
What if the infamous Dracula really existed and wasn't just the fruit of the overactive imagination of one Bram Stoker? What if he's been recruiting people all these years since his 'death' to help him in his vile work? What if some people figured out that he could actually be tracked down? And what if that search overtook their lives to the point of frenzy and placing themselves in mortal danger? This is the premise of The Historian - Elizabeth Kostova's first novel - and already it is being touted as "a Da Vinci Code for Dracula". You can read my full review here. https://tcl-bookreviews.com/2014/07/12/the-da-vinci-code-for-dracula/
Erika (17788 KP) rated Dracula Untold (2014) in Movies
Jul 1, 2018
When I first saw the previews for this movie, I was sold. I like different takes on Dracula, and I thought the backstory they built was really cool. I was kind of sad when it didn't do well, and it'll probably never get a sequel. I loved Luke Evans as Dracula, and if Universal had decided not to can Dark Universe, I'd have hoped they'd have opted to bring him back.
