Customer Reviews

Horror of Dracula [VHS]

5 star:		(111)
4 star:		(28)
3 star:		(10)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

The film "Dracula" (1958) (Aka "Horror of Dracula" in the USA) was a turning point in vampire's movies.
The use of Technicolor and profusion of blood shed produced a shock to audiences when released
At that time I was one of the teenagers that crowded the theater. What an experience! Since the starting titles with blood dripping over Dracula's name until the last scene we were enthralled with fear & horror!
At the present times general public is used to much more gore and violence, but this film still make your hair stand straight!

British director Terence Fisher is able to instill true Stoker's spirit to the film; it is a subtle combination of suspense and Grand Guignol. That "touch" was lost in successive new versions and resurrections the dreadful Count.
But in this particular first release Christopher Dracula Lee & Peter Van Helsing Cushing are at their peak.

The story in this particular adaptation of Stoker's book is as follows: Jonathan Harker is sent by Dr. Van Helsing to Dracula's Castle in order to destroy the hideous vampire.
That fate is easier to plan than accomplish as the unfortunate Harker will learn.
After defeating this attack the Count starts an all out revenge aimed to Harker's fiancée and her sister.
To stop him there is only one person: Dr. van Helsing. The film chronicles this confrontation.

Christopher Lee with his eyes full of tiny red veins and enormous fangs rends a paradigmatic characterization. Peter Cushing as Dr. van Helsing is at the same height.


This is an unforgettable horror movie. It is highly recommended for fans of the genre.
Reviewed by Max Yofre.

Horror of Dracula, Christopher Lee's first performance as The Count, is surely among the finest versions of Bram Stoker's classic tale. Lee has amazing presence and style as Dracula and his is certainly one of the definitive portrayals of the classic character. Having just seen both this film and Tod Browning's classic 1931 Dracula film in close proximity, I am eager to compare and contrast them.

Browning's film is older and grittier and it benefits greatly from this. The raw, black and white photography gives it an incredibly eerie, creepy atmosphere which is missing from Horror of Dracula. Browning's film bore the influence of German Expressionism, particularly F.W. Murnau's classic Nosferatu. This sense of atmosphere, along with Bela Lugosi's knockout performance as the Count is what makes the 1931 Dracula great.

Hammer Films' Horror of Dracula from 1958 was filmed in Technicolor and has no trace of that German-Expressionist creepiness. However, Horror of Dracula has many advantages over the earlier film. For one thing, the performances are far better. Peter Cushing is perhaps the greatest Van Helsing ever, and Christopher Lee's Dracula is excellent. Horror of Dracula moves by faster and feels like a more cohesive whole, not to mention that the ending is far better than the ending of Browning's film.

Horror of Dracula is an incredibly solid variation on the story. Keeping in mind that it was made in the late '50s, I think most viewers will be satisfied. It's more enjoyable than the 1931 Dracula, but far less atmospheric. The performances of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee propel this fine film. I just wish that Christopher Lee was given more screen time. His Dracula appeared onscreen significantly less than Bela Lugosi's. He doesn't even speak at all in the second half of the film. Lee's powerful voice is one that demands to be heard.

The DVD is nice, but could be better. The picture quality is great for a 45-year-old film. However, the disc is seriously lacking in supplemental material. Christopher Lee is an extraordinary man to listen to, and any commentary track with him is worth listening to. Lee did a commentary for the forgettable Hammer film The Devil Rides Out, but none for the classic Horror of Dracula???? At the price point that Warner is selling this DVD at, there should at least be some decent extra features. However, extras or no, this film is indispensable for horror fans.

My favorite horror movie of all time--probably my favorite film period--is this classic Hammer horror film. I like this picture so much because it captures the spirit of Stoker's novel better than any other version. Dracula is portrayed as a ruthless, sexual predator--he is not just a mysterious nobleman ala Lugosi or (even further off the mark) a tragic romantic hero ala Langella, et al. Christopher Lee makes the most out of his six minutes of screentime, and Peter Cushing is great as the heroic Dr. Van Helsing. I also like Michael (Alfred in BATMAN) Gough and the gorgeous Valerie Gaunt. James Bernard's music is terrific, the best ever in a horror picture; and can anything top the wonderful finale? Don't miss HOD!

Chris Lee has had a love-hate relationship with Dracula. He played him in a series of films (progressively WORSE) for Hammer Films, and was often very vocal because the works got farther and farther from Stoker's story. He did a Spanish version where he starts out with grey hair and moustache, and he felt it was a more faithful adaption. Interesting, but it really does not hold a candle to this first outing. The poor lensing and production quality was a stake to the heart to the Spanish version.

Hammers production is lush in quality and colour, with the powerful, aristocrat Count (Lee) meeting Harker in his castle in Transylvania, then later flees to England to stalk Harker fiancé. Only, in seducing Mina and Lucy, he comes up against a formidable foe Van Helsing, wonderfully played by the late great Peter Cushing (the second pairing for the duo, the first Hammer's Frankenstein). They were super in their struggle, climaxing in their battle of good against evil swashbuckle style.

Lee was dynamically menacing, with courtly European grace and manners, and turned on the sensual magic that saw him soon recognised as a star world wide. The best of the Hammer Vampires, and despites Lee's often dismissal of the films and others for Hammers, it stands as a brilliant work.

At this price, it's a super bargain!

Terence Fisher's stunning 1958 adaptation of Stoker's famous novel is far and away the finest of several screen versions.

HORROR OF DRACULA has several points to commend it, all of which converge to make this a true masterpiece of horror cinema: First, Terence Fisher's strongly Christian mythological framework, rarely so brilliantly brought to the screen as it was here; second, Jack Asher's superbly atmospheric photography and lighting, bringing us the most memorable and carefully articulated images of vampirism of all time; third, Bernard Robinson's splendid sets; fourth, James Bernard's score, his most famous, complementing excellently Fisher's blend of fairy-tale, sexuality, horror and drama; fifth, Jimmy Sangster's intelligent script; and sixth, two sterling performances by relative newcomers to stardom, Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee.

This film has haunted me since I first watched it at the age of ten, and it still weaves a powerful spell. Later versions have tended, perhaps inevitably, to be highly derivative, where the Hammer version set the tone for a whole genre of films, putting its stamp irrevocably on the face of Dracula and its surrounding mythology for almost half a century to come.

First, like pretty much any "adaptation" of Bram Stoker's novel to the screen, this film has little to do with Stoker's "Dracula" novel. It DOES have more in common with it than either the famous Bela Lugosi version or the abomniable, offensively titled "Bram Stoker's Dracula" with Gary Oldman.

Others have already mentioned that this film is a piece of cinematic history... and 45 years after its release, it remains an exciting item to pop in the VCR when you're looking for a chlling, adventuresome diversion.

"The Horror of Dracula" starts out looking like a straight adaptation, but ten minutes in, it takes a hard left when its revealed that Jonathan Harker has come to Castle Dracula not as a hapless victim but as an agent of vampire hunter Dr. Van Helsing and that Harker is fully aware of Dracula's true nature. But it all works, because when Van Helsing appears on screen (played by the late, great Peter Cushing), we get a different interperation of him than offered in Stoker's novel, and a different spin on vampirism as well. The film then proceeds to present Dracula claiming Mina and Lucy as victims, like in the novel, but for a different reason--revenge for Harker and Van Helsing being pains in the rear. In the end, the Count is brought low by his own schemes AND a rather neat little bit of action by Cushing/Van Helsing.

What is particularly remarkable about this film is that, although it strays far from Stoker's story, Christopher Lee's portrayal of Dracula (as well as the way he is handled in the script) is far truer to Stoker and the overall tone of the novel than any other version. He's not the incongriously eveningwear-sporting-but-decaying-castle-dwelling Lugosi, nor is he the pathetic whiner from Oldman's version... no, the Lee Dracula is a blood-thirsty monster who preys on the life and emotions of the living. He is a strange and alien fearsome outsider, just as Stoker portrayed.

Several years ago, I got into a conversation with two friends. It was around Halloween and the subject turned to horror movies. The question was then asked, "What's your favorite vampire movie?" One friend said Salem's Lot, the other picked Bram Stoker's Dracula from 1992(Gary Oldman-Winona Ryder version). Without hesitation, I picked this film. From the moment, the opening credits come on the screen with James Bernard's chilling theme playing, you know you're watching classic horror at its finest. Christopher Lee provides the right combination of good looks, personal charm, eroticism, and at the same time animalistic terror in his portrayal of the Count. It is a performance clearly unmatched in the six sequels he later did. Peter Cushing is excellent as Professor Van Helsing, combining the perfect balance of kindness and compassion with a single minded purpose and devotion in destroying Dracula. Michael Gough, Melissa Stribling, and Carol Marsh are terrific in supporting roles, especially Gough as Arthur Holmwood. It is an excellent retelling of the Stoker tale, although some of the elements and settings from the book are clearly omitted. The film's climax with Dracula and Van Helsing battling each other in the Count's library of the castle is the best ending to a horror film I've ever seen capping an outstaning directorial effort by Terence Fisher. I've been a huge fan of Hammer Horror most of my life and this is without a doubt their best film ever. A must see for any fan of the horror genre.

Although Curse of Frankenstein launched Hammer's gothic cycle, it is their 1958 production of Bram Stoker's Dracula that remains their greatest aesthetic and narrative achievement. There are of course many Hammer films that rival Dracula, but in Hammer's most successful phase (1957-64) all the key ingredients reach their most successful synthesis. Director Terence Fisher, first and foremost an editor, creates some excellent parallels and doubles, and the film in fact is centred around a series of oppositions and dualities, in the shape of characters, spaces, gender, class and culture. This makes Fishers carefully composed shots and editing procedures particularly effective. Jack Asher's gorgeous cinematography drapes the film in sumptuous colour, and the beautiful gothic set designs gives the impression of a production far more expensive than the £81,000 it took to make. Furthermore the narrative hares along at breakneck speed, thanks to a Jimmy Sangster screenplay that removed much extraneous baggage from the novel. For Stoker purists, this version of Dracula would probably be rejected, but the result is a freedom and pace that almost every other version of the story has lacked. If all this isn't enough we get to see a snarling bloody mouthed Christopher Lee in one of horror cinema's greatest close ups, and the magnificent Peter Cushing leaping athletically onto a table and bringing the curtain down on the Count. Hammer's Dracula series never reclaimed the spirit of the first film, despite some interesting attempts ("Dracula has Risen from the Grave" and "Brides of Dracula" for example) and this film has now rightly taken its place in the pantheon of horror masterpieces.

I rented this movie because I have recently become a fan of British horror film actor Christopher Lee. Terence Fisher's "The Horror Of Dracula" is a must-see for all horror fans.

Vampire hunter Jonathan Harker attempts to destroy Count Dracula(Christopher Lee) but fails and becomes a vampire himself. Dracula then sets his sights on Harker's fiancee and her family. Harker's friend and fellow vampire hunter, Doctor Van Helsing(Peter Cushing), sets out to stop Dracula without failure.

Christopher Lee played Dracula in more than half-a-dozen films but "The Horror of Dracula" features his first and best outing as this character. The movie is very suspenseful and exciting. Jimmy Sangster's screenplay for this picture is perhaps the best of all the Christopher Lee-Dracula movies; "The Horror Of Dracula" has none of the logic and continuity problems that would plague many of the later movies. Peter Cushing is a great Van Helsing. The special effects at the end of the movie are awesome, particularly considering that this movie was made long before the era of computer-generated special effects.

If you only see one Christopher Lee-Dracula movie, make it Terence Fisher's "The Horror Of Dracula."

After the success of Hammer's The Curse of Frankenstein in 1957, they decided to take the next logical step and remake Dracula. Released in 1958, Dracula (U.S. title The Horror of Dracula), reunited the very same cast and crew and The Curse of Frankenstein and created the formula that would carry Hammer's success throughout the 60's and 70's. Christopher Lee's portrayal of Dracula was so definitive that people pictured him in their minds when they thought of Dracula, a typecast that he was never quite able to escape. His Dracula--tall, dark, lips glossed with bright red blood--virtually revolutionized the horror film industry.

To update the film, Hammer used not only eye-popping Technicolor, but added the sexual element, not clearly pictured in previous versions. This was the first vampire film where the female victims actually seemed to be enjoying the process. Peter Cushing, as Van Helsing, compared vampirism to drug addiction, and Hammer furthered the theme into realms of disease and madness in later films.

The script, by Hammer's favorite screenwriter Jimmy Sangster, streamlined the key elements of the Bram Stoker novel, taking only a few liberties along the way. Probably the main change was Jonathon Harker, who knew the score from the start and arrived at Dracula's castle posing as a librarian, but intending to play the role of vampire slayer. This doesn't quite work out for him, and quickly swinging back into novel territory, he meets up with Dracula's three concubines.

Horror of Dracula is widely considered to be Hammer's best Vampire film. I'm not quite sure that I agree with this (give me Captain Kronos or Twins of Evil over this one any day...) considering that they built a whole genre starting with this film and took it in some wild and previously unheard of directions. It is Hammer's most faithful adaptation from an original work, and it's notable as the beginning of something big.

The DVD release has a few extras-not many and nothing I'd never seen before elsewhere. There is a notable mistake on the packaging. The woman on the back is Stephanie Beachum, in her role as Jessica Van Helsing in Hammer's Dracula: AD 1972, when they decided to bring the Count into the then "modern age." Ooops! Maybe whoever designed the case didn't actually watch the film.

The release seems somewhat minimal and casual, but it's definitely worth picking up. While I'm slightly disappointed with the lack of extras, (and by the cheesy packaging blurbs and picture mistakes), I am very grateful to be able to have it on DVD!