Tuesday, 27 October 2026

Dracula Has Risen From The Grave (Freddie Francis, 1968)

In an attempt to draw a local village back to the Church, Monsignor Ernst Mueller (Rupert Davies) takes it upon himself to exorcise Dracula’s (Christopher Lee) castle.

When this exorcism inadvertently leads to the resurrection of the Count, the Monsignor finds himself a target as a vengeful Dracula looks to take his niece Maria (Veronica Carlson) as his new consort.


I have not heard great things about the latter Dracula sequels, which made them fertile ground for a reappraisal.


Perhaps my fresh eye could uncover some gems, some fresh blood still flowing in the franchise’s veins?


In this case, I would say yes.


Opening with a cascade of blood to herald the opening credits, the film boasts a striking visual palette that seems more vivid than its predecessor.


Directed by celebrated cinematographer Freddie Francis, the film strikes out on its own from the opening:


A young church bell man finds blood trickling down the rope.


The priest (Ewan Hopper) then finds the corpse of a young woman dangling from the bell.


This mocking calling card from Dracula draws in the stern Monsignor who takes it upon himself to exorcise Dracula’s castle.


I am not familiar with Rupert Davies so I had no expectations for him as the Count’s new nemesis.


What sticks out about him is how human he is. 


Peter Cushing’s Van Helsing felt completely resolute in his mission, and completely without vice or weakness - a fairly traditional hero.


Father Shandor from Prince of Darkness feels even more like a swashbuckling hero, even with his love of booze - he still seems fundamentally a white knight.


Davies’ Mueller is marked not only by his relative ignorance of Dracula, but his arrogant belief that he can resolve the village’s plight.


In a way, he is the first of Dracula’s foes to have an actual character arc.


When he begins the ceremony, a storm unleashes.


The other priest falls downhill, hits his head and lands near the frozen river where Dracula lies trapped - the trickle of his blood reawakens the vampire.


This is where the film really starts to differentiate itself.


In contrast to the fairly traditional heavy Klove from the previous film, the weak-willed priest (Ewan Hopper) becomes Dracula’s familiar


Hopper’s priest gets no name, but his sweaty, terrified performance highlights this film’s strength in vividly drawn characters.


It also draws attention to the way this film portrays religion - as entirely based on faith. Its power - and the power of Dracula - is based entirely on the faith of individual people. 


One of the key conflicts of the film is between the Monsignor and his niece’s boyfriend Paul (Barry Andrews), who is an atheist. This causes the Monsignor to disapprove of their union. It is only when she becomes a target for Dracula, that the pair are forced to work together.


I was trying to work out why this film worked for me and not its more illustrious predecessor, and it comes down to this level of characterisation and the narrative that develops out of these characters’ conflict.


The characters in Prince of Darkness - aside from Father Shandor - felt like mannequins waiting to be bumped off. 


The characters in Dracula Has Risen From the Grave are familiar archetypes, but they at least have definition - and the cast bring their own textures, their own flavour, that make the film feel more alive. 


The most vivid character is Zena, a vivacious barmaid who becomes Dracula’s first victim - she enjoys having a good time, and shows interest in Paul - she clearly wants romance, but gets treated as a good time girl. 


Her character is not that deep - and the film’s overall view of her is about as enlightened as the Monsignor’s - but she does get more shading compared with Dracula’s previous ‘brides’. After Dracula attacks her, she seems to enjoy his attention, and is enraged he demands she bring Maria to him.


Like the unnamed Priest, Zena feels like a more nuanced take on Dracula’s usual acolytes.


And because his acolytes have understandable motivations, this highlights how truly singular Dracula’s evil is. 


When Dracula enters Maria’s bedroom, it is played along the same lines as his seduction of Lucy in the original film, but reframed as a loss of innocence for the young woman - emphasised by including a shot panning from Dracula on top of Maria to a child’s doll that she is holding and pushes away. 


As with the original film, it turns out Dracula has hidden his coffin in the basement of the house - whereas this is a surprise in the Fisher version, here we are shown the process of the Priest gaining entry to the property, which generates more tension for the viewer. 


The film turns into a battle of faith v science, as the Monsignor and Paul join forces to save Maria. 


There is an almost great moment where Paul impales Dracula but it does not work because he does not believe in the power behind the stake.

  

Ultimately, the film does not lead to Paul’s conversion, but the redemption of Hopper’s fallen priest, who sacrifices himself while offering the final prayer that destroys the Count as he lies impaled on a cross.


There is a lot to recommend with Dracula Has Risen From The Grave.


The photography is beautiful, and the sets by Bernard Robinsion - working at Pinewood instead of Hammer’s old ground Bray Studios - have more of a sense of scope (I liked the rooftop exteriors, with the buildings so close together that characters can walk and run between the roofs).


A worthy pivot from the familiarity of its predecessor, Dracula Has Risen From The Grave may not quite match the original’s drive, but the deviations it makes from the familiar template (this time, we never see inside Dracula’s home) give Lee’s vampire more bite.



Related


Horror of Dracula (1958)


Brides of Dracula


Kiss of the Vampire


Dracula - Prince of Darkness


If you are new to this blog, I also co-host a podcast on James Bond, The James Bond Cocktail Hour. 

You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.


If you enjoy something I wrote, and want to support my writing, here’s a link for tips!

Friday, 23 October 2026

Dracula - Prince of Darkness (Terence Fisher, 1966)

Two couples, Charles (Francis Matthews) and Diana (Suzan Farmer), and Helen (Barbara Shelley) and Alan (Charles Tingwell), take shelter at the late Dracula’s castle. 


The castle’s one inhabitant, the servant Klove (Philip Latham), is happy to see them, as the unknowing visitors are about to unwittingly help usher in the return of his master (Christopher Lee).



After one in-name-only sequel, and re-written second attempt, I was hungry (thirsty) to get back to the original prince of darkness.


Of the series’ titles, Prince of Darkness has to rank at the top. Here is Dracula - accept no pretenders.


It had been eight years since Christopher Lee played Dracula, so the film opens with a flashback to the finale of 1958’s Dracula.


Since it has been over two years since I wrote about that film, I wanted to expand more on my thoughts on Lee’s Dracula.


I believe I mentioned the sexuality Lee brought to his portrayal, something the film definitely leans into


Watching the Hammer horror films often feels like a cinematic reunion as many of the cast and crew were shared with the other major UK genre export of this time, the James Bond franchise.


While they share few overt similarities (at least for now - here’s looking at you, Satanic Rites of Dracula), I could not help but draw hypothetical connections between Hammer Horror’s success at the turn of the Sixties, and the early Bonds, particularly the casting of, respectively, Lee and Sean Connery.


Connery is often regarded as one of several new British stars who broke the idea of what a local movie star was - getting rid of the received pronunciation, with a more openly emotional, physical and sexual presence - one can see this in the popularity of Stanley Baker (the true forerunner), Michael Caine and Terence Stamp. 


While he appeared earlier, and was more associated with popular genre fare, Christopher Lee’s breakthrough is based in part on a similar type of appeal - while his presence is menacing, he brings a sensuality and eroticism that are integral to the success of the film. Everything that is repressed in the original story, all the hidden desires of the Victorian era, are embodied by Lee - and it is his very attractiveness that is key to how he seduces his victims. 


He radiates less of that sexuality in Prince of Darkness, but suppressed desire is still part of the film’s make up. Instead of being the locus of sensuality, he becomes the catalyst - after he has converted Helen into his bride, she attempts to seduce Diana.


While this is intriguing, one of the downsides of the film is that - after a spectacular opening - it does not make better use of its leading man.


Dracula’s resurrection is the highlight of the film. 


Alan follows Klove through the castle into Dracula’s tomb, where the servant murders him and then drains his body of blood.


Dracula is slowly reconstituted through a series of dissolves as his flesh slowly grows over his bones.


After the titular villain returns, the film slows down, as it turns into characters running around rooms. I was expecting this section of the film to turn into a bloodbath, but not enough of these boring characters die.


Made over a decade before the slasher genre, Prince of Darkness feels like a half-step in its direction - but without the bodycount or sex.


And Lee almost becomes a piece of art direction - he never speaks, and  just looms out of the shadows with a red-eyed glare.


Thank the production team for at least giving the count a worthy adversary:


Andrew Keir’s Father Shandor. Played with a gruff confidence by Keir, he is a man of contradictions:


Despite being a man of the cloth, he is a skeptic who  rubbishes the village folk for their superstition. He also drinks wine and carries a gun.


Whenever Keir is onscreen, the movie gains a sense of gravitas and scope. I was double-checking the credits for the later Dracula movies to check if he would return.


Klove (Philip Latham), Dracula’s human familiar and servant, makes for a fine secondary antagonist. I particularly enjoyed his first appearance, a cheeky misdirect that parodies Lee’s introduction in the first film (framed in a long shot, he resembles a dishevelled version of his master).


Fundamentally, Prince of Darkness lacks the forward momentum of the original Hammer Dracula.


There is a lot to like (Michael Reed’s vivid photography; James Bernard’s reprise of his iconic score), but the story feels like a prelude to a real campaign of terror.


Terence Fisher being at the helm does mean the film feels slightly out of time. If you did not know it was made in 1966, you would think it came out a year after the original film.


I was curious to check out Lee’s remaining appearances, but on the evidence of this film, I was sceptical. I will hold my thoughts on the rest of the ‘saga’ - check back in when Dracula rises from the grave again…



Related


Horror of Dracula (1958)


Brides of Dracula


Kiss of the Vampire


If you are new to this blog, I also co-host a podcast on James Bond, The James Bond Cocktail Hour. 

You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.


If you enjoy something I wrote, and want to support my writing, here’s a link for tips!

Kiss of the Vampire (Don Sharp, 1963)

After their car runs out of gas, newlyweds Gerald (Edward de Souza) and Marianne (Jennifer Daniel) are invited to be guests of the mysterious Doctor Ravna (Noel Willman) and his family.


The good doctor and his brood are vampires who would like to add Marianne to the family. 


When Marianne disappears during a masked ball hosted by the Doctor, they try to convince her terrified husband she never existed.  


Joining forces with the local vampire hunter, Professor Zimmer (Clifford Evans), Gerald is in a race against time to find his wife before it is too late… 


While it is not technically part of Hammer’s Dracula franchise, Kiss of the Vampire intended as another sequel, before it was reconceived as its own entity. Despite those tangential connections, it has enough similarities, particularly thematically, that make it worth discussing alongside the series. 


It is also just a fantastic movie on its own terms - I would personally rank it higher than Brides of Dracula.


I haven’t watched this movie in years, but I never forgot the opening scene - the funeral of a young woman is interrupted by a man in black, who plunges the shovel into the coffin.


A high-pitched scream emits from the coffin, accompanied by a geyser of blood. The camera dives toward the coffin, followed by a dissolve to the interior, into a close-up of the dead vampire’s blood-stained lips. CREDITS.

 

Kiss of the Vampire was largely the work of a different crew, and it gives the film a unique energy.


Director Don Sharp admitted he was not particularly interested in the horror genre, and the film plays more like a thriller - there are almost no supernatural elements, with most of the vampire's actions feel more like a long con:


Marianne’s kidnapping is based around a game of swapping masks, while her husband is rendered unconscious with an endless supply of drinks.


And when the vampires go through the charade of deceiving her husband, it plays like a scene out of The Lady Vanishes.


Alan Hume, later known for his contributions to the James Bond series and Star Wars, gives the photography an autumnal chilliness. 


The one familiar face is James Bernard, who delivers a score with more emphasis around the piano. More haunting than his imposing score for Dracula, but equally effective, and totally in the film’s voice.


The whole film feels like a twist on the Hammer template, from the reveal that the film takes place in the early 20th Century - a long establishing shot of lush countryside is disturbed by the sound of a motor car’s engine.


Most of the film’s early scenes take place in overcast daylight.


Dr Ravna and his children are presented as more contemporary than their surroundings, in contrast to the local villagers, who would not look out of place in Brides of Dracula.

 

The only time they dip into familiar fashions is the masked ball sequence, which features the vampire cult cosplaying the 19th Century, with characters wearing grotesque masks (for once, their monstrosity is externalised).


Clifford Evans’s Dr Zimmer is a distinctly different figure from Van Helsing - less analytical, more informed by passion (his daughter is one of Ravna’s cultists). He is an alcoholic, traumatised by his past experiences.


He also has fewer scruples about how to destroy the menace: he uses black magic to wipe out the vampire cult.


My overriding impression of Kiss of the Vampire is how understated it is. There is a stillness to the film that is arresting - some of the most unsettling scenes are based around the vampires just watching our unsuspecting heroes, with nary a fang in sight.


The leads are bland, although de Souza brings some fire late in the piece as the increasingly frenzied husband. Daniel is stuck as the object of (everyone’s) affection.


By contrast, Willman is effective as the charming cult leader, and Evans is terrific.


Filled with inventive touches (Gerald protects himself by drafting a cross over his heart in blood from a wound in his shoulder), Kiss of the Vampire is a worthy outlier from the Hammer template.



Related


Nosferatu


Dracula (1931 Anglo version)


Dracula (1931 Spanish version) 


Horror of Dracula (1958)


Brides of Dracula


Count Dracula (1977)


Dracula (1979)


Bram Stoker's Dracula


Let The Right One In


The Last Voyage of the Demeter


Abigail


Nosferatu (2024)


If you are new to this blog, I also co-host a podcast on James Bond, The James Bond Cocktail Hour. 

You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.


If you enjoy something I wrote, and want to support my writing, here’s a link for tips!