IMDb RATING
6.3/10
7.3K
YOUR RATING
After killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.After killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.After killing his disciple, three English gentlemen unwittingly resurrect Count Dracula, who seeks to avenge his servant by making the trio die at the hands of their own children.
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
Anthony Higgins
- Paul Paxton
- (as Anthony Corlan)
Madeline Smith
- Dolly
- (as Maddy Smith)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
1969's "Taste the Blood of Dracula" was intended to introduce Ralph Bates as the vampire's disciple Lord Courtley, with Christopher Lee occupied in Spain finishing Jesus Franco's "Count Dracula." Having come as close as possible to playing the character as conceived by Bram Stoker, he was naturally reluctant to essay his 4th performance in the role for an increasingly penny pinching Hammer Films, only relenting under pressure for American financing from Warner Brothers. The previous Freddie Francis outing, "Dracula Has Risen from the Grave," was the best of all the sequels, allowing plenty of hair raising moments for Lee to assert Dracula's power, in particular the spectacular and controversial act of removing a stake from his own heart because the hero is an atheist without spiritual beliefs. Here, even after a hasty rewrite by usual screenwriter Anthony Hinds (as John Elder), he is reduced to mere cameo status with truly no need to speak any lines at all, quite a comedown so far as his mere presence is concerned. A traveling salesman (Roy Kinnear) happens to see the Count perish on the giant cross from the previous film's gory climax, stealing the vampire's signet ring, cloak, clasp, and a sample of his blood before returning to his London shop, where Lord Courtley has found three suckers eager for more impressive kicks than a drug induced evening at the local brothel. Willingly paying an astronomical price for Dracula's possessions ("may the devil take good care of you"), Courtley sets everything up in a dilapidated church intending that all four of them ingest the blood of Dracula to ensure the master's revival, only for the others to pass up the gruesome sight and Courtley imbibing himself. Falling to the floor in agony, he's beaten and left for dead, slowly transforming into Dracula (finally arriving at the 44 minute mark), who curiously decides that the trio must die for what happened to his servant, an extremely petty and simple minded motive for the supposed lord of the undead, despite being present in an obviously decadent Victorian London. So wicked are the so called killers that they present themselves to high society as pillars of the community doing charity work on the side, their children becoming the instruments of their own demise. Linda Hayden as Alice makes a strong impression in just her second film role, the daughter of Geoffrey Keen's loathsome Hargood, a knowing smile as she wields a deadly spade against him to lethal effect, followed by Isla Blair as Lucy, daughter of Peter Sallis' Paxton, the first time that Lee actually bites the throat of a victim on screen (Paxton is the one getting staked for a change). John Carson's Secker is stabbed to death by his son, vampirized by Lucy mere moments before, but not before leaving a note for Anthony Corlan's Paul Paxton, informing him how to gain knowledge to destroy Dracula, later finding the discarded corpse of sister Lucy before engaging in final battle for sweetheart Alice's soul. Again, Hinds is able to build a nice preamble but everything falls apart once Dracula sets out to corrupt the children to atone for the sins of the fathers, apparently still good enough to require another ruined church for a similar ritual in "Dracula A. D. 1972." Many critics praise this entry for its excellent production values and fine cast, but without a strong Dracula to propel events Lee is left with top billing and a meager bit part; though most decry the follow up "Scars of Dracula" as the worst of the Gothic sequels at least there the actor enjoys his largest role in any Hammer entry, happily recreating some of the passages in Stoker's novel.
Taste the Blood of Dracula is neither the best(Horror of Dracula) or worst(Satanic Rites of Dracula from what I recall, the film needs a re-watch though) of the Hammer Dracula series, for me it's somewhere in the middle as a flawed but very enjoyable film.
One of Taste the Blood of Dracula's biggest flaws is the ending, which is one of the series' most unimaginative and is far too protracted and drawn out, Dracula's demise is also too easy and the silliest of his demises in the series. The script is flat and far too talky, some of the talk not adding much, while Dracula's few lines of dialogue are rather ludicrous. While not as bad as in the films following it, the pacing in the first half is on the pedestrian side too.
However, the photography is incredibly stylish with lots of vibrant and creepy colour and use of camera that adds to the atmosphere. The sets and period detail are very evocative and splendidly Gothic, while the effects are decent(thankfully no laughably fake bats like there were in Scars of Dracula). The music thunders thrillingly, has a lot of personality, is orchestrated beautifully and cleverly and is deliciously spooky. It is a great score on its own and adds a lot to the film. Not all of the story works, but there are some cool death scenes, some chilling violence, gore that doesn't get too gratuitous and once the film does pick up there is a good deal of suspense and a real sense of horror and dread, something that Hammer excels in better than most horror films(before, during and now).
Taste the Blood of Dracula boasts some fine direction from Peter Sasdy, and as long as one doesn't expect any development the characters at least serve a point to the story and engage. The acting is good, with Ralph Bates making the most of his deliciously hammy and sinister character, Geoffrey Keen being appropriately stiff and shady and Linda Hayden is alluring and spunky. Anthony Higgins is very likable too, not the most well-developed of characters but one of the better-acted hero characters in the Hammer Dracula series. Christopher Lee does not have very much screen time and has to work with lines that are too few and pretty bad, meaning that he doesn't have a lot to do, but the suave and incredibly intimidating presence that he brings to Dracula really captivates so he is still memorable.
All in all, an enjoyable entry in the Hammer Dracula series, without being one of the series' best or worst. 7/10 Bethany Cox
One of Taste the Blood of Dracula's biggest flaws is the ending, which is one of the series' most unimaginative and is far too protracted and drawn out, Dracula's demise is also too easy and the silliest of his demises in the series. The script is flat and far too talky, some of the talk not adding much, while Dracula's few lines of dialogue are rather ludicrous. While not as bad as in the films following it, the pacing in the first half is on the pedestrian side too.
However, the photography is incredibly stylish with lots of vibrant and creepy colour and use of camera that adds to the atmosphere. The sets and period detail are very evocative and splendidly Gothic, while the effects are decent(thankfully no laughably fake bats like there were in Scars of Dracula). The music thunders thrillingly, has a lot of personality, is orchestrated beautifully and cleverly and is deliciously spooky. It is a great score on its own and adds a lot to the film. Not all of the story works, but there are some cool death scenes, some chilling violence, gore that doesn't get too gratuitous and once the film does pick up there is a good deal of suspense and a real sense of horror and dread, something that Hammer excels in better than most horror films(before, during and now).
Taste the Blood of Dracula boasts some fine direction from Peter Sasdy, and as long as one doesn't expect any development the characters at least serve a point to the story and engage. The acting is good, with Ralph Bates making the most of his deliciously hammy and sinister character, Geoffrey Keen being appropriately stiff and shady and Linda Hayden is alluring and spunky. Anthony Higgins is very likable too, not the most well-developed of characters but one of the better-acted hero characters in the Hammer Dracula series. Christopher Lee does not have very much screen time and has to work with lines that are too few and pretty bad, meaning that he doesn't have a lot to do, but the suave and incredibly intimidating presence that he brings to Dracula really captivates so he is still memorable.
All in all, an enjoyable entry in the Hammer Dracula series, without being one of the series' best or worst. 7/10 Bethany Cox
Three wealthy gentlemen go out during one night of the month for pleasure seeking (supposedly for charity the wives think) and are becoming incredibly bored in what they do in that time, as they think that they've done everything. That's until they meet Lord Courtley (Ralph Bates) who claims he can give them power if they join him in some ritual to recreate his dead master, but first they have to buy a certain item off a shopkeeper to perform this task. So, with the help of Dracula's servant Lord Courtley they meet in a rundown chapel to revive Dracula (Christopher Lee) from his ashes, but they chicken out of fulfilling their end of the bargain and to keep this quiet they kill the servant. Thinking that it will just blow over, but there wrong as now Dracula has been revived through his servants' corpse and he plans to take vengeance on those three for killing his servant.
Decent latter-day hammer effort that has very good production valves and some solid performances on show. The polished Victorian sets standout with sharp detail and great use of shadowy and dim lighting for its Gothic atmosphere. Though, the atmosphere was good it wasn't that grand in stature and it's not terribly suspenseful as we've seen it all before. The overall feel might come across a rather glum, but it has its lively parts and an undertone of pervading sexuality and flesh for some added boost. The compellingly clever plot is well thought out to begin with (great intro) and there are some unpredictable moments, but then it does seem to follow the usual pattern of the earlier Hammer Dracula's and ends rather unconvincingly after it looked like there was going to be an exciting finale. After a promising first half it does kind of drag in parts after the resurrection of Dracula and comes up with an uninspiring romance tale. The script is utter ham and quite stilted. Christopher Lee as Dracula doesn't really get that much too do, but whenever on screen his presence or quick flashes has some hypnotic pull making you wish he had more screen time. Most of the time his sneaking about in the background, counting down his victims in a husky voice (1,2 & 3) and giving orders to others (their children) to do his dirty work. Most of the performances were good (some deadpan) from the likes of Geoffrey Keen, Peter Sallis and John Carson as the three gentlemen and Ralph Bates as Lord Courtley is incredibly over-the-top, but seemed well suited for it. The ladies of the film or you should say Dracula's victims Isla Blair and the ravishing Linda Hayden give fair performances and some added eye-candy. The direction by Peter Sasdy is top-notch in delivery and he adds in some great sequences. The fine camera-work had sprawling crane and ground shots. While not forgetting the look into my eyes camera zooms too. Even the make-up and gore effects (nice flowing rich blood) were pretty well conceived and didn't come across as too wretched. Another highlight of the film would have to be piercing, but also moody music score.
Anyway maybe the formula was starting to wear thin in this film? Well, it does rehash certain elements and the usual clichés follow, but what do you expect from these campy hammer films. Its their trademark and has been a winning formula for them.
A mildly enjoyable hammer film, even if it's by the books.
Decent latter-day hammer effort that has very good production valves and some solid performances on show. The polished Victorian sets standout with sharp detail and great use of shadowy and dim lighting for its Gothic atmosphere. Though, the atmosphere was good it wasn't that grand in stature and it's not terribly suspenseful as we've seen it all before. The overall feel might come across a rather glum, but it has its lively parts and an undertone of pervading sexuality and flesh for some added boost. The compellingly clever plot is well thought out to begin with (great intro) and there are some unpredictable moments, but then it does seem to follow the usual pattern of the earlier Hammer Dracula's and ends rather unconvincingly after it looked like there was going to be an exciting finale. After a promising first half it does kind of drag in parts after the resurrection of Dracula and comes up with an uninspiring romance tale. The script is utter ham and quite stilted. Christopher Lee as Dracula doesn't really get that much too do, but whenever on screen his presence or quick flashes has some hypnotic pull making you wish he had more screen time. Most of the time his sneaking about in the background, counting down his victims in a husky voice (1,2 & 3) and giving orders to others (their children) to do his dirty work. Most of the performances were good (some deadpan) from the likes of Geoffrey Keen, Peter Sallis and John Carson as the three gentlemen and Ralph Bates as Lord Courtley is incredibly over-the-top, but seemed well suited for it. The ladies of the film or you should say Dracula's victims Isla Blair and the ravishing Linda Hayden give fair performances and some added eye-candy. The direction by Peter Sasdy is top-notch in delivery and he adds in some great sequences. The fine camera-work had sprawling crane and ground shots. While not forgetting the look into my eyes camera zooms too. Even the make-up and gore effects (nice flowing rich blood) were pretty well conceived and didn't come across as too wretched. Another highlight of the film would have to be piercing, but also moody music score.
Anyway maybe the formula was starting to wear thin in this film? Well, it does rehash certain elements and the usual clichés follow, but what do you expect from these campy hammer films. Its their trademark and has been a winning formula for them.
A mildly enjoyable hammer film, even if it's by the books.
This was the only Dracula/Lee movie that I saw on the huge theater screen and it was pretty cool. My mom would never take me to these things so I had my dad drop me and my friend off, then pick us up later. It was a double feature along with Trog. The theater was not packed, but it had been playing for at least a week. Now some kids are going to rate this lower because they've all seen much bloodier and scarier stuff. No kidding, really????? When this came out it was very good in terms of gore and horror.
My most memorable scene was when the hardened dust broke in half and Dracula's face filled the screen with those red eyes. I just purchased the DVD and it includes some restored footage of the brothel T&A and during each victim's death they look up at the standing figure of Dracula. The first victim's shovel-gashed face was restored on the DVD, the second victim's bloody face and the third victim too. This version was never released in the US. It would have been rated R, instead it was GP (before they called it PG).
I think it's bull for another commenter to say it's obvious that Dracula was never intended to be in this. No, what is obvious is that a certain commenter read some of these movie facts before claiming they "knew all along." Yeah, they were going to have Bates as Dracula, thank god that fell through. Lee was talked into it again. They had to rewrite it to insert Dracula in there, and his presence was awesome though some of his lines were bad. Hmmm, Dracula can count to 3. I'll give this one 7 stars. The DVD quality is spectacular.
My most memorable scene was when the hardened dust broke in half and Dracula's face filled the screen with those red eyes. I just purchased the DVD and it includes some restored footage of the brothel T&A and during each victim's death they look up at the standing figure of Dracula. The first victim's shovel-gashed face was restored on the DVD, the second victim's bloody face and the third victim too. This version was never released in the US. It would have been rated R, instead it was GP (before they called it PG).
I think it's bull for another commenter to say it's obvious that Dracula was never intended to be in this. No, what is obvious is that a certain commenter read some of these movie facts before claiming they "knew all along." Yeah, they were going to have Bates as Dracula, thank god that fell through. Lee was talked into it again. They had to rewrite it to insert Dracula in there, and his presence was awesome though some of his lines were bad. Hmmm, Dracula can count to 3. I'll give this one 7 stars. The DVD quality is spectacular.
The story concerns three middle-aged men seeking thrills, making a pact with a devil's disciple, backing out of that pact at the last moment, and then dying as well as their progeny for their lack of commitment. The story has some big holes, but is one of the better Dracula films in the Hammer series. You get what you generally can expect from Hammer: good character acting, lush cinematography, dutiful direction(ably done by Peter Sasdy), Christopher Lee(alas no Peter Cushing), beautiful young girls showing lots of cleavage, wonderful period costumes, and the film's shining grace is the score by James Hermann which is simply poetry put to music. Ralph Bates stands out as a Lord Courtly living a life of sin and debauchery. Good Hammer Fun!
Did you know
- TriviaThe film was originally not going to feature Dracula at all, much like The Brides of Dracula (1960), due to Christopher Lee becoming increasingly reluctant to reprise the role and the producers not expecting to be able to convince him to do so. Lee's increasing salary demands were also a factor. Ralph Bates would have played the lead. The script was re-written to include Dracula after the producers were finally able to coax Lee back to the role after "Warner-Seven Arts" refused to back this movie without the actor's participation.
- GoofsLucy's front door has a Yale lock.
- Alternate versionsThe UK cinema version was cut by the BBFC to edit blood spurts from the staking of Paxton, a closeup of Dracula's bloodstained teeth and a brief shot of a brothel customer with a topless woman. The 1989 Warner video release featured the heavily edited U.S cinema print which runs around 4 minutes shorter and is missing shots of Dracula's blood becoming powder during the opening scene, the violent beating to death of Courtley, and a snake charmer's dance in the brothel. The 2004 DVD is the original UK cinema version, minus the BBFC cuts which may no longer survive.
- ConnectionsEdited from The Vengeance of She (1968)
Details
- Runtime1 hour 31 minutes
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content

Top Gap
By what name was Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970) officially released in India in English?
Answer