Horror of Dracula Year: 1958 Director: Terence Fisher Written by: Jimmy Sangster Threat: Vampire Weapon of Choice: stake Based upon: novel - Dracula - Bram Stoker Color/B&W/3D: Colour Language: English Country of Origin: UK IMDb page:

Other movies in this series:
The Brides of Dracula
Dracula: Prince of Darkness
Dracula Has Risen from the Grave
Scars of Dracula
Taste the Blood of Dracula
Dracula A.D. 1972
The Satanic Rites of Dracula

Rish Outfield's reviews
The first of the Hammer Dracula films, this tells of Jonathan Harker, arriving at Dracula's castle, already knowing of the evil that lives there. It doesn't save him, though, from Christopher Lee's menacing Count. The story shifts back home, where Harker's ladylove, Lucy (again with the switching of names) becomes the Count's next victim. Doctor Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) tries to stop Dracula, but the pigheadedness of Michael Gough's character soon threatens the lives of both Mina his wife and their daughter.
This wasn't bad, not bad at all. A little short, and sure, it took a lot of liberties with Bram Stoker's novel, but as vampire movies go, this one delivered. Peter Cushing is unquestionably great as Van Helsing (I love the way he rolls the occasional 'R'), and Christopher Lee is a frightening, bestial Count Dracula . . . you never root for the bad guy in this one, all fanged and hissing. Perhaps the depth of his character, sexiness, and pathos came in later installments.
Still, this was all too easy. The vampires were dispatched so quickly and simply, they slept out in the open (mere feet from sunlit windows), and the only threat was how attractive the female ones were. People talk about the eroticism of the Hammer Pictures, and this one just barely touched on that (I guess they would get bolder as the years went on).
Another thing that I appreciated: this film took itself seriously and was not at all campy, as it could easily have been. I really liked the little girl in this one, but how she survived is beyond me. It was nice to see Batman's Michael Gough in a non-Alfred role--he seems to be a good man (and still alive, thank Krishna).
I think I prefer Universal's 1931 version, but I did enjoy this adaptation, and I know it would be fun to see it in the theatre. It would be good to check out the others in this series, and I hope that they only get better. We'll see, as tyranist and I plan to watch the entire Hammer series this Halloween season.
Best Scare: The vicious, inhuman Count, as I said, was pretty scary.
I'd Recommend It To: Classic horror fans, vampire enthusiasts, Cushing/Lee devotees, etc.
Posted: October 8, 2007

The tyranist's thoughts
For me, this is a refreshing take on the Dracula story. Most Dracula adaptations either get mired down in attempting to recreate Bram Stoker's vision too closely, or the strange charisma of Dracula. That isn't to say that they aren't worth watching. I enjoy them all. But once in a while it is good to see an adaptation of the story that borders on an action/murder mystery film.
Peter Cushing's Van Helsing is just the right mix of mystery and dignified doctor to pull me into his character. Christopher Lee makes a menacing Dracula despite his small role. The female characters were beautiful in the right ways. The sets lent to the air of the film without distracting from the story.
I love that Terence Fisher and Jimmy Sangster took the liberties they did with the film. It appears to be set entirely in an inland east European country. The characters are slightly different and plot elements are changed a little. The important thing is that you can really move along with this one. It is fast-paced and short so they don't spend a ton of time just showing us shots of Dracula staring at the maiden victim.
I'm not sure this is my favourite adaptation of the novel, but it is certainly one of the best. This may have been the first Hammer horror flick I was exposed to and if that's true, I can certainly see where my current love for that little studio came from. This should be enjoyed as it is. Relax and just let the movie entertain you.
Posted: October 8, 2007

Total Skulls: 6

Sequel
Sequel setup
Rips off earlier film
Horror film showing on TV/in theater in movie
Future celebrity appears
Former celebrity appears
Bad title
Bad premise
Bad acting
Bad dialogue
Bad execution
MTV Editing
OTS
Girl unnecessarily gets naked
Wanton sex
Death associated with sex
Unfulfilled promise of nudity
Characters forget about threat
Secluded location
Power is cut
Phone lines are cut
Someone investigates a strange noise
Someone runs up stairs instead of going out front door
Camera is the killer
Victims cower in front of a window/door
Victim locks self in with killer
Victim running from killer inexplicably falls
Toilet stall scene
Shower/bath scene
Car stalls or won't start
Cat jumps out
Fake scare
Laughable scare
Stupid discovery of corpse
Dream sequence
Hallucination/Vision
No one believes only witness
Crazy, drunk, old man knows the truth
Warning goes unheeded
Music detracts from scene
Death in first five minutes
x years before/later
Flashback sequence
Dark and stormy night
Killer doesn't stay dead
Killer wears a mask
Killer is in closet
Killer is in car with victim
Villain is more sympathetic than heroes
Unscary villain/monster
Beheading
Blood fountain
Blood spatters - camera, wall, etc.
Poor death effect
Excessive gore
No one dies at all
Virgin survives
Geek/Nerd survives
Little kid lamely survives
Dog/Pet miraculously survives
Unresolved subplots
"It was all a dream" ending
Unbelievably happy ending
Unbelievably crappy ending
What the hell?