Alicia I love this movie so much

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Senteur As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Cineanalyst The eighth film in Hammer's Dracula series and the third of that series to feature both Christopher Lee as the Count and Peter Cushing as Van Helsing, "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" is a rather seamless continuation of the last film in the series, "Dracula A.D. 1972." That alone is unusual for the series, which frequently altered its locations and vampire facts from film to film. "Dracula A.D. 1972," for instance, with an opening sequence set in 1872, entirely disregarded the prior six films, which were set after that date. This time, there's a different actress playing Van Helsing's granddaughter, but the film is otherwise quite faithful to its immediate predecessor. And, fortunately, that didn't include continuing the depiction of hippie youth culture that partially ruined the former film.Although a rare competent Hammer sequel in this regard, it's otherwise a not very interesting Dracula feature. The premise of a centuries-old vampire rising to the top of a corporation and amassing a satanic cult is promising, but handled poorly here. Given the frequent use of flashbacks of a satanic ritual, the filmmakers seemed to think it more intriguing than I did. According to the time frame given within the narrative, Dracula managed these tasks within the span of little more than a couple years since the last time he died, and before that brief period of life, as it were, he'd been dead for a century. And, his plan is foiled even more quickly once Van Helsing is alerted to it. Apparently, Dracula is brilliant enough to master capitalism and cultism within a couple years despite most of his experiences being from the Victorian age and, perhaps, even more ancient than that; yet, he's also stupid enough to easily be defeated time and again by a family with an expertise in occultism. Contrary to Bram Stoker's novel, this Dracula isn't vulnerable to modern inventions; here, he uses the newest in surveillance technology, including trip alarms and cameras, and the inability to photograph him helps to temporarily foil the surveillance methods employed by the police. Dracula also employs modern science to increase the old threat of plague. Most incredulously, we're to believe Dracula does all of this because he's suicidal and wants to bring about Armageddon.Although "The Satanic Rites of Dracula" raises the stakes in the series--making Dracula a truly existential threat to all of humanity, Hammer's vampires remain quite weak. The supposed purity of running water being fatal to them, which the last film started, results in a scene where a herd of female vampires chained in a basement are wiped out by a sprinkler system. Once again, Van Helsing lists the ways vampires can be defeated, and you can take to the bank that the new one he mentions will turn out to be important by the end. This time, it's hawthorn bush-a particularly lame way to catch a vampire, I must say. Also, after a hiatus in the most recent Hammer Dracula films, the trope of a makeshift cross makes a comeback here.

jacobjohntaylor1 This is one of the scariest movies ever made. It is the eight part to the Hammer Dracula series. And it is scary then that first seven. It has a great story line. It also has great acting. It also great special effects. This very intense. Dracula is killed by Lawrence Van H.e.l.s.i.n.g in Dracula A.D 1972. He is resurrected and this out for revenge. If this does not scary you then no movie will. I can't believe there are people who do not like this movie. I do not think they are a majority. This is a very intense. The hammer Dracula movies are some of the greatest horror movies ever. Christopher Lee who played the part of Dracula was one of the best actors of his time. Peter C.us.h.i.n.g who plays Van H.e.l.s.i.n.g was also also one of the best actors of his time. Joanna L.u.m.l.e.y who play Jessica Van H.e.l.s.i.n.g is a great actress. Also she was quit pretty when she was a young girl. This movie is a must see.

Prichards12345 Desperation of a series in its death throes, or perhaps just an inventive entry in Hammer's Dracula series that was misunderstood? Well, perhaps The Satanic Rites of Dracula is a little of both. A much better movie than the comically bad Dracula A.D. 1972, this is still, when one weighs it up, inferior to the early Hammer Draculas and 70s audiences must have had a struggle to connect to it's mixture of Vampirism, Satanism and James Bondery, with a good kicking given out to property speculators to boot! Alan Gibson directs with a sure hand, and every sequence is well executed - particularly the cellar full of female vampires section. And of course, there is always Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee to pep things up as Van Helsing and his eternal enemy Count Dracula. There's a rather splendid stand-off scene between the two, when Cushing confronts the property tycoon D.D. Dehham, and one can only wish there was more of this kind of stuff. Lee adopts a splendid Lugosi-like accent here, and Cushing is all steely resolve.They are helped by an agreeably quivering Freddie Jones, William Franklyn - who dies in almost exactly the same way he does in Hammer's Quatermass II - and Joanna Lumley. Michael Coles also returns as the longest-haired police inspector in British movies, and this time out is given somewhat better dialogue than he was in A.D. 72.The plot of course, has a few flaws - why have a sprinkler system where the vampires sleep? When you don't have one where a house-gutting fire later breaks out! On the whole this is a lively and quirky film, with Dracula coming off like a Batman super villain rather than the King Of Vampires, out to infect everyone on Earth with a virulent form of bubonic plague. It's a fun and fast moving affair. And we can saviour Van Helsing against Dracula one last time.

callanvass This is the worst Dracula without a doubt. I wasn't exactly "bored" but it's fairly lifeless. One thing I noticed was that it lacks the stylistic touches that Hammer films usually have, which was always integral in my opinion. Everything seems old, worn down, and dreary. It wasn't a very positive experience. I will give credit to some solid cinematography of London, especially in the opening credits. There are some picturesque scenes that are really well done. They tried to rejuvenate the series with the contemporary setting, and placing Dracula in the modern era, but it doesn't fit at all. Count Dracula felt out of place in this movie. Christopher Lee himself doesn't look very enthusiastic about being in this movie. He seems to be on auto-pilot, not that I blame him. He didn't have a whole lot to do, and he didn't have a great deal of screen time. I read on Wikipedia that Lee was becoming more disillusioned with each new Dracula movie, and it shows. It wasn't a great performance, his send off is being killed by a thorn bush. How's that for gratitude? Peter Cushing is once again our protagonist as Van Helsing. Since this is set in the modern era, he is a "descendant" of the original Van Helsing in the earlier Dracula movies. Cushing is dependable as always, even when he doesn't have much to work with. I usually get excited whenever Lee & Cushing face off. Two of the greatest horror veterans in history, but it felt contrived and ordinary in this one, which is quite sad. Joanna Lumley is subtly sexy as Van Helsing's granddaughter. She doesn't have a whole lot to do either. I felt there were too many pointless characters. Aside from a good opening escape, and a suspenseful attack in a cellar, this movie doesn't have much as far as thrills go. Final Thoughts: It's a bit disillusioning to see Christopher Lee go out like he did. Hammer reinvented Dracula, and to see a series of this magnitude end on a whimper is saddening. 4.7/10