For what Prince of Darkness lacks in Peter Cushing, it makes up for in sheer style and simplicity. In what is Terence Fisher's final film for the titular Count, he really goes all out, even with such a tight production. It greatly benefits from the photography of Michael Reed who utilises the cold setting to a chilling degree with the bright, harsh contrasting red blood oozing and spurting onto the magnificent sets and atmospheric locations. The rebirth of Dracula sequence really left me with a shiver down my spine. The performances from its cast are exceptional, mainly from Francis Matthews killing it as a leading man for once and Andrew Keir, even if Lee's return to the iconic role is somewhat squandered by his lack of anything to do. He has an awe-inspiring presence with his complete absence of dialogue only adding to the mysterious and hypnotic portrayal of the character. Prince of Darkness may not be the best in Hammer's repertoire, but it perfectly captures that classic Hammer Horror atmosphere with its chilling terror.

I actually enjoyed this sequel much more than its predecessor. What makes this movie unique is that its characters are completely original and it doesn't mess around with the original Bram Stoker's characters in any way. Well, maybe this movie gives Dracula his own story, but that's to be expected for a sequel. I did not like the first movie at all, but this one was excellent!

While it may not be Lee's finest hour as the legendary Count Dracula, this sequel works well as a continuation of the first film and it presents the vampire as more of a wild creature than ever before.

The third in Hammer's ‘Dracula' series is one of the best in Hammer's history. Christopher Lee is again superb in the role despite not speaking a single line. Barbara Shelley is also good as Dracula's love interest. The scene in which Dracula is resurrected is a gruesome highlight of the film. Christopher Lee plays Dracula for the second time. Brides of Dracula (the second of Hammer's Dracula films), never featured Lee or even Dracula.

There comes a time in the life of every movie fan when it becomes apparent that all Dracula movies are virtually the same, especially those made by Hammer back in the ‘50s and ‘60s. Dracula, Prince of Darkness certainly makes an effort to conform to the formula. After a decade of dormancy, the Count (Christopher Lee) rises from his slumber when four British tourists appear in his dusty castle. Not surprisingly, bloody mayhem ensues until the inevitable confrontation that send Dracula back to where he belongs. Director Terence Fisher, a mainstay at Hammer, does a decent job establishing the requisite creepy atmosphere, but you just get the feeling that you've seen it all before. And that's because you have.

While it's not the greatest Hammer Dracula movie, it's a very accessible and fun entry. Absent in the last film, Christopher Lee is back and brings everything we expect of him. The sets, costumes, and directing are all top notch. The highlight of the film is the bloody resurrection scene.

Christopher Lee returns for his second outing as the famed vampire, in Hammer's third entry in their Dracula series, while the film is solid enough with plenty of atmosphere and a decent (though simple) plot, it is a bit of a shame that Lee never says a word in the entire picture, only hisses at people. He is menacing, but I like Dracula a little more talky than Frankenstein's monster.

Not bad, but not great either. The ending is a bit strange and kind of comes out of nowhere, although I guess I'll give them credit for not ending it the same way most Dracula films end. If you're a classic horror connoisseur, it's worth a watch.

Dracula comes to life, through some naive englishmen bewildered in the Carpathian. Christopher Lee with a magic performance, with true evil in his eyes. The story is too loose in between the horror, which makes it less frightening than its suppose to be. Maybe a little too aristocratic, too fit in the Dracula empire.

My master's hospitality is revered. A group of individuals are invited to meet a count in a castle. The individuals do not know why they've been invited, but the story of the count unfolds before them as he's resurrected by some loyal followers that the count somehow communicates with despite the count being deceased. None of the events make sense to the guest until it appears to be too late... "Is he indisposed?" "He's dead." Terrence Fisher, director of Horror of Dracula, The Curse of Frankenstein, The Mummy, Island of Terror, The Gorgon, Frankenstein Created Woman, and The Curse of the Werewolf, delivers Dracula Prince of Darkness. The storyline for this picture is as you'd expect for the genre and era; however, Christopher Lee as Dracula is always compelling and perfectly executed. The cast also includes Barbara Shelley, Andrew Keir, Francis Matthews, and Suzanne Farmer. "There is no bogey man anymore." This was on Turner Classic Movies (TCM) this Halloween season and I had to DVR it (I honestly thought I had already seen this). This was entertaining and well done but isn't as good as the original Dracula with Lee. This is a must see for diehard fans of the classic horror pictures or Christopher Lee. "You are a superstitious, frightened idiot." Grade: C+/B-

I didn't realize you could kill a vampire with running water.

Full of the sensual mysteriousness which Hammer used to achieve so effortlessly during their long occupation of Bray Studios. Starting with a re-run of the Count's dusty demise at the hands of Van Helsing, this was the official sequel to Dracula, and - though it tails off - the first hour has real grandeur as Dracula's servant uses a prudish Victorian couple to effect his master's restoration.

The second Hammer Dracula film starring Christopher Lee as Dracula (actually the third Dracula Hammer film). Christopher Lee doesn't utter a word throughout but his sheer presence raises the bar of an otherwise slow moving film. Basically 4 English travellers (2 couples) end up spending the night at Castle Dracula despite Dracula himself being 'killed' some 8 years prior. The film has a very 1960s feel. The two couples are annoying actors. The film suffers from the absence of Peter Cushing and a secondary actor commands his Dracula knowledge role (some local village monk). The sets are atmospheric (the interiors of Castle Dracula). The resurrection of Dracula allows some 1960s special effects to be shown off! My trawl of the many Hammer 'horror' productions continues.

Once again, it doesn't offer much new, but it's still very entertaining. It's great to see Lee in the title role again, though he doesn't speak much. Sadly, no Cushing, and frankly the other characters don't stand out much. Nice blood and a unique ending.

One of the better Dracula films of the era of Hammer House. Terrific direction by Terence Fisher. Fine performances by Andrew Kier as the abott and, of course, the legend that made this part his, Christopher Lee.

Although this film directly continues from the story of the first Hammer Horror Dracula film, and generally presents itself in the same style, this by-the-numbers sequel does little to arouse the same thrills that made the first film great in the first place. In this regard, the biggest problem is that the story and characters seem so haphazardly assembled that it kind of takes out of the film. Then again, horror films have rarely been accused of being clever. At the very least, the film moves at such a balanced pace that the film doesn't feel like too much of a contrived, overcooked sequel. The characters (barring Dracula) may be uninspired, but their performances actually make up for plenty of the flaws in the film's writing. The film does, however, have quite a palatable atmosphere, and the gothic visuals, once again, are used to good effect. However, that doesn't make up for a general lack of satisfying thrills from a generally tired and almost incoherent sequel that seems to only exist for the purpose of capitalizing on the then-lucrative Hammer formula.

While Dracula: Prince of Darkness isn't quite as awful as a lot of the back end of this series, it is in a lot of ways a step down from Brides of Dracula and the series never really starts moving in the right direction again. http://cinematicjustice.wordpress.com/2014/11/04/dracula-revisited-hammer-horror-1958-1974/

The boys are back in town! Director Terence Fisher and vampire Christopher Lee all return (along with composer James Bernard) for this disappointing sequel to Hammer's first Dracula film. The story involves one of Dracula's servants resurrecting him, after which he proceeds to terrorize a group of tourists to the remote Castle Dracula. There's blood, atmosphere, nice photography and Lee is nice and scary, but the film unfolds essentially like a dull 80s body count horror film with Dracula simply killing one underdeveloped character after another.

The first 45 minutes is both admirable in its building of suspense before the return of the titular villain, yet simultaneously dull as we follow four bland (and fairly stupid) characters towards their inevitable end. Sangster's script has some nice moments of wit, and his decision to keep Dracula entirely silent is a bold and interesting one (if not entirely successful). Fisher wrings out some memorable sequences, particularly the shockingly gruesome and tense resurrection ceremony, but overall "Dracula: Prince of Darkness" is a fairly rote, loose sequel that simply tics all of the standard Hammer tropes without bringing anything new to the table.

The third installment in Hammer's Dracula series is the weakest to that point by far, though it still contains its fair share of memorable atmosphere and a few honest chills. There are problems with the script, which is pretty frail. The story, which would be retreaded over and over again in the eighties, concerns four young travelers who seek refuge in an old mansion in the middle of the woods on their way through the country. Though they begin to experience strange and foreboding signs, they stick around long enough to meet the titular Prince, who is resurrected in one of Hammer's gorier and more shocking scenes of the era. Christopher Lee infamously despised the screenplay, and what the studio was doing with the franchise, so he stubbornly refused to utter a word of dialogue in the film. The movie hurts because of it, though his presence is still enough to supply some seriously creeps.