_**Dracula takes on members of the Hellfire Club (sort of)**_ Hammer did nine Dracula or vampire films from 1958 to 1974 as follows: Horror of Dracula (1958); The Brides of Dracula (1960); Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966); Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968); Taste the Blood of Dracula (1969); Scars of Dracula (1970); Dracula AD 1972 (1972); The Satanic Rites of Dracula (1973); and The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires (1974). While "Taste the Blood of Dracula" has a kick-axx first act, a highlight of the series, the remaining hour is rather run-of-the-mill and flawed. The most intriguing aspect of the story is "the circle" of three Affluent British thrill-seekers. Once a month they secretly meet together to taste of life's taboo activities. Enter Lord Courtley, an Aleister Crowley-like servant of darkness. Ralph Bate's performance as Courtley is one of the highlights of the film; he's utterly twisted, diabolic, maniacal, self-centered and arrogant, a great character to love to hate! Courtley offers the ultimate fiendish thrill to the circle of friends. Geoffrey Keen plays the hypocritical William Hargood, who puts up the pretense of being a respectable, church-going aristocrat. Meanwhile his ill-treatment of his sweet, beautiful daughter Alice, played by Linda Hayden, is infuriating and reprehensible. It also proves that he's a counterfeit. The sequence where Courtley and the circle of three 'taste the blood of Dracula' is ingenious, not to mention horrific. Commendations to screenwriter Anthony Hinds! "Taste the Blood of Dracula" is lush in Gothic atmosphere, plus the set-up of the story is engrossing and refreshingly innovative. There are a couple problems though. It's kinda hard to buy Dracula's vengeful attitude toward the murder of his supposed servant (Courtley). Isn't Dracula the Prince of EVIL? Why would he care about Courtley? Wasn't Courtley's death the necessary catalyst to the Count's resurrection? Isn't Dracula a use-em-and-leave-em type of guy? (which he does with others in the story). Then again, maybe it's an issue of pride and isn't Dracula a servant of the devil, whose downfall was his great arrogance? Also, maybe I'm not up on my 60's/70's vampire lore, but why did Dracula fail to convert Alice to the ranks of the undead? He obviously mesmerizes her to do his bidding, yet he fails to ever taste of her sweet blood (although he attempts to at the end). By contrast he converts Alice's friend right away. This doesn't make sense. It also doesn't make sense that he sucks the blood of a vampire at one point, which kills the creature. I didn't know vampires could feed off the non-blood of fellow vampires. The film runs 1 hour, 31 minutes, and was shot at Elstree Studios, which is just north of London, as well as areas nearby, like Aldenham Country Park, Highgate Cemetery, Tykes Water Lake and St Andrew's Church. GRADE: B

They have destroyed my servant. They will be destroyed... Taste the Blood of Dracula is directed by Peter Sasdy and written by Anthony Hinds (AKA: John Elder). Out of Hammer Film it stars Christopher Lee, Geoffrey Keen, Peter Sallis, Linda Hayden, Gwen Watford and Ralph Bates. Music is by James Bernard and cinematography by Arthur Grant. Trawling through all the sequels of Hammer's Frankenstein and Dracula series it becomes apparent that opinions differ greatly, a case in point is this, the fifth of the Dracula cycle. For her we have a Dracula film thought of very highly in some quarters, most notably in one of the Hammer Films' lauded literary bibles, myself, like the other 50% of Hammer film fans, just don't see that at all. Famously it's the Drac film where Christopher Lee had to be greatly coerced into reprising the role of the blood sucking count, financial rewards doth talk it seems. His apprehension with script and stale feelings were well grounded, with the final result begging the question as to how bad was the script before Lee's intervention? Story has three upstanding English gentlemen showing themselves to be model pillars of society by day, good stern parents/husbands and all that, but by night they are purveyors of a different sordid lifestyle, kind of like members of the naughty Hellfire Club! When decadent dandy Lord Courtley (Bates) offers then something tantalisingly more dangerous, they indulge and it results in murder and the rebirth of Count Dracula. After a neat opening which tags onto the ending of Dracula Has Risen from the Grave, we find Dracula once again on a daft revenge mission, being a bit part once again in a film bearing his name, and saddled with minimal lines that really aren't worth a suck of the neck. Some striking sequences apart (Dracula birth - bloody retributions etc) the film feels like a confused blend of ideas. On one hand it's taking a caustic peak behind the curtain of upper crust Victorian England, on the other it tries to be a period based revenger fronted by the iconic beast of the title. Under Sasdy's direction the look has been stripped back from the Gothic colourful splendour of previous Dracula entries, in place is a more earthy approach, which isn't as appealing. Of course there's a so-so romance simmering away, plenty of heaving bosom and blood shot eyes, and Bernard's musical score hangs around like a moody step-father. Which leaves us with a Hammer Dracula that's not bad at all, it's just ordinary and not all it can be, where they shoehorned Dracula into what is in truth a serial killer like revenge picture. 6/10