Most helpful customer reviews
4.0 out of 5 stars
Not the best, but the most horiffic of the entire series!, Jun 6 2004
By A Customer
This review is from: Scars of Dracula (Widescreen) (DVD)
Great movie although I still say "Horror Of Dracula" was the best of them all. This film is the best of the sequels. Only one confusing part of it though. In "Taste The Blood Of Dracula", he is destroyed and rots away into dust at that ruined church. "Scars" begins, presumably, right after that film, yet we see Dracula's remains lying on a stone slab at a castle. How did this happen? Did someone pick up his dust at the church and then sprinkle it in the castle? Maybe it was the bat who comes in to drip blood on the remains? Who knows? In any case, this was a rather good film. Unlike the previous one, Dracula is present for nearly the entire film this time. And, a great demise at the end this time. If you buy any of the Hammer "Dracula" films, stick with this and the previous ones. Stay away from the ones that take place in the 20th century. Not the same.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4.0 out of 5 stars
No bonus DVD as the cover claims!!, April 7 2004
This review is from: Scars of Dracula (Widescreen) (DVD)
The movie itself is very good if your a Dracula fan like me,however, I bought this movie for the bonus DVD thats suppose to come with it, however, there is no bonus DVD! I was sent a replacement movie hoping It would come with the bonus DVD as the front cover claims, but it did not. One reviewer out there says he got the bonus DVD but I don't understand why twice I did not get it. If anyone out there bought this movie and got the bonus DVD I sure would like to hear about it. You can email me at; mrfun100@hotmail.com and I thank you!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5.0 out of 5 stars
Underrated and Truly Chilling!, Jan 1 2004
This review is from: Scars of Dracula (Widescreen) (DVD)
The first time I saw this movie was many years ago and I still remember being in complete awe over the fact that it was so much different than what I had expected. It was so incredibly dark and sadistic (which was very uncharacteristic for Hammer Studios, let alone any other film of this period) and it actually left a lasting impression on me for days. The entire look and feel of the movie was somehow EXACTLY the way I had always pictured old horror movies to be. I feel this is one of Hammer Studios best films and one of the best Dracula movies ever made. (which unfortunately isn't saying much.) For once, Dracula gets to deliver some good dialouge and do some pretty cool things like scaling his castle walls, torturing his nim-witted servant, and might I also mention the inclusion of the most dramatic "Dracula demise" in the entire series. Christopher Lee will always be the irreplaceable crown prince of terror and the one and only Dracula! However, one has to wonder why Peter Cushing wasn't cast as the village priest. His great acting skills and shiny charisma always added a lot of needed credibility to these so called "B grade" imported horror films. Anyway, if you like castles, costumes, and old fashioned gothic horror films you need to give this one a try! Just don't get yourself too upset over the fake looking bats!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|