Blood of Dracula's Castle, (Castle of Dracula) - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Blood of Dracula's Castle, (Castle of Dracula) Reviews

Page 1 of 2
August 22, 2014
"Blood Of Dracula's Castle" is a 1969 film from Crown International Pictures directed by Al Adamson, and Jean Hewitt. The story takes place at the castle of Count and Countess Townsend, really Count Dracula and his wife. They lure a young women to their home for a continued blood supply. When a young man inherits the castle and appears with his young girlfriend the Count and Countess set out to chase away the couple.

The story of "Blood Of Dracula's Castle" is a bit of a train wreck with very little true attention paid to detail as the story falls apart. John Carradine, Paula Raymond, Alexander D'Arcy, Robert Dix, Gene Otis Shayne, Jennifer Bishop and Ray Young all star in the film which gives a nice nostalgia for some of us when watching "Blood Of Dracula's Castle" but not enough to really warrant any fan's of Dracula's to embrace the film completely. Dracula and his wife are practically neutered and remind me of the time the Flintstone's met Count Dracula. The addition of Mango, and a homicidal maniac to the film should have brought with them more blood but the only red that flows in this film mostly languishes in the glasses of Count and Countess Townsend. All this makes for a dull viewing experience.

The effects and soundtrack for "Blood Of Dracula's Castle" are also neutered in this one. For a film that claims to be exploitation horror I found no real show of exploitation save the bevvy of beauties chained to the castle wall. The deaths are almost none-existent and for the most part implied so I don't get the exploitative aspect branded to this film. The sound is very 1969 cheap-o that screams love-me-late-night- horror-host so there is no real reason to even bother with addressing that element of "Blood Of Dracula". Embrace this one if you wanna, I justify having it by my unending love of even crappy old movies and John Carradine. New horror fans just no that this is a 1969 Hammer film wanna be so don't expect much of anything here.
½ March 4, 2014
It's pretty goofy and fun, but there isn't enough going on to sustain the plot. The characters are decent, some better than others, and the story is alright enough. But it slows down at times, and the ending is rather bland. Still fairly enjoyable at times.
½ February 27, 2014
Vampires with chained girls in the dungeon--Gothic horror, Californian style!!
December 17, 2013
Unintentionally funny and cheap, to boot. A bad movie lover's dream-come-true.
TheDudeLebowski65
Super Reviewer
July 23, 2013
The Blood of Dracula's Castle is one of those obscured films that has stayed out of the minds of horror film fans and forgotten due to the fact that it is a cheesy low budget movie that doesn't satisfy. This is a dull, pointless and uninspired film that just doesn't deliver anything worth checking out. The acting is bland and it is never anything good, in fact it's laughable to say the least. I really wanted to enjoy the film, but I couldn't. There is never anything great going on-screen, and it's a shame because the film had potential of being quite good. This is a scare free horror film that simply is a waste of time. It's no wonder as to why the film stayed obscured, it's a movie that doesn't deliver effective horror or thrills. I thought that this was one movie that really should have been improved upon, but it's clear that everyone involved in the making of the film were clearly inept at making a movie work. This is one of the worst vampire films I've seen, and you just wonder how this crap could be made in the first place. This film was awful in terms of story and acting, and it doesn't do anything interesting with its ideas it tries to project. This could have been a worthwhile vampire film, but it fails and it should stay hidden from horror viewers. However for those really wanting to check it out, do so, but be warned that it's nowhere near a good film and it is a highly forgettable one at that. This film is a disappointment and an awful horror film that should have been better. Clearly the filmmakers wanted to rush the process a bit, and they didn't care about giving viewers a quality film, and it shows.
February 4, 2011
The dogs used to track down Johnny were by far the best actors.
January 21, 2011
Cheesy low-budget gothic horror fare from director Al Adamson is colorful and campy enough to be reasonable entertaining to B-movie fans - Paula Raymond and Alexander D'Arcy are fun as cheeky aristocratic vampires. But it's really nothing special, and ultimately forgettable.
½ November 16, 2010
A complete wtf movie, stupid but it held my attention completely.
Super Reviewer
November 4, 2010
I couldn't really get past the first 30 minutes. Not for me.
November 1, 2010
Not that amazing...but not exactly bad either.
September 14, 2010
Not the best. Not the worst. Worth a watch.
½ August 9, 2010
Absolutely horrible! The film quality on the dvd I watched was totally wretched. Avoid this film!
July 10, 2010
Good for laughs. Not much else. And it really is good for that. Highly recommended for "cheesy horror movie" night with friends.
½ June 21, 2010
Don't let the title fool you. This is NOT a serious, bloody horror film. This "Dracula" film falls far more into the campy B-movie dive-in drivel from the late 1960's that only seems to have a character named "Dracula" thrown in to sell a few more tickets and popcorn.

The film has a young couple (a photographer and his model) getting notice that they have just inherited a castle. The castle's current tenants happen to be Dracula and his wife, their caretaker (John Carradine) and their dumb Igor type character Mongo who only job seems to be bringing his masters young women for blood. According to our vampire duo AB positive blood from a woman is the best at keeping them looking young! Our young couple decide they want to live in the castle themselves and this proves as an extreme problem for a vampire residents who decide to try to kill their new landlords.

There is a lot of bizarre stuff going on here making this fall somewhat into that dreaded "alternative cinema" category but thankfully it doesn't sink as far as other films like Frankenstein's Castle of Freaks. The strangest aspect of this film is a subplot which involves a violent psycho escaping from a hospital and after a lengthy manhunt he kills a innocent bystander in order to go stay at the vampires' castle. Why? Well he wants to be immortal, what else! This extremely odd character comes out of nowhere and his relationship with Dracula and his wife is not explained and he seems at odds with Dracula's other typical servants. It seems like his character wandered onto the wrong movie set! Another problem is Dracula and his wife who are completely uninteresting. Dracula seems like a boring Robert Goulet and they both are eclipsed by their much more interesting caretaker, played by schlock movie great John Carradine. He sure did some Z-grade material back in the day but thankfully his presence was able to make these quickie films watchable. The film did have a few pieces of dialogue, my personal favorite being a scene when our leading man says a scream in the castle must have been a woman's electric toothbrush short-circuiting. I will admit I did openly laugh at that.

Though I gave the film a low rating it doesn't mean I didn't find some schlocky enjoyment. It's got bad acting, bad sets, and an odd script making it worthwhile find for fans of bizarre campy B-horror films from the 60's. Entertaining yes... but a good film, HARDLY!

Bonus Rant: If you're a fan of this film don't expect to find any DVD release to be transferred from a pristine print. The DVD I have from Mill Creek is considered the best release of the film but the negative has a lot of damage with tons of scratches. I usually like my old cult films to have some scratches and dirt on the negative as it adds to the experience but the damage here is to a degree that it really can take you out of the film and make it hard to watch. The film may not be good but there are fans for bad drive-in cinema like this and hopefully a negative will be found later in better condition.
½ May 25, 2010
This was one awful film that's almost laughable, but that would be a tragedy.There was little bit of gore and it relies too much on the male figure to protect his screaming girlfriend or any other screaming women. I liked John Carradine in here, and Dracula looked like Capulina and that's horrifying!
April 25, 2010
Total piece of shit? Yes. Totally fun? Pretty much, although I wish there was more corny violence. It might just be worse than Plan 9!
Super Reviewer
March 21, 2010
Usually Im not into Vampire flicks but I actually enjoyed this 1
March 9, 2010
Only one thing can describe this movie: B-licious! So fraught with inept film making and questionable vampire rules is this film that it's positively laughable. Apparently, Count Dracula is not only a flamboyant douche, but he can go out in the sun and he owns a freakin' pool table! Recommended only for lovers of old school grindhouse schlock.
February 11, 2010
blood of dracula's castle is a fun horror b-movie grindhouse flic that is very creepy and shocking around in the 60's there were other big horror film such as night of the living dead, and psycho this movie may sound corny but it is actually a pretty enjoyable old vampire horror movie that is a fun campy funfest.
February 6, 2010
An old Vampire flick in which the Vampires have lost their hunger and desire for survival, and have become "civilized" to the point of recklesness. They choose to stay in a civilized old distinguished manner, giving the young victems the chance to manuver and escape. Several point dont holld to the genera though. Or perhaps we have progressed passed this day.
Page 1 of 2