Simply A Masterpiece

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Scars Of Dracula is the goriest and most violent of the Hammer Dracula films. Christopher Lee gives a very sadistic and totally evil portrayal of the Count here. The pastie makeup job on Dracula might look real cheap and fake, but the extra pale complexion looks cool in my opinion. This was the last of the Hammer Dracula films that is in a Gothic setting, while the film is cheaper than its predecessors and had some flaws I found Scars Of Dracula to be very enjoyable. There are nods here and there to the original source material. Hammer regular Michael Ripper gives a memorable performance as does Patrick Troughton as servant Klove who is best known for his as the priest in The Omen and on the Dr. Who television series. The old Hammer sets look great and the film has great Gothic ambiance. There also is a good amount of blood and gorgeous big breasted women to go around. I would not regard this as the most well made of the series, but it still is a solid and entertaining entry to the series. Cool flick.

I'm by no means an authority on vampire lore, but it seems to me a plain old cross shouldn't send Count Dracula (Christopher Lee) into a tizzy the way it does here when he's about to put the bite on poor gal Sarah (Jenny Hanley). I thought it had to be an actual crucifix with the image of Christ on the Cross. Oh, and another thing, it seemed to me that the cross that Sarah shows the Priest (Michael Gwynn) at the frontier inn was a bit smaller than the one Dracula experienced when he went for that mouthful. Oh well, no big deal I guess.I get a kick out of the reviewers on this board who make their claim that this is either the best or the worst of the Hammer/Lee Dracula flicks. I don't know, this one seemed pretty good to me as far as it goes, with Christopher Lee exuding absolute evil as the famed vampire. He takes quite a few victims in this story, some by himself and even more by way of that bat roaming around the countryside. In terms of visuals, I thought this one offered quite a few gruesome victims, like those at the desecrated church and the loyal but disaffected assistant Klove (Patrick Troughton). Man, the scars on his back looked quite nasty, but almost tame by comparison to victim Paul (Christopher Matthews), who's impersonation of a slab of beef was downright hideous.But it wasn't all horror. This might be the best Hammer flick when it comes to featuring women's cleavage in a prominent role. You had Julie (Wendy Hamilton) at the inn and Tania (Anouska Hempel) at the Count's castle, but Sarah had the most interesting camera angles making it a bit difficult to concentrate on the story. Maybe the cinematographer just couldn't help himself.Back to my earlier comment on vampire lore. I was a little surprised at the finale when Dracula got taken out by a bolt of lightning to the iron spike he was wielding, thereby going out in a blaze of vampire glory. While all the time Sarah's beau (Dennis Waterman) was trying to figure out a way to defeat the Count. When all was said and done, it actually looked pretty simple, Simon.

Opinions Vary Wildly on this Ongoing Series Followup. It Straddles the Fine Line between Camp and Sadistic Bloodletting.The Poor "Bat". This Nocturnal Mammal is Easy Fodder for Ridicule in Pre-Modern Horror Films. Was there ever a Good or Respectable Rendition on Screen. Usually Seen as just what They are. Rubber, Awkward Props on a Wire. This is probably "Scars" Weakest element, and for Toppers, there are many Scenes with Dracula's Totem Dominion Displayed throughout.This is Hammer's most Gruesome and Gory of the "Dracula" Movies, one of the Things that puts the Film on its Supporters Side, and the "Bats" Carnage is Substantial. The Church Aftermath is Chilling.Chris Lee has a lot more to Say in Comparison to some of the others, so that is a Plus. The Budget for this one was Slashed and it Shows in Spots. Dracula's Subordinate and Whipping Post, "Living" with Him in the Castle, along with a "Bride", is Integral to the Plot and is Touchingly Portrayed by Patrick Troughton.Overall, if You Like Your Hammer "Draculas" with Plenty of the Red Stuff, and Cleavage Galore, You will Accentuate the Positive with this one. But if You have No Tolerance for Rubber Bats, Not So Much.No Matter the Divide among Outspoken Viewers, if it's a Hammer Movie, it's Worth a Watch. This one Rides the New Violence like No Other Hammer Film Before, for Better or Worse.

This is a really good Hammer Horror Dracula film. It is the 5th in the Christopher Lee Dracula series and a devilishly delightful one at that! In this one, we finally get to see Dracula on screen more often and hear him speak quite a bit more too. This 5th Lee Dracula film is definitely an excellent, solid Dracula flick.This is a film that critics and fans of Lee's Dracula seems to be split on - some loved it, other hated it. It's really best for the viewer to decide if they liked the movie or not... just like any other film. I am personally pleased with the "Scars of Dracula".Although "Scars" picks up where "Taste the Blood" left off you really don't have to watch any of the other Lee Dracula films to know what is going on in "Scars".9.5/10