Blood for Dracula (1974)
Deathly ill Count Dracula and his slimy underling, Anton, travel to Italy in search of a virgin's blood. They're welcomed at the crumbling estate of indebted Marchese Di Fiore, who's desperate to marry off his daughters to rich suitors. But there, instead of pure women, the count encounters incestuous lesbians with vile blood and Marxist manservant Mario, who's suspicious of the aristocratic Dracula.
Watch Trailer
Cast
Similar titles
Reviews
Simply A Masterpiece
Please don't spend money on this.
It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional
This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.
A sickly Dracula (Udo Kier) and his loyal manservant Anton (Arno Juerging) travel from Romania to Italy in search of a 'wirgin' wife. At the villa of the Di Fiore family, the vampire is introduced to four sisters, but not all of them are as pure as they claim to be.The last five minutes of Blood For Dracula are great: handyman Mario (Joe Dallesando) chases Count Dracula with an axe and hacks off his limbs one by one, blood spraying everywhere. He then stakes the vampire's torso. Distraught, the eldest of Dracula's victims throws herself onto the stake, pinning herself to the dead vampire.If only there had been some of this OTT craziness throughout the preceding 100 or so minutes; instead, we get a rather restrained, slow moving story, the only exploitative content some soft-core sex, randy Mario seeing to several of the sisters (which allows for some full frontal female nudity), and the sight of Kier vomiting as he reacts to impure blood.A spot of subtle black humour and the constant mangling of the English language by the largely European cast provides a few giggles, but on the whole, this is a less satisfying effort than its companion piece, the outrageous Flesh for Frankenstein.
It's weird how Andy Warhol produced so many movies with naked women. I mean, he was gay! Well, this is more or less a retread of "Andy Warhol's Frankenstein". I realize that his movies where literally nothing happened were all made in the 1960's. I guess he decided to make movies that had stuff happen. It seems like he did better with Frankenstein than he did Dracula. This has the same effects with the blood and nudity. It still isn't as messed up, though. I admit that the budget looks pretty high and the sets and costumes are fun.There should have been more plot than just Dracula looking for a bride. Now, I do think it's kind of unique with the location. It just doesn't seem to do enough for a full length movie. The ending is fairly anti-climatic, but the overall acting isn't bad. It seems like the people who worked on this were trying pretty hard. It just doesn't seem to be sending any kind of new message, which you should do with a character this prolific. **1/2
Another movie that i was banned to see along with flesh for Frankenstein back in 1974.This the first Dracula movie that i ever saw where the Count is in search of a pure virgin,daylight don't bother him,dosen't sleep in his coffin,drink blood from the floor,if i'am correct that was some kind of blood discharge after a virgin is being broken in..very sick.once again overacting on Udo and his co-helper,the eyes,just like flesh for Frankenstein.and of all Dracula movies,this is the first time i see Dracula get all chopped up and brutally helpless.Udo play Dracula fine but his crying talk was childish.this is one Dracula mixing it up and looking for Cinderella before the big bad wolf get her..i gave it 8 stars because it was different,sexy,sick and for adult only.
"Blood For Dracula" (aka. "Dracula Cerca Sangue Di Vergine... E Morì Di Sete!!!") of 1974 is, after "Flesh For Frankenstein" (1973) the second bizarre take on a classic Horror tale by the team Paul Morrisey (director), Udo Kier and Joe Dallessandro (stars) and famed artist Andy Warhol (co-producer and prominent name). While this film is, in my opinion, not quite as great as the insanely brilliant "Flesh for Frankenstein" it is yet another beautifully bizarre, atmospheric, amusing and highly unusual vision of a Horror classic."Blood for Dracula" introduces the most pathetic version of fiction's most famous vampire. The great Udo Kier plays a sickly, sniveling Count Dracula, who thirsts only for the blood of virgins, as any other blood makes him fatally ill. Aided by his servant (Arno Juerging, who also played Frankenstein's demented assistant in "Flesh for Frankenstein"), Dracula goes to Italy, where people are supposed to be religious and unmarried women are supposed to be virgins. Claiming to be looking for a bride, the Count approaches the aristocratic Countess Di Fiore, who has four beautiful teenage daughters - unmarried daughters which are supposed to be virgins. However, virginity does not last long when the super-potent handyman (Joe Dallessandro) is around... As its predecessor "Flesh For Frankenstein", "Blood For Dracula" has a delightfully absurd storyline, which is very well brought to screen. Udo Kier is once again great in the villainous role, the sickliest vampire ever seen in cinema, as is Arno Juerging as his exaggeratedly weird assistant. Joe Dallessandro once again plays the hero who has sex with every female that crosses his path. The daughters are very beautiful (except for one), the youngest being played by the ravishing Silvia Dionisio (who plays a 14-year-old although she clearly is in her 20s). As "Flesh for Frankenstein", the film is beautifully shot and director Paul Morrisey delivers a great visual style and thick atmosphere. As its predecessor, the film is sleazy and quite gory (though not nearly as outrageously gory as "Flesh for Frankenstein". The film's greatest quality is its outrageously funny and very dark sense of black humor. Overall, this is another great film by the Morrisey/Kier team, though "Flesh for Frankenstein" is even more essential in my opinion. My rating of "Blood For Dracula": 9/10