Dracula Has Risen from the Grave | 
 enlarge | Director: Freddie Francis
Actors: Christopher Lee, Rupert Davies, Veronica Carlson, Barbara Ewing, Barry Andrews
Studio: Warner Home Video
Category: DVD
List Price: $19.98
Buy New: $6.99
You Save: $12.99 (65%)
New (50) Used (23) Collectible (2) from $6.37
Rating:  60 reviews
Sales Rank: 17324
Format: Closed-captioned, Color, Dubbed, Dvd-video, Subtitled, Widescreen, Ntsc
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Subtitled), French (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), French (Dubbed)
Rating: G (General Audience)
Number Of Items: 1
Running Time: 92
Aspect Ratio: 1.77:1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
MPN: WARD31839D
ISBN: 0790789663
UPC: 085393183929
EAN: 9780790789668
Theatrical Release Date: February 6, 1969
Release Date: April 27, 2004
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com
Dracula Has Risen from the Grave is the third Christopher Lee Dracula film from Hammer Studios. While trying to rid the former Dracula's Castle of evil after the mysterious death of a local girl, the Monsignor inadvertently raises the dark prince from his deathly slumber. Once awaken from the grave, the parched prince only has one thing on his mind, the yummy taste of blood which he fiendishly extracts from the local maidens. Though a little weak in plot, Dracula Has Risen from the Grave still comes off as a strong vampire film, delivering the goods on the gothic visuals, eerie sets, and Lee's performance. --Rob Bracco
Product Description
When his castle is exorcised dracula plots his revenge against the monsignor who performed the rites by attempting to make the holy mans young neice his bride. Studio: Warner Home Video Release Date: 09/27/2005 Starring: Christopher Lee Veronica Carlson Run time: 92 minutes Rating: G Director: Freddie Francis
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 55 more reviews...
A truly 'dark' and atmospheric entry in the Dracula series November 11, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Though there are mixed reactions to "Dracula Has Risen from the Grave", I personally found it to be very interesting and thought-provoking. The story here begins with the little village in which Castle Dracula is located. It's been a year since the count's reign of terror ended, and yet mysterious events still plague the villagers. When the Monsignor [Rupert Davies] returns for a routine visit, he finds the villagers cowering in fear, including the Parish Priest himself [Ewan Hooper]. When the Monsignor undertakes to exorcise the Castle once and for all, events transpire differently - an unfortunate cut on the Priest's head proves to be the nourishment that brings the Count back to life, though the Monsignor remains oblivious of this fact, returning to his own village. The Count and his now faithful servant, the priest follow hot on the Monsignor's heels, bent on revenge - the target being the Monsignor's lovely niece, Maria [Veronica Carlson]. It's left to the Monsignor and Maria's atheist boyfriend, Paul [Barry Andrews] to save Maria before it's too late.
The production values in this movie were actually quite good - the sets, the score, and cinematography all enhanced the storytelling and made this movie very dark and menacing [the cellar under the inn where the Count is forced to reside looks very authentic].
The acting was good - Christopher Lee returns as the Count and this time, he is really mad and bent on revenge, with more screen time and dialogue to convey his anger. His lust for his prey is convincingly portrayed as usual and the female victims once again fall hopelessly under his spell, baring their necks in anticipation of the Count's 'embrace'. Rupert Davies is also strong in his portrayal of the Monsignor and special mention needs to be made of Ewan Hooper's fallen priest. His guilt and conflict comes across as genuine, and this was one aspect of the movie that made it really good for me - the corruption of good by Dracula, and the test of faith in both the Priest and also the atheist Paul.
All in all, I found this instalment to be well-made and entertaining and would recommend it to all Dracula fans as well as those who like classic vampire movies.
 An Age of True Story Telling October 21, 2008
I grew up on theses Christopher Lee Dracula series and I remember when they scared the holy bejevis out of me. I guess that is why I enjoy the old world story telling and the gothic nature of the Hammer series. If you are looking for a horror film that compares to today's special effects of blood and guts everywhere, you may be bored with this series. But if you enjoy as I said a gothic story with a flavor for the yesteryear you will be well entertained. One nice thing though as the films are remastered in todays CD quuality is much appreciated.
awesome October 2, 2008
I saw this movie in 3 D when I was a teenager. I have always like Dracula movies and when I found this I bought it right away. When it arrived in the mail I watched it that night. Thanks for having it.
No coffin can hold him!!!! September 22, 2008
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
I knew to expect good things from the opening frames, which show a tide of blood washing down the screen. The blood flows around the letters of the name DRACULA like river water flowing around big rocks and continues to drip down the screen. A good sign, giving the impression that the movie will be drenched in blood.
We open on a young simple looking fellow cruising along on a goofy early 1900's looking bicycle, the type Mr. Burns from the Simpsons might have ridden in his youth. The fellow cruises through a small Eastern European looking burg, the kind of place that looks to have a strudel-based economy. He's the church groundskeeper and at some point decides to ring the church bell. When he grabs the bell rope he jerks his hands back and we see that they are now COVERED with blood!
A priest comes in and decides to investigate all the blood and climbs to the top of the bell tower, where a buxom village girl is hanging upside down inside the bell. A close-up of her throat reveals a pretty ghastly wound, punctuated by two, tooth sized puncture marks. Wuh-oh! Time to immigrate to America! ( Sometimes pursuing the American Dream meant pursuing the dream of not having all your blood sucked out by an Eastern European aristocrat.)
Luckily, a doughty monsignor manages to show up and only a year later. He dresses down the priest, who now drinks heavily, The towns people are still freaked out and the priest hasn't done anything to alay their fears. So the monsignor persuades the priest to join him on a little nature hike up to Castle Dracula, where they'll install a big golden crucifix in the Count's doorway and perform a Rite of Exorcism. That should take the wind out of the old Count's cape!
The priest however is a wuss, and halfway up the mountain he starts crying about how he can't go any further. The monsignor, who is schlepping the big, heavy golden cross, tells him to stay where he is and rest. Monsignor will take care of the dirty work.
Long story short, the monsignor reads the Rites while a scary storm whips up; throwing lightning bolts all helter skelter. The priest, Father Nancy-Boy, stumbles in a fit of drunken panic and falls on some rocks and cuts himself. The blood trickles out of the priest and down through a hole right into Count Dracula's mouth, Drac having been frozen in the ice in the last movie. Drac is revived. The priest, as the broken often do, becomes a Servant of Evil.
The Count is madder than a wet hen because he's been evicted from his Castle thanks to the Crucifix and Exorcism Rites and decides to get revenge on the Monsignor. And that's the plot right there.
Turns out the Monsignor's niece, Maria, is the hottest fraulein in the Shire or Fatherland or wherever they live and she's seeing a local wise acre named Paul, who works in a bakery until he can find something more meaningful that will engage his (imaginary) great intellect. When Paul's boss asks him why he studies so much, Paul answers that he wants to learn about Truth and become a success. "Well," the old baker replies," If you want to be a success you better steer clear of the Truth". Paul shows us how brash and headstrong he is by laughing off this sound advice and heading off to the tavern, where he meets Maria.
At the tavern, a gaggle of college boys are singing ,playing drinking games,enjoying the spirit of Bon Homme a little too much, not that there's anything wrong with that, and suppressing their Homme tendencies by group commenting on the waitress, who has bigger endowments than Harvard Law School( Ba-DUM-Dum). Zena is the Quintessential Saucy Tavern Wench. When the lads nod at her cleavage and tell her that her "dumplings are boiling over", she's the kind of girl who laughs it off and then cracks them over the head with her serving tray. . She's contrasts Maria who comes across as the type who would make you wear a tie to Sunday dinner and make you take all your Gwar posters down because they are "Icky". Give Uncle Hammockrider the Saucy Tavern Girl every time! Once you see Maria's innocent beauty, you know how the Count is going to direct his thirst for vengeance. There's a great scene where Dracula puts the Hypno-Whammy on Maria, seducing her with the power of his evil mind.
The rest of the movie is Paul and the Monsignor trying to rescue Maria and take the Count down for...the count. (sorry)
Christopher Lee is so good as Dracula his performance is usually taken for granted. Veronica Carlson reminding me of a young Linda Evans during her big Valley days, is one of the sexiest would-be-vampire brides. Barry Andrews is brash and brave as Maria's devoted lover and Rupert Davies does a great job as the Monsignor, wise backbone of the anti-Drac Squad. My favorite character though, was Zena, who was funny, sweet and tragic and well played by Barbara Ewing. She deserved better than what she got.
The ending features one the best Dracula death scenes ever filmed. And when you see whom it is who REALLY gets his revenge, you'll agree that he deserves it. It was a strong note to end the movie on.
The plot is a bit thin but there are lots of memorable Hammer moments here, and it's just plain fun. There will always be an audience for old-fashioned entertaining monster movies like this one. FANGtastic!
 Ugh! September 2, 2008
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
First, I must state that I dislike violent films, and tend to avoid viewing them. That way, the vast majority of persons reading this review will know right away that they probably have nothing useful to learn from my review (and will probably mark it as "not helpful" because after all, how dare someone like me post a review of a horror film?)
On the other hand, though, this film was rated G (way back in 1968, when that meant only "Suggested for GENERAL audiences - all ages admitted" and didn't have any other connotations) and so I thought perhaps this might have something of the flavor of "golden age" Hollywood films that have spooky old houses and mysterious music as a woman explores haunted hallways in candlelight and maybe glimpses a creepy figure and screams. My hope was that it would be in classic style, rather than the sadistic junk that passes for "horror" in today's cinema.
Unfortunately, this film was very much what I should have expected from Christopher Lee.... It is also the bloodiest G-rated film I've ever seen. That's right - bloodiest! Today, when bloody violence means an R rating, it sounds like a joke to say that a G-rated film could possibly be bloody. At most, one would think that a close-up of someone's finger with a papercut would be the most that a G rating would allow. Well, this was 1968, so ignore all that marketing junk that has surrounded the rating system in the following decades. The early ratings had long been criticized for being overly concerned with sex and profanity and not concerned enough with violence. And this film is a great example of that. Parents DID complain at the time, but Jack Valenti just said that: Well, the Dracula genre is traditional in film, and those parents just aren't aware of those traditions. He totally missed the point. Those traditions themselves were controversial from the outset - far from simply being tradition, the mixing of sensuality with violence has always been a controversial part of the vampire genre ever since the original Dracula novel, and this film is well beyond anything that would have been approved under the classic production code. The most appealing part of the film are its comely young women, who make a point by the way of exhibiting cleavage throughout the film. But viewers supposedly want more than appealing faces and figures on screen, when they select a horror film, and so these women get placed in jeopardy and even murdered (!) for our supposed entertainment.
Let me state frankly what this film offers, and if you've learned to think that these things are "entertaining" then you can take that into account. If, on the other hand, you actually think that there is something valuable about human life, and that vicious portrayals of injury, bloodshed and murder are quite opposed to the respect that human life deserves, then you should take this warning into account before watching this G-rated film.
The very opening scene involves the discovery of a woman's corpse, by following its trail of blood up through a bell tower to its source. She's hanging upside down at the top, with a purple wound in her neck where she'd been bitten and blood beneath her, pooled on the floor and dripping through. Her body is later seen in a state of some decomposition being dumped disrespectfully from its coffin.
Numerous scenes involve extreme close-up views of the puncture wounds from Dracula's bite, in women's necks, with swelling and purple bruising.
In this film, various wounds produce blood. The vampire is revived when a head wound has pooled blood that happens to drip through some ice into a wintry tomb in which it lands on the sleeping Dracula's lips. (If Dracula hadn't yet revived, then it turns out that this film has no explanation whatsoever for the first victim that was found!)
A woman is murdered and her body is burned in a fireplace. In this lengthy scene, we are spared only the actual vision of the body being loaded into the flames.
When a stake is driven into Dracula in this film, blood actually flows from the wound in numerous extreme close-up shots. This, today, would be R-rated fare, were it not for the cinematic "traditions" that Jack Valenti originally referred to for the dracula films.... :-(
Dracula is also impaled on a metal cross, with visible blood and extreme close-up shots showing the metal going through his body and protruding from his torso, with blood on it. This is not a brief glimpse, mind you, but an extensive collection of shots as part of an entire scene showing his demise, with all the lurid displays one would expect of today's PG-13 films.
You were warned.
This is a vicious little film of the "modern" blood-and-murder style of horror. :-( It delivers very little else of significance, and is NOT recommended.
|
|
|
