Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972) review

draculaAd1972Poster

Look, man: this is a Hammer flick – can you dig it?  Eschewing the default period piece setting for its classic horror monster pictures, Hammer decided to pull Dracula and his most famous nemesis (well, his nemesis’ ancestor, anyway) into hip, bacchanal, grooving 70s London.  While this film is commonly considered a lesser Hammer film, I thought it was a real trippy blast.  Yes, it’s silly and the attempts to relate to the youth are comically obvious, but it’s these qualities that make it so much trashy fun.  This is high order kitsch.  Just chill and go with it, man.  Don’t be such a square.

dracula1972_2
Johnny Alucard, I’m not going to ask you again. If you must smoke that infernal bong, please do so outside of my crypt.

Well, okay: this is a lesser Hammer film, but it’s just so darn much fun.  Hammer’s brand was heavily waning in the 70s.  Gothic horror was out, and there was a new breed of drive-in and horror films bringing in the bucks.  In an attempt to get the kids in aisles, Hammer set their next Dracula film in swinging contemporary London and filled it with cool young people dancing, partying, getting high, visibly at odds from the stuffy older establishment.  Ironically, the film brings to mind stuffy older establishment executives at Hammer stuck in a stuffy room blatantly attempting to fit in with the young folks.  I was reminded of Steve Buscemi’s 30 Rock guest appearance as an undercover high-school cop.  This square attempt at writing hip youths, as it happens, is part of the silly, campy charm of this film.  It’s hopelessly, desperately solicitous of youth viewership, and that can be funny and fun – it certainly is here.  Of course, while most of the kids mean well, their excessive, frivolous ways can get them into trouble, and it’s up to the gerontocracy to save them from themselves. And Dracula, of course.

dracula1972_3
Peter Cushing is the man.

It helps that the film looks really nice.  Lots of bright technicolor, the vibe of 70s London, it’s all so much better put together than it has any right to be, which is one of Hammer’s great strengths – professionalism and talent in the service of what many studios would treat as pure trash.  Lee, of course, is a consummate performer, as is the wonderful-as-always Cushing.  The rest of the cast is largely fine, but suffer for the lackluster writing.

dracula1972_5
I never drink…cherry Kool-Aid from a wine decanter.

Perhaps I’m just the right kind of viewer for this film – an appreciation of kitsch, drive-in exploitation, well-shot, colorful psychedelia, and a straight from Sunday school story of Satanism and corruption (oh God, not sex and drugs and rock n roll!).  One person’s trash is another’s treasure, as the cliche goes.  If you can jive with it, this is a fun time with a groovin’ soundtrack.

6/10

4 thoughts on “Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972) review

  1. Fond memories of this movie because they used to play it quite a bit on Saturday afternoon horror movie shows in Detroit growing up. It was so awesomely dated, I’ll never forget Stephanie Beacham’s shag haircut.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s