Blood for Dracula (1973)

67% of critics liked it
(15 reviews)
58% of users liked it
(4,839 ratings)

The second of two horror films shot in a single production term and bearing the name of pop-art icon Andy Warhol (whose participation pretty much ended with the use of his name), this film is slightly superior to its higher-profile predecessor, Andy Warhol's Frankenstein. Direction is credited to… More The second of two horror films shot in a single production term and bearing the name of pop-art icon Andy Warhol (whose participation pretty much ended with the use of his name), this film is slightly superior to its higher-profile predecessor, Andy Warhol's Frankenstein. Direction is credited to Warhol factory filmmaker Paul Morrissey, though there still exists a very vocal camp who insist that the real credit should go to Italian director Antonio Margheriti. Euro-horror leading man Udo Kier assays the title role, playing the count as a pale, anemic-looking blood junkie with an overwrought accent. Finding the supply of "weer-gin" blood diminishing rapidly in Romania, Dracula is forced to seek a fix in a predominantly Catholic Italian province, where he is certain a few virgins still exist. He travels with his assistant (Arno Juerging) and his coffin-sealed sister to the decrepit, crumbling mansion of the financially-strapped Marquis DiFore (a tour-de-force performance from Bicycle Thief director Vittorio de Sica) who welcomes the affluent Count with open arms, hoping to marry off any one of his four daughters. Dracula clearly has other intentions for the girls... but his plans are rudely thwarted by beefy, socialist handyman Mario (Joe Dallesandro), who has been dutifully divesting the young maidens of their -- ahem -- virtue, thus tainting their blood and making it unsafe for vampiric consumption. Very unsafe, it turns out -- as we are treated to protracted scenes of the death-pale Count vomiting up gallons of blood. Rated "X" at the time of its release (and subsequently re-rated "R" ten years later), this outrageous catalogue of depravity features wildly campy performances, inane dialogue and an outrageous climax. ~ Cavett Binion, Rovi

Rating, Runtime: R, 1 hr. 30 min.
Directed By: Paul Morrissey, Antonio Margheriti
Written By: Paul Morrissey
Genres: Horror, Classics, Comedy

In Theaters: Nov 27, 1974 Wide
On DVD: Dec 22, 1998

Critic Reviews

Variety Staff, Variety
Morrisey long showed that his films, although more implicit in sex, drugs and characterizations, were really Hollywood films at the core.
Jonathan Rosenbaum, Chicago Reader
One of the two schlocky horror comedies Paul Morrissey made in Italy in 1974... Blood for Dracula is the sexier and funnier.
, TV Guide's Movie Guide
Stylishly directed, atmospheric, funny, and intense enough to please gorehounds--especially at the climax.
Ben Cobb, Film4
Outrageous, hilarious and shocking, this is trash art at its very best.
Rob Nelson, City Pages, Minneapolis/St. Paul
Desperate for virgin blood, [Udo] Kier's wan, fussy vampire strategically heads to Catholic Italy, but the food sucks ("They put so much oil here on everything!").
Dennis Schwartz, Ozus' World Movie Reviews
It's a few bites away from being a delicious spoof on Dracula.
Rob Gonsalves, eFilmCritic.com
Pretty funny, especially Roman Polanski's cameo, though not nearly as wild as Flesh for Frankenstein -- but then again, few movies are.
, Time Out
Often startlingly beautiful to look at.
Christopher Null, Filmcritic.com
One of the worst and least faithful Dracula intepretations ever made.
Ken Hanke, Mountain Xpress (Asheville, NC)
A horror film and a spoof -- but it's also something more. A strange, lingering sadness hangs over the film in its depiction of the end of an era.

Read all 10 critic reviews

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

Featured Audience Ratings

Graham J

Superior to Flesh For Frankenstein, this is a great second film for Paul Morrisey's horror double feature. There are some truly amazing images in this one. Udo Kier is perfect as Dracula.
Stephen M

With a shortage of 'wirgins' in Romania, Count Dracula travels to Italy in search of good, pure Catholic girls to feast on, installing himself in the dilapidated mansion of an aristocrat with four unmarried daughters, ostensibly as a suitor for one of them. Since two of the… More
With a shortage of 'wirgins' in Romania, Count Dracula travels to Italy in search of good, pure Catholic girls to feast on, installing himself in the dilapidated mansion of an aristocrat with four unmarried daughters, ostensibly as a suitor for one of them. Since two of the daughters are slatterns and any blood but that of a virgin makes the count violently ill, the scene is set for some nice comic episodes. Although the acting is generally atrocious, "Blood for Dracula", unlike the terrible "Flesh for Frankenstein", has a number of clever touches which breathe new life into the vampire yarn, for instance the count applying make-up to disguise his sickly pallor. Dominique Darel, Silvia Dionisio and Stefania Casini, as three of the daughters, are very easy on the eye, and Roman Polanski makes a brief appearance in a scene which prefigures one in his own "Bitter Moon". Surprisingly well photographed and scored, too.
Cindy I

More fun from the gang that brought you Flesh for Frankenstein. This time Dracula (our pal Udo Kier), is a little particular about his meals -- he can only have the blood of female (I guess, I didn't see him attacking any young boys) "wirgins". If he drinks the blood… More
More fun from the gang that brought you Flesh for Frankenstein. This time Dracula (our pal Udo Kier), is a little particular about his meals -- he can only have the blood of female (I guess, I didn't see him attacking any young boys) "wirgins". If he drinks the blood of an experienced woman, he vomits up the blood (all charmingly detailed in Technicolor) and goes into wild convulsions and spasms. All this gets demonstrated when he travels to Italy to the home of a wealthy man (Vittorio de Sica -- how did they talk HIM into this?!) and his four daughters. Dracula tells the man that he is looking for a wife and heard his daughters were all beautiful and devout Catholics, which would prove that they were pure. Uh, not quite. See, there's this gardener (Joe Dallesandro) who's doing his best to give all the daughters a ride on his ho handle. Dracula tries to make a little time with the daughters too, but keeps getting sick because they keep lying about being pure and he keeps believing them (Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice...) What to do, what to do? I won't give anymore away. Let's just say that the film ends on a rather downer note for all involved. As usual, the effects are laughable, the acting and script atrocious. There are so many accents heard that it sounds like the United Nations. We can count on Big Joe though, with his New Yawk accent to make this movie more bizarre than it already is. More (boring) sex scenes and fewer disembowelments in this than Frankenstein, but no less ridiculous. Deserves only 1 star at best, but it's one of those "so bad it's good" films, which adds more stars for entertainment bang for the buck.
hawk l

Great photography, Udo Kier a pale, anemic villian, Arno Juerging his assistant, marvelously balancing ludicrous dialogue with deadpan earnestness. Tour-de-force performance from Vittorio de Sica as the Marquis Di Fiore with Maxime McKendry as Lady Di Fiore.