It is difficult for me to decide which one I consider Hammer's greatest achievement in Horror films !
Both have aspects I embrace : one has the rich colour and style and gothicity(plus Van Helsing) while the other has the storyline(what a sequel to Horror of Drac.!) and characters & Chris Lee w\Andrew Keir and Latham at their best-and throw in Babs Shelley for good measure !
It is tough indeed ... and so I'll wait ....
I'll go with Brides of Dracula. The two main reasons- it was interesting to see Van Helsing go up against a vampire who was not Christopher Lee for a change and also, those two vampire women were the sexiest and the most beautiful vampires I've ever seen. They just make my mouth water. They can bite me anytime!
shareI definitely prefer Dracula Prince of Darkness. It has a sophistication that Brides of Dracula lacks.
Brides of Dracula is basically a bloody good romp, very camp and very lavish, but it's not one of Hammer's cleverest productions.
- - - - - - - -
www.rattiganwrites.blogspot.com
www.dictionaryofhammer.com
[deleted]
Still a tough call:both have aspects to them which recommends them.
They are different from each other;one has the wonderful Chris Lee and yet the other has the redoubtable Cushing who shines as the immortal Van Helsing !
...and certainly,Prince of Darkness is even more dark and grittier than Brides,but BOD still has that lustre of sophistication which,may indeed,edge out DPOD in the final analysis.
[deleted]
I love Prince of Darkness as well, but Brides is my favorite of the series.
The variety of action, the tonal range (action packed, sinister, even elegiac in the scene of the Baroness' euthanasia), an excellent performance from Cushing, epic soundtrack (Hammer's best in my opinion), a very clever ending, and two incredibly beautiful vampire brides. What's not to love?
--------------------------------------------
If there were reason for these miseries,
Then into limits could I bind my woes.
There are those "little things" in "Brides" which make it a special Hammer flic in the Horror canon. Fine veteran acting such as achieved by Miss Hunt,for example,strengthens the beginning of the story and gives it gravitas-and dear Freda adds even more spice as she gleefully jumps into her role with vigor and vitality. Just to cite the scene where Jackson briefs a prospective female undead to rise is sufficient to make the case.
The soundtrack is effective and never intrudes upon the action itself as it is woven nicely throughout the proceedings. And I do believe the climax of the story is both clever and impressionable.
All in all an exquisite classic to revisit although we pretty much concur that Christopher Lee is the best when it comes to the Count being portrayed; but,at the same time, we have Terence Fisher and Co. pulling off a coupe in this remarkable original film of diabolical vampirism.
Btw I certainly like the lead young actress who gives extra boost to the film and her beauty certainly adds to the sheen when watched visually on the screen.
I can't choose one over the other. Both are equally great and all involved with the making of them should be proud to have made such excellent horror classics.
Come, fly the teeth of the wind. Share my wings.
In many ways, it's a close call: both are directed by Terence Fisher with great style, so both are beautiful films to look at. David Peel makes an adequate substitute for Dracula in Brides, whilst Andrew Keir is the best in the series of Van Helsing substitutes until Peter Cushing himself returns in Dracula AD 1972.
Ultimately, however, the scales tip in favour of Brides, since (1) Brides looks fat more lavish than DPoD, which shows its thin budget; (2) the supporting cast are much better in Brides, some of the cast in DPoD (eg the mother of the dead girl and the clergyman in the funeral scene at the start) are very unconvincing; (3) the plot of brides moves (despite a couple of inconsistencies)at a much better and smoother pace, whilst the plot of DPod often seems to keep the cast revisiting the same few sets to keep costs down.
So Brides: 9/10, DPoD 7/10
[deleted]
Of itself, that is a major bonus for DPoD (to my mind he remains the definitive Dracula) but as we see in each new film in the series, Lee's presence was not enough to stop the films declining in quality.
shareBrides of Dracula for me! I love those rich colors by Jack Asher, he really made Bernard Robinson´s detailed period sets look amazing. I also really like the script by Jimmy Sangster, Peter Bryan and Edward Percy, plot holes or no plot holes, and the cast is great.
Don´t get me wrong, POD has great actors and actresses too, it is well-done picture, but I am the bridesmaid to Brides.
I totally understand the rationale for your choice as you click off the myriad reasons for preferring BOD. In fact,I would be in agreement pretty much with your positive points to ponder as this film,for example,has a rich visual look in general.Which conveys to me that there might have been a generous budget afforded for this classic.
I like the story line which unfolds brilliantly as the tale progresses.It is plainly intelligently packaged.And,I think Cushing's Van Helsing is one of his best portrayals of this most arresting character in Vampire lore.