Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

TeenzTen An action-packed slog

Peereddi I was totally surprised at how great this film.You could feel your paranoia rise as the film went on and as you gradually learned the details of the real situation.

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Leofwine_draca An above average Gothic adventure from Hammer, in their finest tradition. While the story - honeymooning couple falls foul of vampire cult - may be nothing new, the typical trappings and good acting help to make this a refreshing spin on the tale, a rare film where everything gels together to become one. Don Sharp, who later went on to helm the FU MANCHU series, does a good job in directing his first horror film, and the pacing is great. No scene ever gets too boring, and there are a number of shocks and jump scenes to enjoy, and action too. The Gothic surroundings and style is spot on, making this a fine example of Hammer's output. Not the best, perhaps, but certainly solid.The cast all do their jobs, although nobody is really a match for the sorely missed Cushing and Lee. Edward De Souza and Jennifer Daniel are capable leads as the innocent young people caught up in the happenings. Noel Willman is pretty solemn and emotionless as the head vampire, but his acting is suited to the role, and he's believably evil. Clifford Evans is no match for Peter Cushing, but he's okay, although lacking in natural charisma. The film doesn't really have many special effects, apart from the usual fangs. The swarm of bats which is involved in the relatively exciting climax are good fun but blatantly fake, and not realistic in the least, unfortunately. This ruins the atmosphere somewhat. While generic, KISS OF THE VAMPIRE has enough correct ingredients to pass the time amiably enough.

lulu-17985 I'm not going to rehash the plot of the movie, because that has been done by most of the earlier reviews. I'm going to just touch on what I think worked-and what I think didn't. In terms of the atmosphere, cinematography, etc., I think they did a good job. It had the foreboding, eerie set up, for the most part. (Also, from this point, things might get a little spoilery.)There were so many things they did in this movie, IMO, that they really didn't set up properly. This movie is definitely formulaic-and I'm not criticizing it for that. What I am going to find fault with, though, is leaving part of the formula out. 19th century husband leaves his new wife sitting in their useless motorcar because they ran out of gas, and he needs to go get help. OK. It's also not necessarily bad that she got uncomfortable and decided to try and catch up with hubby, at least if they had bothered to have something unsettling happen before she decided to get out-but they didn't. Stuff happened after she got out of the car. Of course, part of this was so she could run into the stern Professor fellow who gave her a cryptic warning, which, of course, also did not help calm her already frayed nerves. Another thing I found out of sync was the "inn." It seemed like it was designed to be the "Ritz" of small Bavarian inns, but why? I don't know if we were supposed to deduce that the village once was more prosperous and merited such an establishment, but it seemed out of place. It would be like finding a deserted town in the Nevada desert that still had a fancy Hilton hotel there welcoming whatever guest might wander in- which is pretty much what happened here. Also, the innkeeper moderated from seeming happily oblivious to what was going on to being complicit- even if they were being coerced(and I think that was certainly implied.)The wife's behavior became more understandable once they showed the scene where she was grieving over her daughter-a scene which I thought was very effective, and probably the best acting in the whole movie. Even the main couple's faces expressed their understanding that they had almost intruded on a private, sad moment as they quietly withdrew to leave the poor women to grieve. Speaking of the main couple, they were naturally, happily naive. The man, of course, was one of means-inherited, naturally. He wasn't a snobby sort, though he certainly had no problem with the local "uppity-ups" recognizing his obvious value and integrity, sight unseen. Again, this isn't necessarily something that was unrealistic in terms of the "upper"class being, perhaps, as too trusting when dealing with someone they have assumed is also "upper class."Let me skip on to what I found was the biggest flaw in the show-and that was how "ho hum" the bad guys-and gals-were. The predecessor to this movie was, I believe(at least in terms of vampire movies)Brides of Dracula-and I found the vampire in that to be more intimidating, even with his fake, fluffy red wig and foppish appearance-than most of the vamps in this movie. It was almost laughable when the "hero" managed to grab his wife and run out of a whole room full of vampires-with almost none of them in pursuit except their one, I assume, human lackey. We in the audience needed much more exposition as to why this Drac wannabe had a castle full of other vampires who seemed to have nothing better to do than to either quiver in fear for various reasons, or carp at their "master." I mean, the village was supposedly pretty deserted- so, who was left for this house full of vampires to victimize and "feed" on? Even the visitors to the countryside were supposed to be rare- and the two naive victims had made a wrong turn to start with to end up out of gas in the middle of some obscure Bavarian forest. The one actor who did a decent job, IMO, was the "Van Helsing" type-Professor Zimmerman. In what screen time he was given he managed to convey that he wasn't just a grumpy drunk-but that there was a good reason he was the way he was, as well as a method to his madness.Last, but not least, I feel the climax could have been done much better. I saw it mentioned that, for some reason, they decided not to release this movie around the same time as the famed Hitchcock movie, The Birds-not because Hammer didn't want to compete with that movie(though that certainly would make sense)but because of the similar, mind-blowing "event." I can see the slight similarity, but the Hitchcock film did not shy away from showing, as much as they were allowed by the movie codes, how gruesome being attacked by a huge flock of birds could be. Likewise, this movie could have added to the discomfort-and certainly the horror-if they had portrayed, like The Birds, at least as much as possible(taking into consideration the aforementioned codes and the Hammer budget)a much more mutilated bunch of vampires being chowed down on, I assume, by a horde of vampire bats(the irony not supposed to be lost on we, the audience.) This was just about as "toothless," in terms of scares, a vampire movie was I have ever seen-and I've seen a bunch, at my age.

utgard14 Newlyweds Gerald and Marianne Harcourt (Edward de Souza, Jennifer Daniel) are passing through a tiny European village when their car breaks down. They find themselves invited to a ball held by the charming Dr. Ravna (Noel Willman). But little do they know Ravna is a vampire. After his wife is kidnapped, the husband must turn to local Van Helsing stand-in Professor Zimmer (Clifford Evans) for help in rescuing her from Ravna and his vampire cult.Slow-going but intriguing Hammer horror film directed by Don Sharp with a good script by Anthony Hinds and a solid cast. Lots of creepy scenes and one of the best endings to any of the Hammer films. This one doesn't have Peter Cushing or Christopher Lee but it's great nonetheless so definitely check it out.

Spikeopath Kiss of the Vampire (AKA: Kiss of Evil in a truncated TV version) is directed by Don Sharp and written by John Elder. it stars Clifford Evans, Noel Willman, Edward de Souza, Jennifer Daniel, Barry Warren, Brian Oulton and Jacquie Wallis. Out of Hammer Film Productions in Eastmancolour, cinematography is by Alan Hume and music by James Bernard.Honeymooners Gerald (de Souza) and Marianne Harcourt (Daniel) stop over in a remote Bavarian village and fall prey to a suspicious family headed by Dr. Ravna (Willman).Planned as a Dracula sequel by Hammer Films, Kiss of the Vampire eventually followed in the vein of Brides of Dracula by bringing vampires into a social situation without the famous Count as the figurehead. With no Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, Terence Fisher or Freddie Francis involved, it does on the outside seem it should be a lesser Hammer Horror picture. Thankfully that isn't the case at all.There's some wooden acting, less than great effects work in the finale and a lack of blood for the gore hounds, but this is still a wonderful Hammer picture. Ripe with atmosphere, beaming with glorious Gothic set design and beautifully photographed, it's a film begging to be discovered by the vampire faithful.Essentially a reworking of Edward G. Ulmer's The Black Cat (1934), the narrative follows the familiar vampiric formula so beloved by horror film makers, especially the house of Hammer, which is no bad thing really since they do it so well. In fact it should be noted that the finale to this one is a departure from the norm and is rather exciting, if just a little abrupt in the context of plotting.A bevy of beauties adorn the frames while suave aristocrat type gentlemen glide around the Ravna abode, this is very much a film rich in that Hammer style. Ignore claims of it being slow, for this is considerate to setting up the characters, and ignore the butchered American TV version, for Kiss of the Vampire is a treat for like minded Hammerphiles. 7.5/10