Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Organnall Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

christopher-underwood This begins well enough at an isolated orphanage with talk of strange winds advancing and there is an amazing and extensive attack not very far in. The ending is only okay, however and somehow in between the director looses the plot (what there is of it). Unlike the rather charming and effective original Yorga this one clearly has a larger budget and is well shot but horror, comedy, romance ooh, lets have a bit of one and then the other and we can always end up running about like Scooby- Do. Its not a complete mess, but really, considering the potential and the simplicity of the location it is a bit of a shambles. I see that leading lady Marietta Hartley was born in 1940 and is still working today so I shall not be rude but do not know how she was chosen for this when all that was required was a young sexy woman who could make us believe she was going to save the day. Talking of 'sexy' again this 'Yorga' is rather lacking. In that early great scene when all hell breaks loose, almost everyone seems to be wearing dressing gowns. I understand the original "Yorga' had originally been intended as a sex film but that the excellent Robert Quarry thought it should be given a chance as a straight horror. Well, that one worked and then we come down to this sexless and almost lifeless effort. Shame.

MartinHafer Following in the tradition of Hammer Films' Dracula series, this sequel resurrects the vampire AND his assistant even though they were clearly killed at the end of the first Yorga movie! Yes, inexplicably he's back and in a different locale--now terrorizing suburbia instead of Los Angeles.Soon after the film begins, a group of very poorly costumed vampire ladies attack a home--killing several family members. However, Yorga appears and is not pleased (why?!) and decides to somehow erase the memory of the attack from most of the surviving family members. Oddly, the mute woman (Jennifer) is immune to the hypnosis but no one believes her story that the family was attacked. However, some family members were killed but young Tommy came up with convenient excuses as to their whereabouts. Slowly, however, another family member (Cynthia) begins to recall bits and pieces of the attack--all this AFTER she's gone to stay with Yorga. Perhaps she'll remember the entire traumatic event in time. This all begs the question "why would Yorga go to all this trouble--and why wouldn't he just wipe out this family altogether???" Well, the answer it seems is that he's in love with Cynthia and wants to woo her! No, he doesn't want to bite her neck but have her voluntarily become his--a truly consensual vampire (how modern and non-chauvinistic).So is the film any good? Well, not especially. The biggest problem, other than the weird plot, is that the vampire makeup appears often to be some cheap plastic fangs and some white powder makeup and that's all!! This is especially true of the lady vampires and just looks crappy--and I am talking about WORSE than a typical Halloween costume! And, in most every other way the film just looks shabby. To make things worse, it's also not all that interesting...and Yorga comes off as a bit of a loser. Not very good and a pale shadow of the original Yorga film. Perhaps the $47.37 budget didn't help!

caprairie I saw this movie at my Junior High School in the '70's....halfway through it my buddy grabbed a teacher and she screamed her head off. This one caused a few sleepless nights for me as a kid. It is reminiscent of "Night Of The Living Dead" in the scene where all the female vamps break in and kill all inside, but it was somehow more scary in that this family was "at home", where we are supposed to feel safe. The opener with the kid running through the graveyard and the hands coming up out of the ground also creeped me out. Best line has to be when Count Yorga is at the costume party and the cheesy looking guy dressed as Dracula asks him "Where are your fangs?" Yorga replies "Where are your manners?" Classic.

Matt Moses It comes as no surprise that by the early 70's sequels were being made from movies in which the protagonist of the second film dies in the first. I do wonder, however, what sequel did this first - I'd hesitate to suggest the Dracula or Frankenstein series as those characters were more concepts than distinct personae. Yorga, however, was a clear case of capitalistic resurrection. Count Yorga, Vampire left him decidedly dead, yet he shows up here with little explanation. But, when push comes to shove, who really cares? I care more about the fact that despite the presence of many of the same names, including director Kelljan, from the first highly entertaining installment, Return fails on any number of accounts. Robert Quarry, back as Yorga, makes his reappearance at a masquerade at the local orphanage put together by kind-hearted if unimpressive Mariette Hartley. He likes what he sees, so he has his harem of decaying ladies abduct her and bite many members of her good-natured family. Mute coworker Yvonne Wilder finds the bodies; when the police arrive, however, they've mysteriously disappeared and frustrated Wilder can't locate a pen to inscribe what she witnessed. Roger Perry, back in his role as vampire investigator and apparently in the process of establishing himself as a modern Van Helsing, spearheads an investigation that apparently involves quite a bit of conversations shown in unexciting long shot. While Quarry's out on the town, Hartley has some pretty intense vampire hallucinations that provide some distraction from the mundane story. Three beers and two mojitos into the film, my notes and memory are illegible, but the conclusion involves a lot of vampire converts. Return is nowhere near as frightening as its predecessor, nor does it boast a clever story, suggestive acting and passable dialogue. With a story like this enacted by a cast like this, it's difficult to determine where the bad screenplay ends and where the bad acting begins. Regardless of where to place blame, Hartley has some horrible lines, many of which she lolls out like so much porridge. One of the only attributes similar to the first film is Kelljan's clever use of color. While Yorga featured a symphony of shades of brown contrasted with the occasional burst of red, Return's understated color scheme includes some extremely well placed shots, including a sequence with some striking purple. I found the video in the Horror Comedy section of the video store but did no laughing with, only at. The funniest part of the movie to me is that the co-writer Wilder didn't give herself any lines in the movie, preferring instead to hop around, point and gesture than to pronounce any of her clunky dialogue. Mel Brooks actor/writer Rudy De Luca has a role as a police investigator; Craig T. Nelson, the dad from Poltergeist, also plays a detective. George Macready returns from the previous film (which he narrated) for his last film role, as does ugly Edward Walsh in the same role as Quarry's gatekeeper.