The Satanic Rites of Dracula (1973)

Secret Service and Scotland Yard police investigators believe they have uncovered a case of vampirism in London. They call in expert vampire researcher Professor Lorrimer Van Helsing to help them stop these hideous crimes. It becomes apparent that the culprit is none other than Count Dracula, disguised as a reclusive property developer, secretly plotting to unleash a fatal virus upon the world. The Satanic Rites marks the 8th entry in Hammer's Dracula series, following on from the events of Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972). Its continuation of the story allowed for many returning characters, locations and recalling of events, which cemented the pair's shared continuity. I found this to be the film's strongest attribute, developing every element further in exciting and interesting ways. I particularly loved the reprisal of figures who originally had meagre parts step into the limelight, such as Inspector Murray. He was a fun side character in A.D. but ultimately didn't get anything crucial to do, until now, playing a pivotal role, aiding Helsing and getting in on the action. Even Helsing's granddaughter, Jessica, would make a return, although now recast, which I'm still unsure how I feel about. Naturally returning prior characters meant another showdown was set in place for returning stars, Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee in their respective roles as Van Helsing and Dracula. Their ceremonious reunion was a huge highlight of the last title and would be an equal driving force here. Lee's Dracula plays a much more prominent role than in the previous, having plenty more to do, say and finally, a bigger vendetta to pursue rather than his personal revenge missions of the past. His presence continues to be grand in all his scenes, featuring his demanding, booming voice with plenty of dialogue. Cushing's Lorrimer Van Helsing equally receives plenty to do, becoming the focal protagonist who must once more use his cunning to unearth the dark mysteries and expose the truth. I also love how he would later arm himself for a confrontation with Dracula, bringing a cross and so on, including a gun, which made for a fantastic image of him wielding the two. Any opportunity to see the duo together makes for required viewing as their chemistry elevates the production, even if this is the most confusing and weakest movie in the series. Many would argue this derived from the film's juggling of a plethora of genres, which come across as less of a 'Hammer Dracula' production and more as a spy, thriller or crime flick. One that just so happens to have vampires present. Its mix-matched genre styles can be quite puzzling, almost as though the film itself isn't sure what it's meant to be. I'm not sure espionage, car chases, and police investigations were high demands for a Dracula film but, it has the luxury of never being done before or since. All being said, amidst its flaws, I still found much to enjoy and certainly don't hate the film. Whilst it has been deemed the weakest movie by viewers, it has evolved in its perception by fans, much like A.D. 1972 has. We definitely see a departure from some of its more 'campy' themes, moving away from its hippie focus and taking a seemingly more serious and darker tone. There are plenty of aspects using more violence, mainly including shoot-outs, as well as upping the horror, best seen through the twisted farm of chained-up vampiric brides in a basement. Furthermore, Dracula's plan is just as horrifying, aiming to destroy the population with a manufactured plague whilst it could be argued as making little sense for him to do so, it would practically be his ultimate revenge. I also liked the detail of the headquarters of the evil goings-on being the original grounds of the condemned church, where Dracula died in the last film and would feature one of the best sequences with the mortal enemies talking face to face. Overall, The Satanic Rites is a pretty basic Dracula film, in my opinion. It has plenty of redeemable qualities but still falls flat as it loses its identity in attempting to do too much. I think Cushing and Lee's involvement makes this worth watching, especially to see Lee's final portrayal as the definitive iteration of Dracula. Check out the final production The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires (1974) for more.

 

Runtime: 1h 27m

Director: Alan Gibson

Genre: Horror

Related Sites and Media:

Movie Trailer:

Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972)

London has become a small town for a handful of jaded psychedelic-era hipsters. Except, Johhny Alucard has a groovy new way for his pals to get their kicks. A particular ritual will be the living end, he insists, but little do they know how deadly serious he is. Whilst the act comes to fruition, the now resurrected Dracula must still face the descendant of his archnemesis, Van Helsing. Whilst a sequel to Scars of Dracula (1970), it equally chose to depart from the rest of the series, starting a fresh in probably the most ... unique way. Dracula A.D. 1972 decided to do something new and, in doing so, departed from its Gothic period settings in favour of bringing this ancient evil to the realms of today, modernising the series. The period aspect had always been at these film's core but even this production couldn't totally cast it aside. The film opens with a climactic confrontation between Lawrence Van Helsing and Dracula in 1872 aboard a moving coach, travelling at high speeds. Their animalistic fight is a gripping opening to the picture displaying Helsing's triumph over his sworn enemy before his ultimate demise. However, a follower of the Count collects the ashes for safekeeping. This introduction is absolutely fantastic, instantly pumping you with adrenaline before the title card has even been played. I further adored the transition from the 19th Century setting being panned up to the sky as funky music blares out with a plane crossing the screen, transporting us to 1972. That adrenaline is carried on through the entire sequence by this killer soundtrack that has the grooviest theme in any Dracula film! The soundtrack is a tremendous highlight and one I can honestly say is worth owning. Mike Vicker's composed theme alone is a stand-out track and one that's permanently stuck in my head. Viewers will be quick to notice the reprisal of actor Peter Cushing as Van Helsing or rather, both versions as he plays Lawrence during the opening and his descendant, Lorrimer, our main protagonist. I loved the return of Cushing to this franchise after all, his last appearance with Christopher Lee's Dracula was way back in the first film, Dracula (1958). Naturally, the pair steal the spotlight, bringing outstanding scenes at the abundance, elevating the picture tenfold. Their inevitable reunion during the finale is a phenomenal segment that will have fans on tenterhooks. During the year 1972, Lorrimer Van Helsing leads a standard life looking after his granddaughter, Jessica who on the other hand, spends her time hanging out with her hippie-like friends who like to have fun crashing parties and doing wild things for kicks. Jessica and her friends are one of the main focuses of the movie and are easily one of the reasons this film was classed as dated. Even my Dad joked "The film was dated when it came out", which I find hilarious. Despite all this, it has weirdly improved with age and is favourably looked at now by more people revisiting it. Jessica is undeniably the most intriguing member of the group to follow, with her ties to Van Helsing and how she would become an ideal target for a revenge plot. Among her group, member Johhny Alucard proposes an experience like no other, suggesting a black mass. Reluctantly agreeing under peer pressure, they do so in a condemned church. However, when the situation becomes increasingly realistic, they all scatter moments before Dracula makes his dramatic revival. Now with his vampiric turned servant, Johhny, Dracula hunts each member. However, when the police get involved and seek the Helsings for questioning, Lorrimer begins investigating the matter, equally hunting Dracula and his spawn. Overall, Dracula A.D. 1972 is a fascinating step in the series, taking the age-old tale in a new direction. This is a guilty pleasure for me and my Dad as we found plenty to enjoy from its ambitious and outright groovy style. Plus it was my introduction to the Hammer Dracula series. It's a so bad it's good film that also manages to deliver a brilliant soundtrack as well as the reuniting of Cushing and Lee in their iconic roles. Movie-goers will find plenty to be entertained by from this unusual flick. Check out the continuation in The Satanic Rites of Dracula (1973).

 

Runtime: 1h 36m

Director: Alan Gibson

Genre: Horror

Related Sites and Media:

Movie Trailer:

Theme Song:

My DVD Copy:

Scars of Dracula (1970)

After coming back to life from the ashes, Count Dracula begins spreading his evil once again from his mountaintop castle. When passer-by Paul Carlson spends the night, he witnesses the horrors of Dracula first-hand, resulting in his disappearance. His brother, Simon, and his girlfriend, Sarah, trace him to the area, where they discover a terrified populace. Thrown out of the inn, they make their way, like Paul, towards the sinister castle and its undead host. Scars of Dracula is one of the more intriguing entries in the Hammer Dracula franchise. Viewers of the series will be quick to notice the featured resurrection sequence holds no continuity to the last entry, Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970). Therefore, breaking up a line of sequels with connected stories since the initial production back in 1958. Scars was planned to be a reboot of the franchise in the case of Christopher Lee not reprising as the titular vampire going forward. The idea of this being a reboot is honestly crazy, considering the fact Taste the Blood only came out some months earlier in the very same year! The film opens with a large bat (that unfortunately hasn't aged particularly well), which hastily begins regurgitating blood upon a pile of ash remains, reforming into Dracula. Although breaking all continuity, I was a fan of the choice to bring Dracula back from the minute go. All previous instalments made us wait nearly forty minutes just to see him, making for a welcomed change. An interesting choice too was to open with the uprising of the villagers who gather at the castle in an attempt to destroy him forever, burning the structure. However, these actions do more harm than good as we're treated to the first of many horrifically gory and bloody depictions of Dracula's wrath ever shown. Scars is a brutal film and features an unbelievably violent Dracula, unlike any prior portrayals. Furthermore, as the story progresses, we are subjected to sights, actions and ideas never before attempted by Hammer in their realm of horror. We are subsequently introduced to our main protagonists, Simon and Sarah, during her birthday, where Paul (not to be confused with either version of the last two films) competes against his brother for her hand. Whilst I like Simon and Sarah's chemistry, it's not of the same standard as Hammer's earlier movies that had brilliantly crafted relationships on display. However, Paul's attempts are cut short when his mischief-ridden lifestyle catches up with him and he must escape the authorities, leading him further than he anticipated, arriving at a mysterious castle. Naturally, he is welcomed in by the icy charming host who allows him to stay but, he shortly falls victim to the fury of the Count in a dramatic display. Worried for his brother, Simon and Sarah follow suit, finding themselves in a similar predicament staying at the castle. Some attributes of this film hark back to elements from the original works of Bram Stoker's novel, much like Dracula (1958) did. My favourite lift from the book was the scene of Dracula scaling the wall from his secluded coffin, cut off by a sheer drop. Seeing him crawling up the wall with ease was an awesome inclusion. Another highlight was the character Klove, Dracula's servant, although not the Klove of Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966). This time, played by Patrick Troughton, who is a contrasting character to that of the previous, who showed unwavering loyalty, whereas, this version occasionally displeases his master and is tortured for such. His growth and motivation remain one of the best aspects of this story, and his scenes with Dracula are the finest in the production. The ruthless nature of the movie carries over to the final confrontation, which entails possibly my favourite death of the villainous beast in an explosive spectacle of effects. Overall, despite stopping the series' overarching narrative, Scars of Dracula is still a fantastic stand-alone movie for fans to enthral in. It is a bit of a cult classic and one I can enjoy, especially my Dad, who loves it. With an opportunity to see an unnaturally violent Dracula, it makes ideal viewing for movie-goers who want a lesser-seen adaptation of the iconic vampire. Also, see the next picture with yet another fresh start to the series in Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972).

 

Runtime: 1h 35m

Director: Roy Ward Baker

Genre: Horror

Related Sites and Media:

Movie Trailer:

My DVD Copy:

Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970)

Three middle-aged distinguished gentlemen search for some excitement in their boring bourgeois lives and are approached by Lord Courtley who offers them an experience like no other. They don't yet fully realise he is one of Count Dracula's servants. They perform a ritual that goes awry resulting in the three men killing Courtley. However, the Count is successfully resurrected and now seeks revenge on each man for his servant's death. Following on from Dracula Has Risen From the Grave (1968), we open to the scene of Dracula's demise, however, this time featuring a new angle. Travelling businessman, Weller is thrown from his carriage and alerted by horrifying screams, leading him to the frightful sight. Witnessing the body turn to dust, Weller collects the robe, jewellery and a vial of blood for good measure (as any sane person would). We are then introduced to three gentlemen: William Hargood, Samuel Paxton and Jonathon Secker who are deemed 'respectable' figures in the community, devoted to charity work. But, in actuality, they head to brothels leading a secret life in an attempt to escape their dull lives. Upon our initial meeting of the group, I was quite shocked to see the true nature of their so-called work. Admittedly, it was an interesting aspect to explore the double life led by supposed upholding citizens. These men are certainly unlikable, which the actors did a phenomenal job at portraying as they revel in their ingenuity. Of the three men, I found Hargood the most disagreeable. His actions were horrendous, like his punishing of his daughter, Alice, when drunk for no good reason. Still dissatisfied in their lives, they meet Lord Courtley, a man known for partaking in acts such as a Black Mass. Intrigued by what he offers, they follow him to Weller's store to purchase Dracula's items and powdered blood. Meeting at an abandoned church, they begin the ritual, which entails (you guessed it) drinking the blood of Dracula. It is a pretty disgusting scene though likely nothing extreme by Hammer's standards but by all accounts, it was still a sick concept to witness. Although, when they each back out, Courtley drinks alone, falling to the floor in pain, begging for help. The frightened men instead beat him to death putting him out of his misery and flee the scene moments before Courtley's body morphs into none other than Dracula. Now risen a fourth time, he seeks revenge once more this time on those who killed his servant. It is interesting to note, that the original script featured no Dracula at all. There were difficulties in getting Christopher Lee to return and Courtley's character would've been a generic vampire upon his death, for the antagonist. Lee later agreed to star in the production and yet analysing the film closely it appears Dracula has less to do in the story and acts as more of an observer to the events, likely since he wasn't in the script, having to be worked in. Dracula's plan for revenge here is certainly a twisted one. Controlling and possessing the children of the gentlemen and using them towards each's demise is a very dark concept that explores the pure evil cunning of our Count. One by one, he gets a hold of the offspring of each perpetrator and sets in motion the means to their deaths. Whilst never acting upon the individuals himself, he commands the children to deal the blows, ultimately committing the deed and counting them off at a time in his bone-chilling voice, "The First", "The Second" and "The Third". Despite his triumph, Dracula is unaware Paxton's son Paul (not to be confused with the last film) is informed of the whole ordeal by Secker by letter and now sets in motion his defeat. Though we don't spend much time with Paul, his scenes towards the end are great with the de-sanctification of the derelict church and battle with the overwhelmed Dracula by the sights and cross. Overall, Taste the Blood is personally one of my lesser favourites mainly due to not being as memorable. I still enjoyed many aspects, especially Dracula's vendetta and the final confrontation plus, Lee is outstanding, alongside the fellow cast members. It's still a worthy watch in the series. For more, see the unconnected sequel Scars of Dracula (1970).

 

Runtime: 1h 31m

Director: Peter Sasdy

Genre: Drama / Fantasy / Horror / Romance / Thriller

Related Sites and Media:

Movie Trailer:

My DVD Copy:

Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968)

One year after the destruction of Dracula, Monsignor Ernest Mueller visits the village to ensure that all is well. He learns that the locals no longer attend mass because the shadow of Dracula's castle touches the church. They feel the castle still contains evil. To alleviate their fears, the Monsignor performs an exorcism of the castle to rid it of all evil. The local village priest, however, accidentally reawakens the frozen Dracula, who now seeks revenge on Monsignor Mueller, targeting his niece Maria. Risen from the Grave is the fourth instalment in the Hammer Dracula franchise, set a year after the events of Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966). The movie begins, however, with a short segment acting as a flashback, although never actually put across as such. The scene shows one of Dracula's victims' fate, which plays heavily into the later reasoning for the villager's abandonment of the church. We are introduced to our semi-protagonist, the Monsignor, who is shocked to discover the attitude shared towards the church and the power the castle still holds over them. There are many parallels here with Prince of Darkness, even the part where he knows Dracula is no longer there despite everybody still believing so and he shames them all. The Monsignor puts in motion a plan to exorcise the castle in hopes of alleviating their fears, taking a large golden cross with him, accompanied by the local priest. Whilst the Monsignor performs the act, the priest (yes, that's all he's called) accidentally falls during an immense storm, where he comes face to face with the frozen Dracula. The resurrection scene is always a fascinating sequence, as we await to see how he will return, though I found this one to be somewhat far-fetched, personally. Nevertheless, our badly dubbed priest has unwillingly brought back Dracula, and Christopher Lee again but this time, with a new notable difference. He talks! Not only do we finally, get to hear the masterful voice of Lee, but it's the most he has spoken so far, even featuring some lines during his beast-like state. Taking hold of the priest, Dracula makes him his servant in a revenge-centered mission he hunts the man who barred him from his home. Whilst Dracula regains his strength, we meet our main protagonist, Paul, a baker at the pub who happens to be the boyfriend of Maria, the Monsignor's niece. The pair share some great chemistry and likely hold the place as one of my favourite couples we encounter in this series. It is this very night Maria plans to introduce Paul to her family, which doesn't go completely as planned as Paul's habit of telling the truth causes him to admit he is an atheist, displeasing the Monsignor. Whilst this could be overlooked as a throwaway scene, albeit a fantastic one, this plays well into the theme and focus of the film, religion. Dracula's existence has always been an attack on religion and this movie thoroughly explored this, especially on a physical level with him attacking the Monsignor, turning the priest into his servant, desecrating the church and so forth. It was equally fascinating to see his main adversary be an atheist who is sent into the turmoil of figuring out his own beliefs, shown tremendously in the staking sequence. It is a highly regarded scene among fans, where due to his lack of religion, the act doesn't quite go as you would expect, exploring a whole new aspect to the staking scenes. Dracula is phenomenal in this film, continuing to deliver an imposing presence aided by the creative lens shots of director Francis. There are a tons of brilliant moments from Dracula who leaps across rooftops and crashes through windows. Equally notable are his biting scenes, like his first victim and later follower, waitress Zena, to his attempts at getting Maria. However, Paul does all he can to prevent Maria's taking, culminating in a frantic battle, resulting in a truly astounding demise. Overall, Risen from the Grave is another superb sequel in the series that so aptly named, rises the Count once more for a frightful vengeance-driven endeavour, battling religion whilst being fought by a non-beliver. I truly loved how creative this film's story was, making for a notable entry. See the next production, Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970). 

 

Runtime: 1h 32m

Director: Freddie Francis

Genre: Drama / Fantasy / Horror / Romance

Related Sites and Media:

Movie Trailer:

My DVD Copy:

Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966)

Four English travellers arrive at a tiny hamlet in the Carpathian Mountains and ignore warnings from the locals not to travel to Carlsbad, the domain of Count Dracula. A dark, driverless carriage arrives to take them to the sinister castle, but they discover too late that they have been lured there to provide the blood which will allow Dracula to rise from the grave once more. Following on from the story of Dracula (1958), Prince of Darkness finally brings back the titular vampire to the big screen. Whilst a sequel to the first film, there was also the release of The Brides of Dracula (1960), which continued the story albeit focusing more on Van Helsing with Peter Cushing's reprisal. It too held the title as sequel to 58's Dracula but was lacking one major component, Dracula himself, or more importantly, Christopher Lee's presence in the role. However, after an 8-year gap both would make their tremendous return with an all-new thrilling horror. This film cements itself as a definitive sequel with its opening of a replay account of the final events of Dracula with Van Helsing's defeat of the Count, which is revealed to have occurred 10 years ago. Despite his demise, locals still fear his power, continuing to perform all their old rituals much to the disapproval of Father Sandor, abbot of Kleinberg Monastery. Sandor tries to convince everyone that Dracula is truly gone but he is not ignorant to the power that may still dwell in his fortress. We then meet our main group, four travellers consisting of brothers Charles and Alan Kent and their wives Diana and Helen who are passing through a local inn. Whilst they may look older and respectable they act more like teenagers, most of all Charles who is seen chugging down beer, carefree, joking and being told off frequently by his sister-in-law. It is further clear they have a lack of superstition too making them very vulnerable in this area and Sandor tries to make them aware of such. However this warning becomes increasingly difficult to follow when their coach breaks down outside the very castle and with night approaching, they choose to shelter there. From here the growing sense of unease and dread sets in as the castle appears prepared for their arrival by the mysterious servant, Klove. As night falls, Klove sets in motion his plan, beginning the ritual to bring back his master. This act would feature one of the most brutal kills and goriest sequences in the series, alongside a truly spectacular effect of the reformation of Dracula's body. With that, Christopher Lee is back once more as Dracula who wastes no time in building up his strength with more victims. One interesting aspect of this portrayal, which becomes increasingly obvious as the film progresses, is the lack of speech. Yes, that's right, Dracula doesn't utter a single word for the entire film. There are many reasons out there, with the main being Lee's distaste for the dialogue presented, he chose not to say them, but some say otherwise. I found this to be an interesting new take on the character and that returning immediately to his beast-like state, it is reasonable to imagine he would not say anything or have a reason to. Our remaining travellers try to flee the clutches of evil fighting back before merely escaping. They stumble upon Father Sandor who keeps them safe but Dracula is hot on their trail seeking his escaped victims. I further loved this movie's use of many themes from the book and folklore. For instance, the scene where Dracula forces Diana to drink the blood from his chest is a memorable inclusion inspired by the novel. Furthermore, this film features quite an unusual ending that shows a lesser-seen method of defeating a vampire, which I was so intrigued by. Whilst it may be one of the weaker defeats out of the films I applaud it for doing something different and rarely seen. Overall, Prince of Darkness is a fantastic sequel to both its predecessors though admittedly not my favourite in the series. Whilst, I was extremely entertained there are simply others I prefer, but I have come to appreciate this one more. It experiments with new and old ideas whilst continuing the style, scares and storytelling that Hammer made so popular. Check out the next movie, Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968).

 

Runtime: 1h 30m

Director: Terence Fisher

Genre: Horror

Related Sites and Media:

Movie Trailer:

My DVD Copy:

The Brides of Dracula (1960)

Young teacher, Marianne Danielle, is heading to a small village in Transylvania to teach French at a girl's school when she is welcomed to stay overnight at a castle. It is here where she inadvertently unleashes the horrors of the undead once again on the populace, including those at her school. Fortunately, Dr. Van Helsing is already on his way but can he stop this evil from spreading? Brides of Dracula is the follow-up to the widely successful Hammer Horror production of Dracula (1958), which has since held the title as one of the most definitive depictions of the character and story. Naturally, a sequel was planned to follow after the stupendous hit however one component would be lacking in this continuation, that being the leading villain. Christopher Lee, who played the iconic Dracula, turned down the opportunity to appear in this sequel. It is unclear exactly why although there are many rumours out there. The one I heard most was that he was afraid of becoming typecast though if that is true is uncertain. His absence certainly feels like a detrimental blow to the film however it rose above and delivered an equally exceptional movie amid its flaws. Whilst no Lee, we are at least treated to the return of Peter Cushing as the admirable Van Helsing who continues his story (essentially a sequel to his adventures) and elevates the entire production with all his scenes. Equally lending to this picture is the return of director Terence Fisher, whose style yet again brings an exceptionally atmospheric picture to the Hammer franchise. Simply the opening of a dark night in a forest surrounded by mist and fog sets the tone perfectly for the horror ahead. Another aspect this film masters is setting up a creepy ambience with plenty of scenes, dialogue and moments reinforcing this. Whilst ever present, I feel this came into play at the arrival at  Baroness Meinster's castle where she reveals information about her son, Baron Meinster being locked away there after having gone 'mad'. Even when he is uncovered by Marianne, his, predicament is especially creepy showing his chained state, confining him permanently to the room. Of course, little does she know it is for the good of everyone else but after being manipulated by the handsome man, she unknowingly sets him upon the folk of the village and school. This brings me to our leading villain, the Baron played by David Peel. Now it was always a given fact he would be no match in filling the shoes of Lee's performance and since not being Dracula that is a further given. As a by-the-mill vampire to face off against he is adequate. He is probably not my favourite, naturally that remains firmly with Lee, but I thought it a very fascinating direction to take, giving us a new villain to face off with before a return to the main article. Marianne is a fine character too although not having a great deal to do besides releasing the evil but her interactions with Helsing are truly brilliant and I loved the father/daughter dynamic they shared. Some of the highlight performances have to go to that of the, well, 'brides of Dracula' who have such terrific design and presence. Both of their respective scenes of rising from their resting places, now undead, were phenomenal and probably the best I have ever seen. Nevertheless, Cushing's Van Helsing remains on top delivering the greatest performance. I adored every moment with him from his skills and ingenuity right up to the climactic showdown at the windmill, which was my favourite part. Whilst not topping the first film's this one comes pretty darn close with Helsing even getting bested slightly where he is forced to enact a quick-thinking remedy that I have never before seen done in any vampire picture and it was amazingly acted. Plus the use of the windmill in the fight was just as creative mixed with the other special effects made for a true spectacle of an ending. Overall, Brides of Dracula is a superb continuation of the Hammer Dracula franchise and a promising sequel to the first. Whilst no feature of Dracula, the story delivered is still worthwhile and every other factor only elevates it to a higher standing. This is certainly one you don't want to skip in the franchise. Check out the next instalment in Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966).

Runtime: 1h 25m

Director: Terence Fisher

Genre: Horror

Related Sites and Media:

Movie Trailers: