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).
