Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Jenni Devyn Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

Scott LeBrun The Russian Army (who don't have Russian accents in this movie, by the way) are busy blasting, and they unearth the crypt of the Dracula family line. Also among those bones entombed are those of Veidt Schmidt (Reggie Nalder), the Counts' ghoulish slave, and Veidts' faithful canine companion, Zoltan. The bodies of Veidt and Zoltan are resurrected, and they travel to America in search of the Counts' last living descendant. That turns out to be family man Michael Drake (Michael Pataki), who's gone on a camping trip with his wife (Jan Shutan) and two kids (Libby Chase, John Levin). Drake will receive assistance from an intrepid Van Helsing type named Inspector Branco (Jose Ferrer), who tails the villain and his dog to L.A. Before too long, Zoltan has sunk his teeth into the necks of a few of the canines in the lake area, creating a pack of vampire dogs.Admittedly, this is a fairly novel twist which the filmmakers exploit for all that it's worth. (Although there was also a vampire dog in the 1940s horror picture "The Face of Marble".) "Dracula's Dog" is low rent, to be sure, with less than stellar acting. Ferrer is just picking up a paycheck, Pataki really isn't cut out for family man type roles, and Nalder is required to basically stand around, most of the time. He either smiles for the camera repeatedly with that uniquely unhandsome face of his, or communicates telepathically with Zoltan. Also appearing are two other character actors with great faces, Simmy Bow and JoJo D'Amore, as fishermen in the area, and the sexy Arlene Martel as Russian Major Hessel. It's the dogs that come off the best, unsurprisingly.This viewer did enjoy the decent electronic music score by Andrew Belling and the cinematography by Bruce Logan. There is also some wonderful gore devised by Stan Winston. Directed by Albert Band ("I Bury the Living"), this movie does get one thing right: the animal attack sequences, supervised by old pros Karl Lewis Miller and Lou Schumacher. These, at least, are done with skill, accompanied by rapid fire editing by Harry Keramidas. One moment has Pataki in a car besieged by killer canines, prefiguring the story "Cujo" by a few years. (See also "The Pack", made around this time.)Minor league fare, but it may work for dedicated fans of animal attack horror. The final minute or so is both cute and sad at the same time.Dog and puppy lovers may find some moments to be hard to take.Six out of 10.

Nigel P Being a dog owner is not the first thing you would associate with Count Dracula. Indeed, it would be tempting to imagine this film to be a parody. But not only does it take itself seriously, it makes a convincing case for a vampire/canine partnership.Beginning during excavations of a Romanian crypt, Russian soldiers uncover a tomb containing coffins belonging to Dracula's family. A soldier unknowingly removes the stake (why do people in films do that?) from one corpse and Zoltan leaps out from under the wrappings. Soon, we are treated to a flashback in which the dog is bitten by Dracula in bat form that causes the creature's vampirism, and against the odds, the resultant scenes are very successful – real bats are used, which helps to convince.Zoltan, his eyes glowing eerie yellow, kills the soldier and retrieves Veidt Smith (Reggie Nalder, who also plays the vampire Barlow in 'Salem's Lot' a year later), former innkeeper, now vampire slave. Nalder plays Smith very well, an echo effect applied to his voice, which gives him an ethereal effect. Before Dracula himself can be revived, further blasting necessitates the escape of man and dog. As Smith states, 'Now Zoltan, we must find our new master …' This he does, and locates the family of Michael Drake, last descendant of The Count (despite having two children); Nalder is then reduced to staring moodily ahead and saying 'Soon, Zoltan, soon …' without much else, other than looking haunted, which he does with great effect. Drake sees Dracula in old family photos, which shows a surprising lapse in vampire lore.So spectral are Nalder and the hound, they often overshadow other cast-members, including Jose Ferrer as Inspector Branco, a sub-Van Helsing type as well as Michael Pataki as Drake (as well as doubling for Dracula in brief scenes) and his family. The family are extremely appealing and escape the bratty interpretations juveniles can sometimes bring. The inclusion of their own dogs, especially the puppy, adds to their endearing qualities (the puppy's death is a genuinely sad moment – we are all effected by mistreated animals, aren't we?).Sometimes, requiring animals to 'act' can result in awkward-looking scenes. That only very occasionally happens here - and the creature playing Zoltan is a magnificent looking Doberman, especially with moonlight glinting off his sleek fur. The various dog attacks are pretty well staged, especially when Drake recognises his own vampirised dog among their number.'Zoltan, Hound of Dracula' doesn't garner massively positive reviews. This may be due to its low budget, or viewers unable to take seriously the central premise. And yet I found it enjoyable and sincere in a way many bigger productions are not.Just as Andrew Belling's haunting, minimalist score runs into the credits, we are offered the probability that the story isn't quite over. And if your heart doesn't melt when you see the family's undead puppy with glowing moonlit eyes, then chances are, you have no soul.'There's More To The Legend Than Meets ... The Throat!'

TheWorkingDead *Please note the above score, as this movie is slightly below the middle of the road.* Zoltan(named, I assume, after a Hungarian ruler in the 10th Century) isn't so much Dracula's hound as he is the hound of one of Dracula's servants, Veidt Schmidt. When the Russian army(I think their Russian, based on their uniforms, but no one has any kind of accent) unearths Dracula's tomb, they decide to burn all of the corpses, but not before some foolish soldier decides to pull the stake out of Zoltan's body, allowing him to regenerate and drain the blood of said soldier. He then helps his master, who decides to track down the last surviving heir of Dracula. At least, they call him the last heir in the movie, but he has two children, so wouldn't THEY be the last surviving heirs? There's a bit of a mythological problem here, as well. Veidt Schmidt is the vampire's servant, and not a full vampire. Yet he has immortality and can regenerate after death, all while walking in daylight and not needing blood. I don't know what Renfield's problem was, sitting in that asylum and eating flies.At the beginning of the film Dracula is seen(in Zoltan's flashback!) is about to feast on a lovely young women in the 1800s. Zoltan interrupts his feeding, so Dracula transforms into a bat and instead feeds on Zoltan(why don't vampires do this more often, instead of courting danger by feeding on young, socially popular women?), who skips the whole 'dying' part of the process and goes straight to vampire dog. On their way out they drain and turn Veidt Schmidt(played by Reggie Nalder, whose wrinkles are more frightening than anything in this movie), who also skips the 'dying' part. I mention this because it's odd for them to have done that, as it's clearly established later that the victims DIE after being drained of blood.The film quickly moves to southern California, where Michael Drake(the aforementioned Last Dracula) is taking his family on a two week camping trip in their RV. For plot motivation they also bring along their two dogs and a litter of puppies. Almost immediately weird things happen; Puppies disappear and the dogs are always howling at night. Of course, neither of those is odd, really, it seems to me a logical occurrence when you leave newborn puppies out in the wilderness all night, and howling is just something dogs do. But this bothers the family, who are worried and confused. Luckily for them, a Van Helsing-type character shows up in the form of Jose Ferrer to tell Michael all about his vampiric family tree and help him defeat the undead canines.Really, the film isn't anything spectacularly atrocious, which is it's downfall. It's just middle of the road, never taking itself seriously enough to be campy, but also not self-aware enough to be tongue in cheek. There's no suspense to the film, since aside from the Russian soldier in the beginning there are NO human deaths, just a lot of animal cruelty. It's competently directed(by Albert Band, who would pass on the legacy of mediocre, competently bad horror movies to his son, Charles Band), with a clean print for the DVD. The dialog is notable for this type of film, due to it's believability. The characters may be boring and idiotic, but they speak in a natural manner(Michael's first thought after learning he's a Dracula is that he's going to get rich on royalties for all those movies). There is, however, a growing army of vampire doggies, and the oh-so-cute and cuddly widdle undead puppies.Had it been a bit more over-the-top, just a little bit more awful, the movie would have been classic. As it was, I had fun and a few laughs, but just enough to feel justified in having seen it. I should note that it really takes a lot for me to hate bad horror movies. Even if the movie is awful and irredeemable, I usually feel the better for having seen it. I'll moderately recommend this, for people who REALLY love bad movies, but don't expect an MST3K level of fun.

BaronBl00d Cheaply made horror film from the 70's that is surprisingly better than you might initially expect. The film opens in Romania as soldiers uncover the underground tomb of the Dracula family. A soldier pulls the stake out of a puffy sheet in an opened casket and is soon bit to death by a giant of a hound(A Great Dane I believe). This is Zoltan and he soon pulls the stake out of his master - not Dracula but his servant - and the two begin a trek to the United States to turn the last surviving family member into their undead master. On the heels of these two is Inspector Branco who is well-versed in vampirism and folklore. Anyway, the two follow the Drake family to the woods where they camp and soon all hell breaks out as Zoltan begins to infect all the canines around. The plot sounds ridiculous - and it is, but it strangely works as reasonable entertainment. The actors are all decent with Jose Ferrer lending cachet and clout as Branco. He does a fine job bringing some much needed credibility, though I must confess seeing him drive in a convertible in black slacks, a black turtleneck, and a black beret is something not to be missed. The odd servant is played by none other than Reggie Nalder who just looks evil and up to no good. Throughout the movie he commands Zoltan telepathically. The rest of the cast is serviceable as well. Michael Pataki is believable as the last member of Castle Dracula and even plays the count in a flashback sequence. The dogs do a good job and the director Albert Band, despite a lack of any sizable budget and some real poor lighting, creates just enough suspense and tension to keep this dubious project somewhat afloat. Don't expect any real scares, but there are a few scenes that are well-shot: the dogs attacking the small rented cottage and the dogs attacking the car are just a couple to mention. I saw the denouement coming early in the picture, but is was pretty neat any way. The special effects are nothing really more than the eyes of the vampiric dogs glowing. A fun, bad film from the only decade where something like this could and would have been made.