Watch Blacula For Free

Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Did you people see the same film I saw?

Blistering performances.

This movie would have been notable for its title even if the rest of it were 90 minutes of static. Coming at a time when it did, of the beginnings of so-called "Blacksploitation" movies, it still managed to set the perfect touch as one of the first movies aimed mainly at a black audience. It's impossible to take this movie seriously. The over-acting and silly violence is not really scary to an adult, and it managed to not lean too heavily on the black cast as, well, just a black cast - the movie would clearly be equally silly were all the actors white. In fact a similar "horror"-but-really-campy movie of the same era, and about the same genre is "Trog" - another ultra-low budget production of the time. And were you to put these movies side by side, "Blacula" would probably be the much more watchable of the two.Watch it if you want to see '70's unintentional camp, if you want to see a period piece of media in the relatively primitive 1970's, or if you are a fan of any of the actors for some reason (William Marshall's only other notable role seems to have been as the "king of cartoons" on "Pee-wee's playhouse" - I just KNEW I'd seen him again in something.)

Accidentally awakened in Los Angeles, an African Prince bitten by Count Dracula finds a young woman who is the reincarnation of his dead wife and woos her while leaving a trail of bodies in his path forcing them to stop the prince before she becomes his new bride.This was pretty good and had a lot to like about it. One of the best parts of the film is the fact that, despite the goofy title, it's premise and threat are entirely straight. The vampire angle is never taken as a joke and the camp factor is toned down compared to others which might take a similar approach due to the subject matter for once. Hearing a few jokes throughout about the cape or the accents are perfectly fine considering that the threat the vampire poses are treated with respect and fear. Also quite refreshing is the lack of overt-blackness in the film that could damage it from being seen by a different audience. This could've been made with a different cast and still would be enjoyable. There's nothing in here that really distinguishes it from either crowd, and it is a major compliment to the film. It is also a decent action film at times as he attacks a large number of victims here, upping his fear factor quite highly as well. The initial sequence that turns him into a vampire is great fun with the initial brawl following the double-cross and his eventual entrapment, the later resurrection is quite thrilling and the vampire attack in the graveyard is a rather enjoyable sequence. Beyond these scenes, the fun of the lengthier scenes gives this a lot to like such as the ambush in the dark-room as the initial attack occurs out of nowhere and the ensuing change into a vampire is handled well, the slow-motion attack in the morgue also gets in a nice scare as the vampire thunders down the hall teeth bared, hair whacked out and screaming like a banshee coming out of nowhere as well as the vampire attack in the warehouse which is really effective as more and more vampires crawl out of the woodwork to constantly plague the heroes, and their frequent charges are pretty creepy. The manner of dealing with them is nicely handled, providing some real action and spectacle to the proceedings. The finale is quite nice, with a great police massacre revealing all manners of deaths for the police squad before the final revelation as the heroes come out into the sun, pulls the cape back revealing a slowly disintegrating head with maggots crawling in the smoldering eye sockets until all that's left is the skeleton. This wasn't all that bad of a film as there wasn't a lot here that didn't work. About the only issue is that the relationships aren't all that convincing. Knowing pretty early on that threat isn't right, which is wisely revealed later on, it's still a little hard to believe that the characters would go into the situations with the knowledge of what's going on. Rather than be a little standoff, there's a willingness to stay despite there being plenty of evidence to support the views. Being this and a bit of cheese, though, nothing much sticks out as being that wrong with it.Rated R: Violence and Language.

In the opening to this film, William Marshall as Prince Mamuwalde visits Charles Macaulay's impressive Count Dracula about suppressing the slave trade. Dracula is more interested in Mamuwalde's wife Luva (Vonetta McGee), and when his advances are spurned, sentences Mamuwalde to vampirism and death to Luva. With a film entitled 'Blacula', and the mantle of 'blaxploitation' regularly directed at it, this kind of serious and violent opening was not what I expected. Only after the credits, and when things move from 1780 to the (then) present day, do we enter more familiar, somewhat expected territory.William Marshall is EXCELLENT as the noble vampire. Literally towering above everyone else, he exudes charm, melancholy and – despite some over-the-top vampire make-up – rage and terror. Yet he resists the temptation overplay anything, something other Draculas could not manage. His attraction to the character Tina Williams is played absolutely for real and the audience is completely on their side, despite the growing number of vampiric 'deaths'.As with Blacula himself, the make-up on the vampires is (probably deliberately) heavy-handed, making them appear as green-tinged zombie-types when they could have been terrifying. But is that the aim of the film? Probably not – this prefers to settle for being a compelling supernatural comedy/thriller (although very much 'of its time, the humour is held pretty firmly in check throughout) that aims to entertain, which it does.Having said that, a few deaths stray happily into 'shock' territory, not least Blacula's climactic demise. We aren't glad to see the back of the reign of a tyrant, or even the killer he is, but rather sad, admiring of his nobility. One of my favourite Dracula actors. This is a fine film lifted by Marshall's consistently brilliant performance. Luckily 'Scream Blacula Scream' was released a year later, presumably resurrecting Marshall's character.

I think it's pretty obvious that a blaxploitation horror movie that goes by the name "Blacula" is not to be taken completely seriously. Indeed, there are some humorous moments to be found here and there, though some gags (like the treatment of the gay antique dealers) come across as quite dated more than forty years later. There are other flaws to be found in the movie, like the fact that the title character actually becomes a secondary character for significant portions of the movie. As well, the screenplay has some plot flaws like why no one opened Blacula's coffin back in Transylvania, or why Blacula is not the least bit confused when he awakens and goes around 1972 Los Angeles.Despite flaws like these, I think the movie is worth a look. For starters, it's one of the first black-themed horror movies, and the movie is also kind of a time capsule for black culture of its era. The star feature of the movie, however, is William Marshall playing the title character. He gives a very commanding performance, giving this particular vampire character an intelligence and dignity that's rarely found in vampire movies, and his appearances make it worth your while to sit through the movie's occasional lulls.